Sub 11 sec 100m runners who can run a sub 1:30 Half-Marathon ?

Millions can run sub-1:30 half Marathon. That is only 6:50 per mile for app. 13.1 miles.

The pool of F.A.T. sub-11 100m is far smaller. Most sub-50 high school 400m athletes do not participate in XC. Some do. My college XC and T&F head coach liked to try 400m athletes at fall XC.

There are a lot of 400mH athletes who can do this. Sub-1:30 1/2 Marathon is nothing difficult. Taylor McLaughlin, Sydney McLaughlin's brother can do this. Taylor McLaughlin is a faster 400m guy than S. Coe, Steve Ovett, Steve Holman and Donavan Brazier. I've gone on ten mile tempo runs with a 46.xx guy from college at 6:45ish per mile.

There are 100s of current and former 46.xx 400m guys who can do this or could have sprinted sub-11 100m and sub-1:30 1/2 Marathon.

Is this supposed to be at the same time? I know a guy who ran in the 10.80s in college and went 2:50 something for a marathon in his mid twenties. I think any 48 sec 400m runner who decides to train semi seriously for longer stuff should be able to go sub 11/sub130

this would basically put rudisha on par with ashton eaton, which i'm pretty skeptical of

that being said, capital was right about decathletes, eaton is another very good candidate for this

I ran a hand-timed 11.0 the same season I ran a 4:01 1500m. I could’ve probably held at least 5:45 pace for a half marathon I think if I was fresh.

I imagine I am in a similar shape now, just a little worse. I bet if you made me run a 100m on a Monday I could go 11.3 and run a ~1:17 half in the same week.

californiaScreamin wrote:

Is this supposed to be at the same time? I know a guy who ran in the 10.80s in college and went 2:50 something for a marathon in his mid twenties. I think any 48 sec 400m runner who decides to train semi seriously for longer stuff should be able to go sub 11/sub130

Are you referring to my F.A.T. 46.xx 400m teammate? Yes, my college coach had him running XC. I'm older. We raced 5 miles XC not 8K XC. Said 400m teammate was a sub-30 5 mile guy. I do not know if he raced sub-29 miles. 29ish 5 miles definitely makes 6:50 per mile for 13.1 miles reasonable. We raced on courses tougher than many or most college gals & guys race today. Often bales of hay every mile. S.I.A.C. D-2.

48ish 400m guys who are really 1500m to 5000m guys may have never developed neuromuscular coordination to sprint sub-11 F.A.T. 100m. I think an athlete needs to grow up sprinting to sprint F.A.T. sub-11 100m. Sprinting in baseball, basketball, futbol and football counts as sprint training. I would rather take college F.A.T. 46.xx 400m guys and add some longer runs to their training and have them race sub-1:30 1/2 Marathon than try to make guys like Steve Cram and Bryce Hoppel F.A.T. sub-11 100m guys.

See Jarmila K. wrote:

I would rather take college F.A.T. 46.xx 400m guys and add some longer runs to their training and have them race sub-1:30 1/2 Marathon than try to make guys like Steve Cram and Bryce Hoppel F.A.T. sub-11 100m guys.

That may be true... but if Hoppel was a 400 meter focused runner in college he'd have probably gotten pretty close to sub-47 F.A.T.

Hoppel split 45.9 in the 4x4 (which is maybe more like 47.5 F.A.T. for an 800 meter runner who couldn't get out of blocks as well), but he certainly has wheels.

I have an 11.08 PR from high school, ran a not wind legal 21.5 in my only race under 400m and a 47.6 in college (ran open 400s like 3 times), split sub 47 and ran 1:47 in the 800, then ended up running 14:20-ish on the roads in my late 20's after I took a few years off and began a comeback. I've definitely run faster than 1:30 in practice.

Because I always get the question with those PRs, I never broke 4, and I never officially ran sub 11, but I'm pretty sure that I could have in college had I popped one on the right day.

nah, different dude. Maybe any 48 sec 400m runner is an exaggeration, but 200/400 runners at that level should have the right profile for it if they're willing to put in some aerobic training later on. certainly agree with the other poster who said they'd rather train a sub 11 guy to go up than a Hoppel type athlete to break 11

On a similar note, i think that people really do underestimate the aerobic component of the 400m. Clyde Hart got some great results over the years with more aerobic focus than most

Not sub 11 but comes close. Some very impressive range here...

https://www.worldathletics.org/athletes/ireland/mark-carroll-14198783

Benpot999 wrote:

Not sub 11 but comes close. Some very impressive range here...

That page is not accurate, the sprinting times are a different Mark Carroll, not the distance runner.

10.99w 3.1m/s and 1:25:46 here. Does that count? What if I throw in a 174'6" javelin throw?

serious props if within the same few months of each other.

bloob wrote:

10.99w 3.1m/s and 1:25:46 here. Does that count? What if I throw in a 174'6" javelin throw?

Well, that 10.99 I more like an 11.15ish (+/-.02) in "still" conditions. So....I'd say no.

Former decathlete here and I just posted my 10.99w and 1:25:46 capabilities. Rest of the events are ehhh but I hung on to competing in the javelin for fun.

MiguelLopes wrote:

I read a thread on this forum about the possibility of someone running a sub 11 sec 100m while also being able to run a sub 2:30 Marathon.

General consensus was that it was probably not possible at the same time.

The question intrigued me, so I'm wondering if maybe a more reasonable time on a shorter distance like sub 1:30 Half-Marathon was possible ?

Sub 11sec 100 dash and sub 1:30 Half ?

Of course I'm not talking about a 100 with a flying start.

If someone asks this one more time....

You realize that the 100m uses a complete different set of muscle ability than all distance running talent aside right? Sub 11 for someone with enough fast twitch in them is definitely feasible. Heck, I've seen 250lb throwers go under 7 seconds in the 60m!!

For a distance that short and the time you ask for (10.99, 50-53 strides, block start and final dip) I could see a few eligible candidates without having to think of them as trackstars.

flvmmox wrote:

serious props if within the same few months of each other.

Goodness no. 10.99 in 2008, 1:25:46 Fall 2017 and 174' during track season 2017. But I did run a 2:43 1000m 2 months before the 10.99. But probably anyone sub 50 can accomplish that "feat".

10.58 from blocks; 62min training run 10 miles off nothing; 4:07 1500 training run. Moved up to 800m, trained for two months from September, career ending illness.

What I know is that plenty of good distance runners have good top end speed on a flying 30 or 40, but put them in blocks, and they look poorly. It's easy to confuse top end speed with an ability to be both fast and powerful out of blocks - not to mention to stay relaxed rather than force speed.

Come on. Many could do this.

Any elite 800 runner should be able to break 11 if they can manage the start. 11.0 points to 22.0 , and 22.0 points to 47-48. Not fast for an elite 800 guy.

And any of them could run 1:30 HM if they bothered to.