I have 23.0 200m speed can I run 1:44

Wrong. A flat time is a better indicator of speed. Getting up to speed is an important factor in speed.

Cram would be more effective using standing up starting technique than blocks. Crouched low, but standing. Blocks take a long while to master.

JRinaldi wrote:

An 8/1500 guys with 23.0 speed would be able to run 1:44 - proving he can run sub 3:35. Now I'm assuming it's 23.0 with a standing start and not a rolling start which takes ~0.7 off your time.

The three guys I've coach to 1:44 have all been able to break 23.0 - never raced one, just in a training session with a standing start and the end of a speed session.

Deng 1:44.21 (22.5 - but has never really run flat out)

Rowe 1:44.40 (22.2)

Bol 1:44.56 (21.7)

So I've always gone by 2 x 200m pb/shape +4s = 400m best/shape

Then 400m best/shape +4s x 2 = likely 800m best

Going through the guys I know alot about

Snell 200m pb = 22.3 (probably hand timed), 1:44.3

Ryun obviously could do 44 flat and 1:38 ?

Walker had a 400m best of 48.9 (hand???), but did a 49.9h on grass days before his 1:44.9, his 200m best was 22.7 (hand???) But the day before he ran his mile record he did 23 and 22.9 200m reps with Jim Bolding.

Ovett did 21.7 & 47.5 (hand???). When he his 400m best in 1974 he was running 1:45.77 for 800m (in a Championship). My guess for Ovett was he should have done about 1:43mid but looks to have lost some speed when he shifted to the 1500m/mile

Coe 21.7??

Cruz I think claimed at a coaching seminar I was at that he could do 21.6 or something like that

SlowTwitcher wrote:

Given world class aerobic and anaerobic systems is 23.0 sufficient speed to run 1:44

I think times of 48.5 and 23 would be plausible for some of these runners and in line with their 800/1500 times.

Noureddine Morceli 1:44.79, 3:27.37

Silas Kiplagat 1:44.8A, 3:27.64

Noah Ngeny 1:44.49, 3:28.12

Elijah Manangoi 1:44.15, 3:28.80

Maybe these three could run 1:44

Bernard Lagat 1:46, 3:26.34

Hicham El Guerrouj 1:47.18, 3:26

Fermin Cacho 1:45.37, 3:28.95

Some longer specialists, may have been able to run 1:44 and also 23.0:

Daniel Komen 3:29.46

Mo Farah 3:28.81

I think a few would have been close, but perhaps more likely to break 23:

Saïd Aouita 1:43.86, 3:29.46

Asbel Kiprop 1:43.15, 3:26.69

Mehdi Baala 1:43.15, 3:28.98

Subway Surfers wrote:I've always gone by 2 x 200m pb/shape +4s = 400m best/shape

Then 400m best/shape +4s x 2 = likely 800m best

I think it's more like +3 for 200 to 400, then +5 for 400 to 800 for most 800 runners.

+4s gives times to close to the same level for 200 and 400.

e.g. 20 and 44. If the current world record holder could do this he'd be 19.19 and 42.38, but when the record was 19.72, that would have implied that even an 800m runner with this speed couldn't equal the then 400m record (43.29) as he could only manage 43.44! This is clearly an absurd conclusion.

Similarly, if +4s was reasonable from 400 to 800, then the handful running 1:41-42 would all be running no faster than 46.5-47. I think a handful were running, or capable of running, 45.5-46, with a few 400/800 types who could run even faster.

It’s not always as clear as X time in the 200 with Y endurance = Z 800m time.

I had long legs and a good engine for middle distance. Way too long stride that I kept trying to shorten. It made for a bad sprinter and also lousy over long distances but did pretty well over 800-1500m.

I certainly never broke 25 from a rolling start and, by extension, wouldn’t have broken 25 FAT but I did run 1:51 and 4:02 for the mile. Endurance dropped off like a cliff after that - I only managed 14:40 for 5000m.

Some people are built for certain events and shorter/longer times don’t necessarily explain it.

Old Man 2 Lapper wrote:

Thanks! It makes sense to me. Glad to have people like you on here giving us your perspective. Definitely NOT a Brit and happy about that. Hope to see you on another thread being so positive!

David Krummenacker? (Hopefully i didn't spell the name wrong)

Old Man 2 Lapper wrote:

Thanks! It makes sense to me. Glad to have people like you on here giving us your perspective. Definitely NOT a Brit and happy about that. Hope to see you on another thread being so positive!

So, not Cram, like I expected. Not an American either, we don't have sayings about which knife to bring to a fight. We say "don't bring a knife to a gunfight."

But doesn't like Britain, which rules out Canadians. Yet uses grammar that resembles British English.

No Irish, Aussie or New Zealander ever broke 1:44. A German like Schumann or a Norse like Rodahl might have polished enough English to write like that. But I'm thinking more likely a Kenyan.

-> don't like Britain

-> write good British English

-> lots of 1:44 possibilities. too many to bother counting. William Tanui?

fake is always a possibility too.

