Who is faster over 300m, Rupp or Solinsky? Proof?

So in the video of Bekele he says his 400m open best has been recorded in the 49s, so already your line of Bekele is wrong. I am also curious, what would you say Bernard Lagat's open 400m is? IF you say he is sub 50 then you must say Galen is sub 50 because he has kicked with Lagat consistently and if you say Lagat can't run sub 50, then we all know you have the pea sized brain. Also, these "lines of fit" are stupid. You never see people dropping 1:47 with 51 400m speed lmao.

Jack Mehoff wrote:

So in the video of Bekele he says his 400m open best has been recorded in the 49s, so already your line of Bekele is wrong. I am also curious, what would you say Bernard Lagat's open 400m is? IF you say he is sub 50 then you must say Galen is sub 50 because he has kicked with Lagat consistently and if you say Lagat can't run sub 50, then we all know you have the pea sized brain. Also, these "lines of fit" are stupid. You never see people dropping 1:47 with 51 400m speed lmao.

Galen "outkicks" Bernard once and he's suddenly of the same calibur as Bernard. Stop.

Jack Mehoff wrote:

You never see people dropping 1:47 with 51 400m speed lmao.

How many people running 800s regularly have sub 27 10k endurance?

Rupp ran 1:49 indoors when he had a 10k PR of 27:33. He had yet to break 4 minutes in the mile.

Knock 50 seconds - 1 minute off of that 10k time and you get people slowing down very slowly going from 400m - > 800m.

Hence why people like Komen could run under 3:30 for 1500m without being able to break 50 seconds for 1 lap.

idiot

if kennster had 49 speed, then it was similar to hicham, so why no 3'26 or even 3'25 with his 5k wr endurance ???

& bernie hasn't cracked 3'33 in 2y

rupp went 3'34 during training

i doubt their basic 400 speed is little different currently at 51+

benie when he ran 3'26 likely had 48-flat speed

nuggins wrote:

Who is it? Any video to back this? Thanks, I'm in an argument.

1. Rupp

2. He just ran a 3:50 mile indoors

end of thread.

If I was a pro of Rupp, Bekele, Mo caliber I would race an open 400 just to settle this debate once and for all.

Rupp is obviously faster than Solinsky in terms of sprinting speed, even if both are healthy.

I think Rupp could probably run :50.5 out of blocks. Sub :50 on a relay split.

Solinsky I'd guess is a 51.5 guy out of blocks.

Anyone who thinks being able to close fast in a 10k is indicative of 400m sprint speed is a fool. The best 5k-10k runners in the world can close a "slow" (relatively speaking) race VERY close to their 400m personal best. That's what makes them the best. They aren't fast sprinters, but they can access their top speed at the end of an endurance race.

Anyone who thinks running a 3:34 or closing in 52-53 automatically indicates sub 50 400m speed is an idiot with zero understanding of physiology.

For instance, Jager regularly ran 49.high splits in 4x4s in high school. I highly doubt his raw speed has changed much since then, so he's a 50.low guy at best, and guys like Tegenkamp (3:34/8:07/12:58) said Jager was MUCH faster than them in terms of raw speed, even at age 20.

Runners are different. Tegenkamp, who probably compares favorably to Rupp in terms of raw speed (Rupp is obviously stronger) admits to being noticeably slower than a raw and young Jager.

Runners have differet physiologies. Teg is an AR holder w/ a faster 2 mile PR than Rupp, comparable 1500m speed, and almost certainly can't break :50 in a 400 out of blocks.

Teg is also faster than Solinsky in terms of raw speed, to which they've both attested frequently.

But you're probably going "well if Jager has PRs of 3:38 and 13:22, and can run :49.5-:50.5, then of course Rupp is faster." But no, Evan Jager will never be able to run 26:30-5, which Rupp most likely will in the right race. Different physiologys = different abilities, even in distance runners.

Similarly, I've never broken 16:15 in a 5000, but I can run a 400m exactly as fast as my teammate who has broken 15:05. But I also can't break 2:00 in an 800, so this has nothing to do with my being fast. I am a 3k-10k guy, probably.

Extrapolate to elite distance guys -- there is a lot of range in speed and strength between people with similar PRs at a single distance.

Rupp has better speed than Jager, Teg or Solinsky. He can break 50 in the 400.

The Single Voice of Reason wrote:

.. snip ..

For instance, Jager regularly ran 49.high splits in 4x4s in high school. I highly doubt his raw speed has changed much since then, so he's a 50.low guy at best, and guys like Tegenkamp (3:34/8:07/12:58) said Jager was MUCH faster than them in terms of raw speed, even at age 20. .. snip ..

A 400m split is a function of a LOT more things than "raw speed".

do you think it makes you somehow more interesting to quote with "...snip..."?

You're so hip! wrote:

do you think it makes you somehow more interesting to quote with "...snip..."?

No ... but it does make a forum easier to read and follow to remove those parts of a comment that aren't relevant to the reply .. and it also acknowledges that I'm only referring to part of what someone actually said, and not quoting them verbatim. It just makes sense to me to do that.

When quotes are taken out of context, they can drastically change a comment's meaning; acknowledging that I'm taking only a snippet, and not the entire commentary, just seems reasonable to me. Most folks I know on forums and bulletin boards do the same.

