Rudisha time predictions for 100m through marathon

Doing the math, I think Rudisha is capable of 10.80-10.95 in the 100m and 21.50-21.70 in the 200m.

His 200m could be a bit lower. 100m.. I don't see any way he runs faster than 10.80, but I don't think he would be over 11.00 either.

I tend to agree. I think one thing that's being overlooked here is that Rudisha WAS a 400 guy. Not an 800 guy who ran the 400, but a 400 guy who moved up on the advice of Colm O'Connell. 400s are run out of blocks in Kenya just like everywhere else.

For a 400 specialist, the 200 time is typically (400-3)/2, so something like 21.8. So I see about 11.0 out of blocks.

11.0

21.8

45.5

Sorry but your abit off base there. You cannot run a 45.5 off 21.8 second 200m. The fastest possible time you could achieve off a 21.8 is 46.6sec FAT. Best 200m x 2 +3. There is no guesswork. That formula is fact. If your endurance over 400m is maxed out you can achieve that ratio or essentially just under 94% of your max 200m speed over the 400m.

In the case of Rudisha that equates to 21.3.

Remember Rudisha ran 45.5 and 1:43.00 a week apart. That same year AFTER speed work he ran 1:41.01. You dont improve endurance as the competition season progresses, you improve speed.

Therefore Rudisha was running 44.5 FAT and a minimum of 20.90 over 200m when he was in 1:41.01 shape.

There is no point talking hypotheticals, this is fact...

Your right on the 10.80 would be correct because his block starts would not be great. But you cant run 45.5 off 21.5 its just not physiologically possible. As the guy above says its just not humanly possible to run faster than 94% of your max 200m speed in a 400m. With his endurance back ground he could typically almost even split a 200m, therefore with a flying start over that second 100m he should be close to 21.00-21.25. This is right in line with his 400m time but of course that was only pre-season in sydney as part of his base work.

I actually watched the race, he came second to ben offereins who ran 44.86. The week after he ran 1:43.0 in Melbourne. You have to remember that this is pre season, he would be 44 mid and 20.xx when he ran the world record.

Trackshark13 wrote:

Sorry but your abit off base there. You cannot run a 45.5 off 21.8 second 200m. The fastest possible time you could achieve off a 21.8 is 46.6sec FAT. Best 200m x 2 +3. There is no guesswork. That formula is fact. If your endurance over 400m is maxed out you can achieve that ratio or essentially just under 94% of your max 200m speed over the 400m.

In the case of Rudisha that equates to 21.3.

Remember Rudisha ran 45.5 and 1:43.00 a week apart. That same year AFTER speed work he ran 1:41.01. You dont improve endurance as the competition season progresses, you improve speed.

Therefore Rudisha was running 44.5 FAT and a minimum of 20.90 over 200m when he was in 1:41.01 shape.

There is no point talking hypotheticals, this is fact...

I think you are being a little optimistic there and it certainly isn't fact that all runners' best 400m will be 200m x 2 + 3. This is a general rule of thumb and all athletes are not the same.

When Coe ran a 45.7 relay from a stumbling start ( probably worse than a start from blocks) and easing up in the last 30m, his 200 pb was around 21.5.

(21.5 x 2) + 3 = 46.0. Coe was certainly capable of faster than that that night, and probably a 45.5 runner by the end of the season.

When Rudisha ran his 45.5 it was early season, yes, but was used as a mini tour (like many athletes use the indoor circuit in Feb/March). You also pre-suppose that 1:43.00 was his absolute limit when he ran the following week. That is not necessarily the case. He wasn't out there trying to break the WR, so it is misleading to suggest that he improved his potential by 2.0sec over the season.

A 200m of 20.9 I would suggest is a maximum rather than a minimum. More likely just outside 21.0. Remember that El Caballo only managed 20.7 from the blocks and he was a 44.2 man.

I don't doubt that by August Rudisha must have been in better than 45.5 shape. But 44.5 that you suggest would have ranked him 3rd in the world that year (& only 0.37 behind Wariner's world lead). I just don't believe that an 800 specialist would be running that much quicker than many of the world's leading 1 lap specialists.

I think 45.0 is a far more realistic time (possibly as fast as 44.8), which would still put him in the world's top 12.Give him a year to focus specifically and solely on the 400 and I think 44.5 is very doable for someone like Rudisha, just not while he's running 800 also.

Relay times arent really relevant. A 45.7 is actually closer to 46.7 out of the blocks. So a 46 would be accurate. In regards to being top 3 in the 400m it is what it is. He broke the 800m world record at the time and is a 400/800m runner. You cant discredit a 44.5 on the basis of the 400m being weaker in that particular year. But as I said you cant keep putting in an opinion when facts exist. That equation isnt up for debate, you will nit find anyone with a 400m pb faster than 94% of their 200m timr. It isnt physioligically possible.

