That's a pretty good 200m time. What is the story behind that? Were you primarily a 200m and 400m runner?
That's a pretty good 200m time. What is the story behind that? Were you primarily a 200m and 400m runner?
400m: 50.? in practice
1500: 3:51.9
5000m: 15:00
8k: mid 25 at some point
and finally the 800m: several 152's, the fastest run perfectly even splits (28, 28, 28, 28). Don't know what thats indicative of but thats what it was. Knee to shoddy to run anymore, but fun to think about those fast track days :)
Lazy Llama wrote:
Depends on the athlete:
22/47/1:55/5:20/18:30
Yup that was me in high school, except the mile was a little faster.
i was originally a 100/200 guy my freshman year, and since then i have slowly moved up in distance. and actually the 200 pr was set when I was in 50.XX shape so im pretty sure I am in the 21's after a 47 split at AAU JO Nat's
200 24.4
800 1.57
1500 3.58
5000 15 14
half 70 18
all in the same year
That's my 800 PR, and my lifetime bests for the others are:
200m: No time
400m: 50.9 open
1600m: 4:26
5k: No time
I don't think top end 200m speed or 5k endurance has ANY bearing in an 800m. If you can't break 25 in a 200m there might be issues, and if you can't finish a 5k there might be issues, but the actual times really don't matter. I would say a 1:06 or 1:07 500m or a sub 2:34 1000m are better indicators of 1:55 800m potential.
I think the distance aspect of the 800m is over-rated. The years I was in the best 800m shape were the years I focused on the shorter events (400m to 800m). The years I ran longer my 800m suffered.
200 doesn't matter much since it is pretty much a totally different energy system for over half the race. But you need to be able to run a quick 200 to run a fast 400. The mile(and over distances in general) more predicates the worst possible time rather than predicating the best. Under distances predicate the best possible timeFor you:Off the 400 m: 1:50 (2x(400+4))Off the 1600 m: 2:06 (1600/2-8)
quack wrote:
That's my 800 PR, and my lifetime bests for the others are:
200m: No time
400m: 50.9 open
1600m: 4:26
5k: No time
I don't think top end 200m speed or 5k endurance has ANY bearing in an 800m. If you can't break 25 in a 200m there might be issues, and if you can't finish a 5k there might be issues, but the actual times really don't matter. I would say a 1:06 or 1:07 500m or a sub 2:34 1000m are better indicators of 1:55 800m potential.
I think the distance aspect of the 800m is over-rated. The years I was in the best 800m shape were the years I focused on the shorter events (400m to 800m). The years I ran longer my 800m suffered.