Does it make you more hip to change your name every time you post?

To compare Galen to Teg is crazy. They are in different universes. Not only is Galen genetically superior, but he and Salazar have been heavily focusing on speed development for the past few years. The kid just race 3'50" off of uneven pacing. I'm sure he could run 1'47" high at least!!!

I bet Rupp could NEGATIVE split a sub 50" 400.

In fact, I would be willing to put money on him going something like 25.5/24.5". It just is NOT that crazy for a guy who works out doing 51" quarters and closes in such in a 10,000m race.

Also, I believe somone said that Kenny, Haile and Danny K couldn't break 50". COME ON DUDE!!! Like an above-poster said, "There are more factors in a 400m race than raw speed".

-SA

bad as naomi russell wrote:

Warnier (150lb?) looks like a stick figure compared to Solinsky (165?), but i'll take him in the 100m-400m any day.

[/quote]

Way to go out on a limb there, chief.

wtfunny wrote:

No ... but it does make a forum easier to read and follow to remove those parts of a comment that aren't relevant to the reply .. and it also acknowledges that I'm only referring to part of what someone actually said, and not quoting them verbatim. It just makes sense to me to do that.

When quotes are taken out of context, they can drastically change a comment's meaning; acknowledging that I'm taking only a snippet, and not the entire commentary, just seems reasonable to me. Most folks I know on forums and bulletin boards do the same.

Does it make you more hip to change your name every time you post?

The point being, friend-o, that an ellipsis (...) already serves that exact grammatical function and has since any of us has been alive. Why does adding "snip" to it (and using the wrong number or space of periods) add anything to its meaning or use? (Answer: it doesn't.) It's redundant and pretentious, sort of like saying "etc., and the rest."

You're absolutely correct. I could well have just dropped the 'snip' and the additional periods, and you would clearly have a much easier time navigating the architectural structure of my post. Apologies.

Cheers

I'm going to take the opposite track from Ventard, and work up from 100m.

We all just saw MF do a 13-second 100m FAT from the blocks.

IMHO, this sets up the following plausible 400m race profiles, by 100m segments:

13.5

11.5

11.5

12.0

for a total of 48.5, FAT from the blocks.

Or, he might go

13.5

11.0

11.5

12.5

for a total of 48.5. FAT from the blocks.

I assume GR to be the same as MF.

As I believe that MF is faster than GR in a FAT 100m from the blocks, I would give GR this 400m race profile:

14.0

11.5

11.5

12.0

for a total of 49.0, FAT from the blocks.

Of course, I round to the nearest 0.5 for this analysis. I actually think that the times would be somewhat faster, maybe by 0.5 overall.

I appreciate that these guys have no sprint ability, that they have a speed governor, and that some believe that they can close a 5k/10k within 2 seconds of their 400m PR--but the 400m is a long race.

I also assume that they would get a good lane draw and not be running on the rail.

Thoughts?

BTW, having broken 50 myself, I know what it takes.

IMO these guys definitely have the SE to do it, as well as the top-end, the only weakness is in the first 100m from the blocks, around a bend.

You might be surprised to know how much can be gained/lost in the last 100m of a 400m. Let's face it, people who go 50 are not great quarter-milers, and are often those who completely fall apart in the last 100m after running a decent first 200m.

Even running hard (for them) in the first 250m, I don't see these guys falling apart in the home straight--slowing a bit, yes, but rigging, no.

Maintenance of stride length is a big deal, and Rupp would have that. I don't know how tall he is, but he looks to have a decent stride length capability in a 400m-type run.

In the distant past I trained some 400's with guys like that, 400's that did not emphasize the start, but which were fast tempo. I finished ahead of them every time, but after a few I was gassed, and they kept finishing closer...I got the impression that they could keep going at their pace all day long, however.

Tall, thin guys with decent basic speed, a long stride, and good SE can absolutely eat up ground in a 400--look at Rudisha. I know Rupp isn't Rudisha, but I have a hard time believing that guys like him COULDN'T run at least 49.5 for the 400m FAT from the blocks.

As for guys like HG and KB, I would give them faster first 100m segments, because I think they'd be intrinsically faster over a block-start FAT 100m, as well as being able to accelerate better around a curve. What they may lack in stride length, they probably make up in absolutely superior SE. They would also go under 50, IMHO.

And of course KB was massively juiced, so he could do whatever he wanted--plus, I think that his juice would have helped him immensely in a 400m. I would give him 47.5-48.5 if he really tried, FAT from the blocks.

And lastly, Lagat.

There is no doubt in my mind that he could break 50.

50 isn't some magical number in the 400, IIRC.

It's when you get down to around 47.xx that things start to get serious, then when you are 45.xx you are real.

But there is a huge gulf between 50 and 47.xx--that is, lots of guys can go 50, but vastly fewer can go 47.xx

I forget where the fall-off is in numbers, somebody showed it to me once--but 50 is for sure still in the fatter part of the curve.

And 50 includes everybody from 100m sprinters all the way to 1500m middle-distance guys. And beyond, I would say.

Isn't there any good evidence? Haven't any of these guys ever raced a FAT 400m from the blocks, even in college (assuming they ran college)?