Trackshark13 wrote:

Sorry but your abit off base there. You cannot run a 45.5 off 21.8 second 200m. The fastest possible time you could achieve off a 21.8 is 46.6sec FAT. Best 200m x 2 +3. There is no guesswork. That formula is fact. If your endurance over 400m is maxed out you can achieve that ratio or essentially just under 94% of your max 200m speed over the 400m.

In the case of Rudisha that equates to 21.3.

Remember Rudisha ran 45.5 and 1:43.00 a week apart. That same year AFTER speed work he ran 1:41.01. You dont improve endurance as the competition season progresses, you improve speed.

Therefore Rudisha was running 44.5 FAT and a minimum of 20.90 over 200m when he was in 1:41.01 shape.

There is no point talking hypotheticals, this is fact...

Garbage. My OWN progressions refute your whole idea that there's a limit to your 400m speed based off of your 200m speed. My 400m PR is less than double my 200m PR + 3 seconds by nearly half a second.

I'm not going to make this thread about me, though, so I'm not going to post my times. I'm just saying that your 94% rule is a completely arbritary thing that is not true in all cases.

Guess what? Rudisha isn't going to be a normal case. This is the 800m world record holder here. Trying to apply very general rules and conversions to him won't really get you anywhere.

You two are equally stupid.... Is 3 k would be faster in his 5 k thus, giving him a fast pr by default... That said 2/10 troll thread, I gave it two point because I typed on it

Trackshark13 wrote:

Relay times arent really relevant. A 45.7 is actually closer to 46.7 out of the blocks. So a 46 would be accurate. In regards to being top 3 in the 400m it is what it is. He broke the 800m world record at the time and is a 400/800m runner. You cant discredit a 44.5 on the basis of the 400m being weaker in that particular year. But as I said you cant keep putting in an opinion when facts exist. That equation isnt up for debate, you will nit find anyone with a 400m pb faster than 94% of their 200m timr. It isnt physioligically possible.

There isn't a 1.0 sec difference when converting relay 400 to open 400m. If that were the case then that means the fastest ever 400 leg (42.9 by Johnson) is only worth 43.9 in an open, and would also suggest that no one else has ever bettered 44 secs in a relay. At the most it's 0.7. And you have to assess each leg individually. If the runner gets a good change over and perhaps some drafting from anyone in front, then it's 0.7. If a runner doesn't get a clean change over and has no drafting, or has to run wide on a curve to pass someone, then that 0.7 drops accordingly.

If you look at Coe's 45.7 relay at

You'll see he stumbles at the change over, is practically stationary as he crosses the start line, hobbles for a couple of strides (by which time a 2m lead has become a 4m deficit) and then sets off. He receives no drafting and eases off the last 20m once the victory is assured. There is no way this run is worth 0.7 slower in an open 400, let alone 1.0 sec. I'd suggest it's worth 45.7 due to the stumble and the easing off. Certainly inside 46.0 for an open 400m.

I have to agree with Sprint Geezer partially on this one. I think what he meant to say is there is NO WAY Rudisha can break 11 seconds in the 100.

Rudisha is an 800m athlete. All those percents and logics that applied for Michael Johnson don't apply to him. It is obvious he can't accelerate as quickly as Michael Johnson can, and obvious that he has more stamina than Michael Johnson.

Just because he has more stamina does not mean that he would be making up ground on MJ if they ran together. Scenario would probably be MJ leaving him in the dust the first 300 pulling away with every stride, and then Rudisha finally stopping the distance between the two but never closing the gap.

I predict around 11.2 for Rudisha simply because his acceleration would be abysmal out of the blocks. If someone like Wallace Spearmon regularly goes 10.2 and 10.3's in the 100 then Rudisha CANNOT possibly be that close to him.

Given the fact that Wallace has:

A) better block start than Rudisha

B) better acceleration than Rudisha

What everyone is forgetting is that this is 100meters from a standstill. Not flying. That's ENTIRELY different. The BIGGEST challenge of the 100m dash for these slow twitch distance guys is getting to full speed as quick as possible before the race is over. Again, using Wallace Spearmon, he does not get into his stride until 60meters so take someone like Rudisha and he won't hit it until 75 meters.

Coming out of the blocks he'll be struggling to defy inertia with such small leg muscles; that is what really will cost him the race. AGAIN, a standing 100 is VASTLY different than a flying 100.

I say 11.2 with all the wind thats legal.

As far as the 200, once again, those percents and arguments that "your 200m time is x divided/multiplied of your 100m time" is all wrong when put on a distance runner.

11.2 + 11.2 is 22.4.

Getting into his stride around 75 meters and finally, finally reaching top speed I predict sub 22 is plausible for Rudisha. Maybe 21.8.

Michael Johnson hit I believe 21.5 for his first 200 of his world record run. The reason Rudisha CANNOT hit 21.8 (his projected PR in the 200) in the open 400m and hold it with his "better stamina" is that trying to run all out to get that 21.8 for the first 200 is going to be WAY too taxing on him. Even with his 1:41 800m endurance he'll burn out and fade in the race.

