Should I run 400m or 800m?

distance mentality wrote:

You guys are looking at this all from a distance mentality.

Going by what some people are saying then a 45.00 second 400m runner should be running the following:

45 x 2.2 = 1:39.00

Somebody should tell the Borlees to move up as they'd be shoe-ins for Rudisha's record :-)

No.

That's the whole point.

'You guys are looking at this all from a distance mentality.'

This guy is not really an out an out sprinter though?

Have a look on here loads of guys are running 2:05 or faster off 55/56

http://www.thepowerof10.info/rankings/rankinglist.aspx?event=800&agegroup=ALL&sex=M&year=2012

'56 and 2:10 would place a woman roughly in the same sort of position in a national championships in many countries btw. The performances are equal on the IAAF points tables.5'

This is a guy not a woman so quoting girls conversion is not relevant. In any case you are just looking at poorly trained athletes. Kelly Holmes was running 1:56 off 53 and was no long distance runner

Of course does not mean he can do this time straight away it would take 1-2 years and even then could still turn out to be better on the sprints

what do you want out of it?

to have fun, to experiment, or to impress someone else?

when i think about it, it does not matter what you want, the recommended training program is the same.

you want to develop your sprinting ability as much as you can. i'd like to see you go under 12 flat in the 100m before attempting the 400m and 800 training.

get in the weight room and really improve all aspects of your leg strength and core.

eat your regular meals and add in 3 protein shakes between.

don't eat too much sugar juice smoothies or junk food.

look to charlie francis / or glen mills for the running program. get plenty of sun- unless your are living under an ozone hole. that will boost your testosterone.

unbusy your lifestyle and don't stress, really take a look at that aspect.

analyze your running form and look for defects. you might get a lot better just by relaxing properly. you can correct your defects in the weight room with specific exercises.

here is my own modified francis concept.

warmup before each workout with....

800 m jog + 4x150m stride outs relaxed full recovery.

warmdown after each workout, 10 min jog AND 15 min cycle.

MONDAY:

10 x 50 m sprints max from blocks 2 sets 20 minutes rest between.

core exercises and weights

TUESDAY:

6 x 20 seconds up steep hill hard 2 min recovery - 2 sets with 20 minutes between.

weights legs and jumps/bounding/stairs

WEDNESDAY

10 x 100m fastish but relaxed and easy. 2 min recovery

cycle 1 hour easy.

THURSDAY

4 x 40 seconds hard up steep hill recovery - 2 sets with 20 minutes between.

weights core.

FRIDAY

10 x 50 m sprints from blocks 2 sets 20 minutes rest between.

weights legs and jumps/bounding/stairs

Saturday

Swim or cycle an hour easy.

Sunday it's a walk in the park.

Notes: If you race Saturday, knock off the weights on thursday and friday but do a good core 45 min workout sunday instead.

what do you want out of it?

to have fun, to experiment, or to impress someone else?

when i think about it, it does not matter what you want, the recommended training program is the same.

you want to develop your sprinting ability as much as you can. i'd like to see you go under 12 flat in the 100m before attempting the 400m and 800 training.

get in the weight room and really improve all aspects of your leg strength and core.

eat your regular meals and add in 3 protein shakes between.

don't eat too much sugar juice smoothies or junk food.

look to charlie francis / or glen mills for the running program. get plenty of sun- unless your are living under an ozone hole. that will boost your testosterone.

unbusy your lifestyle and don't stress, really take a look at that aspect.

analyze your running form and look for defects. you might get a lot better just by relaxing properly. you can correct your defects in the weight room with specific exercises.

here is my own modified francis concept.

warmup before each workout with....

800 m jog + 4x150m stride outs relaxed full recovery.

warmdown after each workout, 10 min jog AND 15 min cycle.

MONDAY:

10 x 50 m sprints max from blocks 2 sets 20 minutes rest between.

core exercises and weights

TUESDAY:

6 x 20 seconds up steep hill hard 2 min recovery - 2 sets with 20 minutes between.

weights legs and jumps/bounding/stairs

WEDNESDAY

10 x 100m fastish but relaxed and easy. 2 min recovery

cycle 1 hour easy.

THURSDAY

4 x 40 seconds hard up steep hill recovery - 2 sets with 20 minutes between.

weights core.

FRIDAY

10 x 50 m sprints from blocks 2 sets 20 minutes rest between.

weights legs and jumps/bounding/stairs

Saturday

Swim or cycle an hour easy.

Sunday it's a walk in the park.

Notes: If you race Saturday, knock off the weights on thursday and friday but do a good core 45 min workout sunday instead.

Bad Wigins wrote:

a 56 runner who's fully trained for 800 should be able to run 2:03.

I'd say more 2.04-2.08, depending on how "fully trained" they are.

Obviously the current 800 time is far worse, but probably off no specific 800 training.

someone had to do it wrote:

Bad Wigins wrote:

A good pro 400/800 runner who could run 47 would be capable of about 104 seconds.

104/47 = 2.21

Rudisha can run about 46 and 101, a ratio of 2.19

An average college runner could do 50 and 110, about 2.2

130 seconds/56 seconds = 2.32. A much slower 800 than usual for a doubler. 2.2 would be about 123 seconds, or 2:03.

I always trust that 2.2 ratio, it's simple and it works.

Umm, Rudisha has run 45.5 for 400m and was likely in high 44 / 45 flat shape in London

Agreed, I was there when Rudisha ran his 400 PB of around 45.4, and that was in Feb/March. When in top race shape, I think he'd go close to breaking 45.

