Minimum Sub 4 minute mile speed

Didn't Ritz approach 4:00 in High School? I read that his open 400m PR was 54.

I don't know. I think he would have been potentially faster, but only with an awesome warm-up.

He did finish some of his sessions with 26 second 200's, so he could have run 25 flat out maybe?

Dathan isn't really the most slow twitch of athletes, although I think he can run faster than 2.07 for a marathon.

Ryan Hall is bound to be kind of slow over 400 meters.

You mean 'slow' i.e. not sub 50? But probably 52-3 ish?

Maybe slower. I don't think he can run 4:00 for the mile anymore though (he once ran the equivalent for 1500).

Bad Wigins wrote:

1:52? Ridiculous.

High school kids reach 1;52 pretty often, but they rarely get to 4 minute 1600 let alone mile. The 800 meter WR was sub-1:47 before anyone ran a sub-4 mile.

Sorry but you're gonna have to go WICKED fast over 800 to do a 4-minute mile. Around 1:47. Which means your 400 pace should be 107/2.2 = 48.6.

I'm not always rude, but the answers saying 52 or 1:52 are idiots.

Did you even read the OP? It's not asking what the equivalent times are.

Anyway I'd say there have probably been guys out there who would max out around 54 but could have run sub-4 just because they were so well trained aerobically. But unless you're a real freak of nature I think it's pretty much impossible if you can't go 52/1:52.

old question wrote:

No one ever seems to have any hard evidence on this but there are always stories of people doing it on pretty shitty speed (for sub 4 that is). I'd be interested to know if anyone has hard facts cause I can't remember specific examples.

Riley Masters ran a 1:54 a week before sneaking under 4 in the mile.

u.milesplit.com/athletes/962824-riley-masters/stats

I have heard many examples of 10,000/marathon types that ran close to 4 minutes early in their careers with moderate 800M P.R.'s

This certainly does't mean you can be slow however and I do think that 52 / 1:52-1:53 would be about the slowest you could run to break the four minute mile.

Murray Halberg 1:51 / 3:57

Ron Clarke 1:52 / 4:00

Steve Jones 1:53 / 4:00

John Landy 1:50 / 3:58 (obviously focused on 1500/mile not 10K/marathon throughout career)

Emiel Puttemans 1:54 / 4:01 (could have run faster 800m)

Dave Bedford :53 / 1:54 / 4:02

Gaston Reiff :52 / 1:53 / 4:02

Lasse Viren 1:53 / 4:00 (probably could have run 1:51/3:56)

Emil Zatopek :54 / 1:57 / 3:52 (1500)

Charlie Spedding 1:56 / 3:48 (1500)

You people have no idea. You are pointing to typical times for distance runners who can break 4 minutes.

The thread title asks what is the SLOWEST speed, not the typical speed.

There will be runners out there who can run sub 4 off much slower times than you realize.

My PBs were 50.1 open (almost never ran; 49.6 relay, also rare), 1:49.8 (ran 800s occasionally, but this was near-peak), and 3:58.7

I considered myself a strength runner, but wasn't a 10k-er, never even ran a great 5k. Decent xc, though

I think it'd be hard to break 4 if you can't run at least a 54 sec 400.

I think it'd be very tough without 53 second 400 speed but I think a true strength guy could push it with 1:54.x with the right make up of strength.

This is in reply to no one inparticular, but to ask the astute Arthur Lydiard disciples a question.

Does any of you recall in one of Lydiard's books - did he mention that the only "time" he is lly interested in is a person 220 time? His point was that that time was critical to distance success up to a point.

I am sure I read that many years ago and it stuck with me. Did not think it was that important at the time and did not keep the book.

Can anyone be of "serious" help in recalling that?

Where else can I post this if the real serious Lydiard people are no longer posting on this site or reading this thread?

Thank you.

jonathon wrote:

Need to edit this:

This is in reply to no one inparticular, but to ask the astute Arthur Lydiard disciples a question.

Do any of you recall in one of Lydiard's books - did he mention that the only "time" he is reallylly interested in is a person 220 time? His point was that that time was critical to distance success up to a point.

I am sure I read that many years ago and it stuck with me. Did not think it was that important at the time and did not keep the book.

Can anyone be of "serious" help in recalling that?

Where else can I post this if the real serious Lydiard people are no longer posting on this site or reading this thread?

Thank you.

59.99 second 1/4 speed

obvious? wrote:

59.99 second 1/4 speed

This is so funny I almost pissed my pants!

Bad Wigins wrote:

The OP is basically trying to predict sub-4 with 400/800 times.

No he's not. What part of the original post did you get that from? Even the title he gave the thread makes it obvious what he's asking.

dukerdog wrote:

Bad Wigins wrote:

The OP is basically trying to predict sub-4 with 400/800 times.

No he's not. What part of the original post did you get that from? Even the title he gave the thread makes it obvious what he's asking.

Yes, asking how fast you have to be over 400/800 to go sub-4. If that's not prediction, you're 100% anus.

Merv Lincoln ran 3.55. Franz Stampfl reckoned he couldn't break 54 for 440.