HOT TAKE: the 400m WR is actually weak, and it should've been sub-47 and this final shows it.

Sprinting Discussion Sprints

Moderation Moderation Information Moderation Information & Rules

Page 2 of 2

1 2

Next Last

8 months ago 09/19/2025 5:38pm EDT

re: SiedgeHammer

SiedgeHammer wrote:
A lot of people seem to be intimated by the fact that it's set in the good old days of East German and USSR. 47.60 and 1:53.28 seem to be unbreakable by any "normal" women. But if you pay close attention, 47.6 is actually not out of this world.
The 100m WR for men and women are 9.58 and 10.54 (if you discount that infamous 10.49). So it's 0.96 differential per 100m. If we extrapolate a 400m from that, 43.03 (men's WR) should yield around 47.2-47.3 for women. And that's without the advance of bicarbs. Now with bicarbs it should be even faster, sub-47 shouldn't be tall order for someone like Syd. If Syd who just switched to the 400m this year, could run a 47.78 in a downpour after mutilple rounds, in a one-off race with good weather, it should be below 47.5, minimum in a one-off race with good weather. In fact, I would go so far as to saying the 47.6 is actually weak, very weak in fact, compared to 10.54 and 21.34. All it takes is a generational talent under great coaching to go for it.
The same can be said about the 800m, but since it's about the 400m, I would leave it at that.

Not 100% sure that I agree. Being a guy is something which really helps in the 400m and even more in the 800m. That’s why we saw so many DSD athletes in the 800m. So it’s not entirely linear.

8 months ago 09/19/2025 5:59pm EDT

re: SiedgeHammer

https://www.ustfccca.org/assets/track-event-conversions-standardized.pdf

21.34 using official conversion is equivalent to 47.68

8 months ago 09/19/2025 11:07pm EDT

re: Sarson

Sarson wrote:
It's so weak it's stood for 40 years.

And it took an absolutely generational talent who has smashed the 400mH world record several times to even come within two-tenths of it (not even accounting for spikes, tracks, etc). In short, with respect to the WR, performance enhancing drugs do a really, really good job of enhancing performance lol

8 months ago 09/19/2025 11:43pm EDT

re: SiedgeHammer

All the conversions and points scores aside, I don’t understand how you could look at the all-time performance list:

1. Marita Koch 47.60 1985

2. SML 47.78 2025

3. Paulino 47.98 2025

4. Jarmila K 47.99 1983

5. Eid Naser 48.14 2019

–and decide that 47.60 is actually a weak record, that it should be closer to 47-flat. Two great performances by two Olympic and World champions does not override decades of great runners maxing-out in the 48s or low 49s.

Shaunae Miller-Uibo was a huge talent and ran 48.36. Allyson Felix never ran faster than 49.26. So 47.60 being weak seems like a stretch.

8 months ago 09/20/2025 7:10am EDT

re: lvrhs1992

lvrhs1992 wrote:
This is wrong.
400/800/1500 are testosterone distances, so males are further away from females.
100/200/5000/10000 etc men are 10% better than woman.
Testosterone give 2% extra boost on 400 and 1500.
800 is hardest distance for women as it is 50/50 combo of speed and endurance and they are 14% slower than men.

I also always thought the 800 had the biggest difference, my rationale was slightly different but arriving at the same conclusion. Basically at 1:40 min of running its closer to a long sprint and at 2:00 min of running its more aerobic. The extra 15 - 20 seconds the women are on the track really hurts them.

8 months ago 09/20/2025 9:59am EDT

re: Vhjvjv

Vhjvjv wrote:
SiedgeHammer wrote:
A lot of people seem to be intimated by the fact that it's set in the good old days of East German and USSR. 47.60 and 1:53.28 seem to be unbreakable by any "normal" women. But if you pay close attention, 47.6 is actually not out of this world.
The 100m WR for men and women are 9.58 and 10.54 (if you discount that infamous 10.49). So it's 0.96 differential per 100m. If we extrapolate a 400m from that, 43.03 (men's WR) should yield around 47.2-47.3 for women. And that's without the advance of bicarbs. Now with bicarbs it should be even faster, sub-47 shouldn't be tall order for someone like Syd. If Syd who just switched to the 400m this year, could run a 47.78 in a downpour after mutilple rounds, in a one-off race with good weather, it should be below 47.5, minimum in a one-off race with good weather. In fact, I would go so far as to saying the 47.6 is actually weak, very weak in fact, compared to 10.54 and 21.34. All it takes is a generational talent under great coaching to go for it.
The same can be said about the 800m, but since it's about the 400m, I would leave it at that.
Not 100% sure that I agree. Being a guy is something which really helps in the 400m and even more in the 800m. That’s why we saw so many DSD athletes in the 800m. So it’s not entirely linear.

Was about to say the same. It’s not linear when you compare men to women.
DSD athletes seem to benefit most from 400m - 1500m. Women typically have slightly slower body response to drops in blood pressure; no idea if this could be a factor, but those middle distances straddle between anaerobic and aerobic.

Page 2 of 2

1 2

Next Last

What People Are Talking About On LetsRun

No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.

Reply Replying to

Username

Password

Leave the password field blank to post anonymously.

Post Preview

By posting you acknowledge that you have read and abide by our Terms and Conditions.

Remember me on this device.

HOT TAKE: the 400m WR is actually weak, and it should've been sub-47 and this final shows it.

This thread has already been deleted.

You have been subscribed.

HOT TAKE: the 400m WR is actually weak, and it should've been sub-47 and this final shows it.

Follow tfrrsftw

Block tfrrsftw

Follow John Wesley Harding

Block John Wesley Harding

Follow MatthewXCountry

Block MatthewXCountry

Follow Dwightarm

Block Dwightarm

This thread has already been deleted.

Reply Replying to

You have been subscribed.