So at the very leaset his conversion is (I prefer to go by seconds added on per lap rather than a multiple of say 2.19):

400 - 45.0

800 - 50.5 per lap

Rudisha's differential - 5.5 seconds

Once you get reasonably fit, you should be able to manage an 8 second differential between 400 and 800 speed. A 5 second conversion is more for a longer distance guy, say a genuine 800/1500 guy who never really runs a super-serious 400 (eg Coe). The sprinters going up in distance are more a 6 second conversion, even the top ones.

So overall I'd say a 7 second differential is fine up to about 15-16, then by age 20 you can drop the differential to around 6 seconds. So a 47.0 400 runner will run a 1.46 (6 second differential), unless they're a beast distance type, strong over mile/5km, in which case they'd be more like a 1.44 (5 second differential).

So to the OP - if you can run a 56.0 for 400, then with a year's decent 800 training you'd get down to about a 2.06-2.08. How do you respond to distance work?

By the way the 200 to 400 conversion isn't great. Your 400 time is double the 200 time + 5 seconds. That's more a HS freshman level. By mid-20s you should at least be at 4, with good training. That means your 4oo should be more like 55.0, and in a year you should be able to get your 800 to about 2.04, say a 61/63. If you can run a 55, then a 61 first lap with decent conditioning should feel comfortable enough to bring it home.

Michael Johnson had a 5 second drop off from 200m to 400m. I think the OP's 200m to 400m is very good. No doubt a low 56 is better than a mid 25. Would expect somebody to be 25 dead based on that 400 time.

ukathleticscoach wrote:

No they are not

Even off an average conversion 56 + 6 x 2 = 2:04

That sounds like a conversion for an 800 specialist maybe, and biased towards faster times (whereas a relative % calculation makes more sense)....

Just going off of world record ratios, 56 / 43.18 * 1:40.92 = 2:10.88

I'm not saying 2:04 isn't doable, it absolutely is, but it would be an improvement over 56.

I can't believe this took two pages:

IAAF: 56.26 equals 2:09.58. This assumes EQUAL emphasis on and aptitude for 400/800 training.

Personally, as a 800/1500 guy in Masters, I have a 25 mid 200, 55 high 400, 2:06 800 and 4:20 1500. I didn't train the 400 that much, so if anything 2:09 seems optimistic, with some hard training if you are coming from 2:19.

Stick with the 400 another season before seriously moving up. That said, do plenty of overdistance/hills and so forth in the early season and you should be able to get that 800 down considerably without compromising the 400.

Oh and by the way Mr. Friggins, the proper ratio based on the pros is 100.9/42.18 for 2.33, giving 2:11 low. This kid isn't an 800 guy who ran an early season 400 for a fitness check.

High Wire wrote:

Oh and by the way Mr. Friggins, the proper ratio based on the pros is 100.9/42.18 for 2.33, giving 2:11 low. This kid isn't an 800 guy who ran an early season 400 for a fitness check.

................................

Believe you meant 43.18 for 2.3367

Of course, thanks.

wealthburg wrote:

High Wire wrote:

Oh and by the way Mr. Friggins, the proper ratio based on the pros is 100.9/42.18 for 2.33, giving 2:11 low. This kid isn't an 800 guy who ran an early season 400 for a fitness check.

................................

Believe you meant 43.18 for 2.3367

'Just going off of world record ratios, 56 / 43.18 * 1:40.92 = 2:10.88'

Rudisha can't do 43 for 400m

Once again here are the actual times people can run:

http://www.thepowerof10.info/rankings/rankinglist.aspx?event=800&agegroup=ALL&sex=M&year=2012

High Wire wrote:

I can't believe this took two pages:

IAAF: 56.26 equals 2:09.58. This assumes EQUAL emphasis on and aptitude for 400/800 training.

Personally, as a 800/1500 guy in Masters, I have a 25 mid 200, 55 high 400, 2:06 800 and 4:20 1500. I didn't train the 400 that much, so if anything 2:09 seems optimistic, with some hard training if you are coming from 2:19.

All those conversions look right.

400 = double 200 time plus 4-5. 3-4 if you're a really good 400 runner.

800 = 400 time + 7ish and doubled

1500 = doulbe 800 time and add 5-10. 1500 time can be a straight double of the 800 time for a distance type moving down

ukathleticscoach wrote:

'Just going off of world record ratios, 56 / 43.18 * 1:40.92 = 2:10.88'

Rudisha can't do 43 for 400m

Let me spell it out nice and slow.... In order to decide which event for an individual to focus on, we have to compare marks that are on EQUAL TERMS or EQUIVALENT.This works at every level of the sport. The only mark for 400m that compares on EQUAL TERMS with 1:40.9 is 43.18. Once the OP finds that his own 800 is statistically EQUIVALENT with his 400, THEN AND ONLY THEN can he assess his cost/benefit in terms of upside for investment.

For a 56 400, 2:09 is on equal terms, or a statistical "equivalent". It is NOT what "most" 400 runners will be running as part of their normal season. Very few runners run equivalents in these two different events at the same time. Juantorena was one of the few for 400/800. And lo and behold...his ratio was 2.338! (44.26/103.50)

If the OP *can* run that 2:09 with equal or less investment than it takes to run 56, he should consider switching (other factors, like scheduling may come into play). In this case, his 400 is far better than his 800, as we have shown, but he has put little investment in the 800. For now he should stay with the 400, but keep an eye towards the 800 as he develops. If he finds he has plateaued at 400, that could be anoter reason to move up, at least to mix things up a bit, as well returning to the 200 at various points in the season.