Get used to being beaten. Your not good enough to worry about random people running faster than you. I'm saying this as someone who also isnt the fastest on my team. Just don't expect to be unbeatable at your current ability level. I would be more surprised if a 2:01 guy got beaten by a 400 runner.
I was a 400m runner in MS and moved up to the 800m. I ended up with 1:50 in HS and state championship and nationals berth. I laughed at the milers who also ran XC who though they could hang. The top milers could knock out 12-200 at 27-28 and do 400m repeats at around 58-60 seconds but when you asked them their fastest times it would be 25 for 200m and 54-55 for the 400m.
Not having speed kills you in the 800m. Elite level HS endurance may take you to 1:55-57 in HS but to get below 1:55 you need real speed.
Where did you go to school? You can't make it to regionals in Texas without a sub 2. At least for 5a. And also 2:14 isn't good but it's something.
7/10
Lots of people took the bait....
TrackRunner28 wrote:
I understand that. There are kids my age running sub-2 in my league. The thing is I literally went from being the "future" of our distance team freshman year to being just above average for our distance team and i don't know where these guys ability has come from. The thing is that these guys fast times came out of nowhere. Two of them did run 800's last year and ran mid-2:30's but they actually improved their sprinting a lot so that could be it even with no endurance change really.
"The Future"? Really? Nobody that slow could ever be called that, its just pathetic. 3 eighth graders and 7 freshmen have already run 2:13 to 2:05 and we don't call them "the future". We call them losers who could potentially not suck. You still got bites on this, though, so 3.5/10.
not all of them are.perhaps a third of them would have what it takes to be super quick 800 metre runners,but a lot wouldnt have the endurence needed,especially if theyre quick over shorter sprints.
Conservatory wrote:
It's not that they're particularly good. It's just that you suck.
The first response to a thread is usually the best.
Sheez! The OP probably is a troll, but, on the off chance he isn't maybe a little generosity of spirit isn't out of line. 2:14 isn't future olympian, but, depending on his hs and depending on what he was running as a freshman, it's entirely possible he was, reasonably, regarded as the future. If he was running 2:14 as a freshman, then I'd say that's significantly better than average. My 9th grade son is running 2:17 and he's pretty well regarded (again, not as a future superstar, but....).
OP: All that said, what some others on here have said is probably true. Many people with good speed, also, it turns out, have pretty good VO2. When I was in 8th grade I had expected that I would be the top miler on my junior high team. That was until a 9th grader who had been a 200 meter runner the year before, decided to move up to the mile. The coach was a big believer in time trials (in fact, his training philosophy was to have us race our events every day - just get one second faster than the day before he'd say - you'll be a sub 4 miler by the end of the year! Yeah...) Anyway, the first day this 9th grader runs the mile in practice he breaks 5 minutes! Just like that. I never came close to him the entire season. He just had more talent than I.
Have you run the 16 or 32? What are your times? My guess is that those 400 guys would not beat you at 32. If you want to retain your position on the team, you might need to move up in distance.
coach d wrote:
Maybe because 400 sprinters spend their time working on being fast, while endurance runners spend their time working on being slow. 2 of the last 4 WR holders in the 800 were 400 sprinters that moved up, and 1 of the other 2 (Coe) did sprint training one day a week all season.
Example for Coe from Peter Coe's USATF Level III lecture:
2X300 + 4X200 + 4X100
How long did either ofKipkter spend running 400m?
Take Rudisha was he really ever an out and out 400m sprinter. He was always doing the 800m, he ran 1:46 back in 2006! :
http://www.iaaf.org/athletes/kenya/david-lekuta-rudisha-209036Coe did work on his speed all year but he spent the other 6 days on endurance or longer speed endurance reps
Out of the top all time 800m runners only Juantorena was a genuine 400m runner and his time was over 30 yrs ago
Even the Ovett being a sprinter is a bit of a myth as even as an early teen he was running 800's. If speed beats endurance why did he bother running 100 mpw
Most 400m runners are spinters and 400m is the top of their range
coach d wrote:
Maybe because 400 sprinters spend their time working on being fast, while endurance runners spend their time working on being slow. 2 of the last 4 WR holders in the 800 were 400 sprinters that moved up, and 1 of the other 2 (Coe) did sprint training one day a week all season.
Example for Coe from Peter Coe's USATF Level III lecture:
2X300 + 4X200 + 4X100
Except that isn't sprint training, it is speed endurance training...