Again, coming out that fast will require him to accelerate as quick as possible to hit that sub 22 first 200m. This will require enormous effort to defy inertia, something his muscles aren't large enough to do efficiently.

So i doubt Rudisha will EVER run sub 45 in the 400 unless he develops more powerful muscles which means bigger thighs that will detract from his endurance.

Your speculating though, you dont have an official 200m time for Coe nor do you have an official 400m time. Your speculating that he is running 'about 21.5' and speculating that his 400m is around 45.7 FAT. If he was running 45.7 FAT he would most likely be running 21.35 for 200m but we dont have a flat 400m time so you can't speculate. At the end of the day your predicting he is running 21.5 but that really isn't too far off 21.35 which would be the actual time if he was running 45.7 is it.

In a relay you dont just factor in the rolling start, some people run alittle further, some alittle less. The Borlee twins have clocked 43 mid 400m legs yet they have never gone under 44mid.

The other problem in regards to 800m sprint times is that you will never see their actual times due to the fact that they never run the shorter distances within a day or two of their peak 800m performance.

Rudisha however is differant due to the fact that we have an official 400m time of 45.5. He has been quoted as saying he had not done any speed work at the time of the 45.5. We also know that the 400m is a sprint, and sprint coaches such as Clyde Hart, Bud Winter, Charlie Francis, John Smith have all concluded that the best possible outcome for a 400m runner is alittle under 94% of their max 200m over 400m, however the best 400m runners only achieve 92%.

I really challenge anyone to provide actual evidence that Rudisha wouldn't run 21.00 or less over 200m at his peak rather than speculation.

Your post is moot. I could say say that i run 14.00 for 100m yet run 1:52.00 for 800m. My body officially does not fatigue because i say so.

Rudisha isn't an anomoly in regards to body chemistry. He is an anomoly due to the fact that he is the first guy to have 44.xx speed and retain a high level of specific 800m endurance. Where Juantorena ran each 400m 7.5x slower than his 400m best Rudisha is doing it in 6.

Do you know what makes everything anyone says about he can't run sub 11 irrelevant.

Marcin Lewandowski has run 10.61FAT a week after running a 1:47 at world juniors in beijing. Rudisha has run 1:41.01.

David Rudisha is worlds faster over the sprints than Marcin, and he would acknowledge this. I just dont know why people disregard proof.

Lachlan Renshaw from Australia has a 1:45.7pb. He ran a 22.1 and 47.3 Electric afew weeks out from his 800m pb. Stands to reason that a 45.5 would be no slower than 21.3.

Jasari22 wrote:

Do you know what makes everything anyone says about he can't run sub 11 irrelevant.

Marcin Lewandowski has run 10.61FAT a week after running a 1:47 at world juniors in beijing. Rudisha has run 1:41.01.

David Rudisha is worlds faster over the sprints than Marcin, and he would acknowledge this. I just dont know why people disregard proof.

Do you know what makes YOUR post irrelevant? He ran that time in Slupsk. Which is in Poland. His home country. And he has never ran a 200 or 400m before.

In fact, it's quite obvious that there was a timing error there, or the track was short. To suddenly jump from 800m to 100m just ONCE in the history of your running and you hit 10.61. Your post is so much trolling that all hats are off to commend you on finding this person.

I ran in the World Juniors in 2006. Your assuming that because it doesn't agree with your arguement that the Polish have short tracks, poor timing etc. He has run a 100m before as have many 800m athletes despite the fact that their times aren't readily available on the iaaf website. I ran at the pre-departure meet prior to the world juniors and ran 11.19 myself. My teammate ran 11.03. I really don't see why athletes run decent times in the sprints is so upsetting. The 800m is a sprint for 400/800 guys. Alot of the training in the peak phase is fast. 10.61 itself isn't quick when guys where running 10.00 at the time. Half a second is a long long way over 100m.

Also my pc is abit slow so I'm not sure if their is a video clip but Rudisha ran a 400m this year in Sydney which i watched. He went through 200m under 22seconds catching John Steffensen on the outside. He faded with lactic over the final 100m and was repassed by John Steffensen with about 40/50 to go.

AusMiler. wrote:

Lachlan Renshaw from Australia has a 1:45.7pb. He ran a 22.1 and 47.3 Electric afew weeks out from his 800m pb. Stands to reason that a 45.5 would be no slower than 21.3.

Not on IAAF website= not legal/validated and dismissed.

David's 400m races. His block start is atrocious. He's giving the field a quarter of a second with how long it takes him to get off the block pedal. Unlike other distance runners he pushes back in the blocks (most just fall out of them) and he doesn't have the fast twitch to apply that force quick enough to warrant block usage.

Why in the world would someone with 1:41-1:42 speed come out so slowly? Wouldn't their mentality be that they can hold it and so should come out blazing?

It's painfully obvious that Rudisha couldn't keep up with these sprinters. His turnover was already incredibly high compared to the other sprinters who were coasting down the back stretch. High turnover dictates lower rates of force development. No doubt about it. No way Rudisha can touch 21.5 or lower.