Slowest 400 time for a sub 2 800 that you personally know?

Sorry, but when we talk about 400 ability it is absolute bogus to think someone maxed out with a 400 in 59.x can run 800 in 1:59.x.

And even with superb endurance no one runs only 58 for 400 all out when being able to run 3:45. Might be it was the 400 workout "PR", but not his potential.

56-57 is about the least amount of 400 speed (in a race setting) you will get sub 2. No way someone going all out for a spiked up 400 time trial running 59.0 is going back to back sub 60s.

I probably should have specified that those are all relay splits. The 52/2:01 was a sophomore who wound up with open PRs around 51.0/1:55.5 as a senior; he didn’t run the 400 much though. The 52/2:03 dude was primarily a hurdler who trained with us often and ran on the relays. The 51/2:03 kid was a 14 foot pole vaulter so he did do some additional explosive type work and often skipped the 4x8 at big meets to focus on PV.

I had a 17 year old run 1:58 this past season and I am pretty sure he could run maybe 56.9 at best. Tough as nails though and he did run 3:59/8:42 for 15/3k double.

In high school I went 67-52 to run 1:59 but had already run 1:53 before so idk if this counts. If you mean for the first time probably 60 honestly cause high schoolers kick like crazy all the time

I ran 1:52 with a 54 split.

I don't think I had much else in me over 400, maybe high 52 at best. It wasn't like I was particularly strong endurance-wise either - the sweet spot was 3000/5000 for me so I sometimes felt I should have been more capable over 400.

Agree with an upper limit of 56-high or so for men. Most guys are gonna need to be sub-55 for any shot at breaking 2. I think the most common profile is something like 54/2:00/4:35 (mile) or thereabouts for the true half milers out there.

I think a lot of the people insisting that they’ve seen tons of 57/1:59 guys have seen a lot of distance runners who don’t have an accurate idea of how fast they could run an open 400.

Try poorly trained for the 800 actually. Good 800 training includes lots of speed work, which should improve your 400 time. I never did pure sprint training in HS, but did lots of high rep 200s, 400s and ladders, with a couple miles warm up and cool down. Once a week we did longer stuff on the track. That mid-D training pushed my 400 PR down from 53 to 49 my junior year and further down to a 47.9 relay split my senior year.

IMO anyone breaking 2 with a really slow 400 is likely doing longer distance training and not enough short stuff in practice.

No way.. you just didn't focus enough on speed training or raced enough 400s. You were a 50/51 runner and didn't know it.

A prolific poster here has run 56.08 and 1:56.99 according to his direct athletics page.

I ran 58 high (all out) in a 4x400 split and ran 1:59 in the 800m, AMA. PR's that year were 4:15 for the 1600m, 9:18 for 3200.

interesting question, but no matter the answer, raw speed MUST be worked on to do your best in an 800m. Don't settle on being a 57sec runner or a 51sec runner. Do what it takes to become a 55sec runner or a 49sec runner. My biggest improvements in the 800m came when I first ran cross country in high school (first time I was really training year round in any capacity) and then an even bigger improvement my freshman year of college when I didn't make the cross country team and instead trained with the 100-400 runners in the fall. On just sprint training and a longer run on the weekends I PRd in the 800 by a second in my first college race and ended up going another 4 seconds faster over the course of the season when getting back to more training with the distance team. But the base of having a much faster top end speed was hugely beneficial to both racing and training in the spring. Top end speed is something I rarely touched in in HS, just a couple times, though was still able to run ~24.5/52high/1:56. Getting down to high 48s in the relay and being able to run 23 flat for 200m reps in practice made a huge difference in my 800

Some like to take some training time and then say - I have never run faster than x time. Actually in races when fresh, they could have run much faster.

Case in point - in 21/22 indoor season, fastest 400m I had run in workout were 60.0. But in 800m race I ran 1:53.12.

In reality I was 50s 400m runner.

I guess it must be true because you said it, but having been an 800m specialist and having coached for many years, what you stated is something I have never seen. Most sub-2 800m runners are capable of running a (54) 400m. The original question was is it possible for someone with only a (57) 400PB; the general consensus seems to be that it's possible but unlikely. You are basically stating that you ran 1:59 while only capable of running a 59 400m. What that means is you ran the first lap of your 800m like an all of 400m and at the point where you should barely be able to lift your legs, you ran another lap at about the same pace. - If you looks at the recent H.S. girls like Ajee Wislon, Mary Cain, Sammy Watson, Athing Mu, Juliette Whittaker, Roisin Willis and Sophia Gorriaran who ran 2 minutes or better in 800m, they were all capable of 54 or better in the 400m. I think Dathan Ritzenhein once joked about the fact that in H.S. he capable of running a sub-2 800, but could run a (55) in the 400m. That's coming from an extremely endurance-based athlete, which makes me think a (57) is perhaps the upper limit for being able to run a subb-2 800...I don't how 59 is possible for even an exceptionally strong runner.

I predominately ran 800m for freshman- junior year, my PRs were as follows. if you can’t run at least 54 in a relay I would think u would have hard time breaking 2, just look at Jack Daniels performance tables

56.5open/ 2:10 open

54?relay/2:01 open

52.5 relay/1:59.8 open

I hate posts like this. The question asks how slow a 400 can be to break 2:00. Many people have told you that 57 has been done many times. One guy even said 58. So we know that 54 isn't close to the answer.

if i had to guess, this type of performance would mostly come from an older runner who has lost more speed than endurance. if this person was still in their prime, it has to be an extreme outlier. most people that i know who are 1:58 or 1:59 can typically do :51-:54

I coach high school XC and distance runners in track. I have had many guys run 1:59 and none ran faster than 54 in a split. Our school record is 1:52. That guy ran 52 in the open 400.

The slowest sub 2 800 runner (in a 4x800 split so that's not "official", but it was 62/57 so I'm counting it) I know had a 400 PR of 54 high from a relay where he seemed relaxed though still obviously working hard (maybe 97% effort?). But he also ran in the 4:10s/low 9:0s range so he was very endurance based.

For a well-rounded athlete (i.e. one whose PRs receive the same World Athletics points across all distances), I'd say you need at least a 55 second 400, though 53 is far safer. And to get 55 you need to be able to run <13.75 for a flying 100 any day of the week - even after a long run - and probably 12.75 as your fastest flying 100.

Looks like 58 is the winner based on this thread, though I bet that person could have run faster over 400m.

Fwiw a low 15s 5k guy on my HS team ran a 57 relay split and then the next day ran a 1:59.99 (no joke lol) 800m