Wohlhuter, Kenah, or Gray. Most likely American.

Old Man 2 Lapper wrote:

A 23 is only one part of being able to run fast in the 800, and it's not really a high bar. If that is your limit then no. I'm sure some of the high mileage guys on here will say otherwise. But as someone who actually ran 1.44 and faster.......you need to bring a bigger knife to the fight.

Sounds like David Mack (1:43.35), but not sure he's bring a knife to a fight - seems a little Small. He'd bring something Biggie to the fight.

JR

who are you?

ovett 142 is what he should have done off 21x and 330, no question. cruz 21.low if he tried, walker 49 flat, but that is with mid distance training, ryun 46 flat on crap track, 800m 142 no more, walker 200m 22 mid. off mid distance training.

if you're not epo dude, then 22 low means 143 to 144, 22 late is 145,

141 means 21x.

140 means 45 flat.

there are almost no exceptions.

altitude born though means 23 flat can be 144.

annoying is the cram 23.0 idea for200m

nonononono.

that's off middle distance training focused of 55second laps.

cram ran the 142 without realizing his basic speed was much better than suspected, blunted with the

longer stuff.

Thank you for all replies, really interesting discussions.

For those wondering I have PBs of 48.6, 1:48, 3:48 making me believe that 800 is the event I am most suited towards rather than 1500. The 200m is from blocks done on one sprint session a week

Slowtwitcher, you are doing pretty well to run 1.48 with a basic speed of 23 for the 200. If you were a 400-800 type I would think you'd be lucky to break 1.52 - like some guys have owned up to here. But if you are more an endurance guy - a true slowtwitcher - or at least an 800-1500 type - then 1.44 would be within the outer realms of possibility. Of course if your endurance was even better than that you'd be a sub-3.30 1500 guy and probably Olympic champ over 5k.

Subway Surfers wrote:

Wohlhuter, Kenah, or Gray. Most likely American.

Gray would never call himself a sub-1:44 guy, he'd call himself sub 1:43, and the only clean one at that, except maybe Solomon.

Bad Wigins wrote:

Subway Surfers wrote:

Wohlhuter, Kenah, or Gray. Most likely American.

Gray would never call himself a sub-1:44 guy, he'd call himself sub 1:43, and the only clean one at that, except maybe Solomon.

Santa Monica, 1980s???

Drew Peacock wrote:

SlowTwitcher wrote:

Given world class aerobic and anaerobic systems is 23.0 sufficient speed to run 1:44

I think times of 48.5 and 23 would be plausible for some of these runners and in line with their 800/1500 times.

Noureddine Morceli 1:44.79, 3:27.37

Silas Kiplagat 1:44.8A, 3:27.64

Noah Ngeny 1:44.49, 3:28.12

Elijah Manangoi 1:44.15, 3:28.80

Maybe these three could run 1:44

Bernard Lagat 1:46, 3:26.34

Hicham El Guerrouj 1:47.18, 3:26

Fermin Cacho 1:45.37, 3:28.95

Some longer specialists, may have been able to run 1:44 and also 23.0:

Daniel Komen 3:29.46

Mo Farah 3:28.81

I think a few would have been close, but perhaps more likely to break 23:

Saïd Aouita 1:43.86, 3:29.46

Asbel Kiprop 1:43.15, 3:26.69

Mehdi Baala 1:43.15, 3:28.98

It is worth nothing, however, the El G closed the 2004 Olympic final in 1:46. This probably shows that someone like him (more on the 3k/5k side of the 1500) takes a bit to get going, given that he typically makes a move from a long way out. This thread has gotten really interesting.

Longer Reps wrote:

PrZ wrote:

Absolutely not. I ran 22 high, 50 low and only 1:56, along with a 4:09 1500. Nowhere close to any other times a 1:44 guy could run, whether speed based or endurance based.

Need more special endurance. Longer reps 600-1k at faster 1500 and 3k pace.

Longer reps at 800 pace, 400/500/600 hitting 52 at 400m

This is bad advice.

Djshdjshshshshs wrote:

It’s not always as clear as X time in the 200 with Y endurance = Z 800m time.

I had long legs and a good engine for middle distance. Way too long stride that I kept trying to shorten. It made for a bad sprinter and also lousy over long distances but did pretty well over 800-1500m.

I certainly never broke 25 from a rolling start and, by extension, wouldn’t have broken 25 FAT but I did run 1:51 and 4:02 for the mile. Endurance dropped off like a cliff after that - I only managed 14:40 for 5000m.

Some people are built for certain events and shorter/longer times don’t necessarily explain it.

200m FAT time isn't the limiting factor for 800m. It's legspeed velocity! People just focus on 200m times because that is a more readily available measure for most.

100m depends too much on the start, acceleration and pickup. These are less of a factor in the 200m, and also it's more feasible to get an estimate of 200m from training as the accuracy of timing isn't such an issue.

23 will only get you 49 at the quarter. The classic early 880 guys who were under 1:45, Peter Snell and Jim Ryan were sub 48 which means their 200s had to have been low 22 s and probably 22 flat.