Dalilah Muhammad believes she could break 2:00 in the 800; ran 12x400 avg. 71 with minute rest

But you would have had to run a 1:45-46 to be equivalent to her running a 2 flat. If you had not "eased off" could you have really run 6-7 seconds faster?

The reason 400 people always make these hypothetical claims is that they don't actually want to run all-out 800s. Why? Because they suck! No 400 runner ever says an 800 is not a million times worse, both physically and mentally. I think a good measure of the true capability of 400 or 400H runners for the 800 is to look at them at the finish line. If at the end of the 400 you have to collapse and act like you've been shot, you probably don't have it mentally for the 800, either for the training or the racing.

It's lame for track athletes to claim they could be as good or better as truly proven runners. Enter the race and do it. Who cares about your workouts? It takes two minutes to prove it. And that workout? There are 1,000 high school boys right now who can do it but only run 2:04. But 2:04 to 1:59 is a metaphorical mile of difference in a race. If Edwin Moses couldn't run a 1:45, why would Mohammed be able to run a 2:00?

Uh, if you are running in the world championships and there is a qualifying time for the world championships, and you have run that qualifying time, then you are "world class" are you not?

At Doha 2:00 got you into the semis and 1:59 got you into the final. In fact, 2:00.8 got you into the final if you came in second in your semi-final section.

https://www.iaaf.org/competitions/iaaf-world-championships/iaaf-world-athletics-championships-doha-2019-6033/results/women/800-metres/semi-final/result

Her 800m PR is 2:14.9 from 2015. Her 400m, 400m hurdles and 200m have improved just slightly since then, certainly not 15 seconds worth in the 800

https://www.iaaf.org/athletes/united-states/dalilah-muhammad-219379

Bib #1 wrote:

Her 800m PR is 2:14.9 from 2015. Her 400m, 400m hurdles and 200m have improved just slightly since then, certainly not 15 seconds worth in the 800

https://www.iaaf.org/athletes/united-states/dalilah-muhammad-219379

Her 600m time is 1:28.85. She ran that in March of 2018, which also was her worst season, where she decided to refocus. She also states on the record here she runs 800s in 2:06. Let me just say if you run 1:28 high in an off season for you during March where you're not firing on cylinders and then start casually run 2:06s in practice...that is the more interesting data point. If she's being accurate about the 2:06, there's no way she couldn't run 2:03 or 2:04. The debate is whether she could break 2 or top out at 2:01-2:02.

VroomVroom wrote:

Five miles? Lol what? What you have is a superior athlete than most any of the women that run the 800m. If she's in shape she would definitely be able to run 2:00. If she specifically trained for it I'd expect her to win.

Most people get into distance because they aren't that athletic. When you have an athletic stud, and world record holder, who then chooses to do distance then it's not even a competition.

that's nonsense, maybe not in HS, but certainly on world class level. Thiam or Bougard are "more athletic" than Muhammad (although maybe not 7 times more) and would not beat her in the 400m or 800m. There is no general quality of "athleticism" that would make a hurdler or heptathlete better than an 800m or 5000m runner if only the former had chosen the middle or long distance event instead.

In fact, women's 400m hurdles is a weak event, probably the weakest of all women's track with hardly any depth; that's why one woman can run two WRs in one season. I don't say this to belittle Muhammad's achievements. But the superior 400m runners usually don't bother with the hurdles and neither do the superior 800m runners. So it is preposterous to claim that Muhammad could (easily) make a WC final in the 800m. There were a bunch of world class 400m hurdlers who ran very strong 800m but they are a distinct minority. So unless she tries we simply don't know if she could run 1:59 or rather 2:05.

She is a phenomenal athlete, so there's a decent chance she could do it. But, she might also dedicate herself to it and run 2:01 ten times. I don't know why she has to throw that out there. I do think it's disrespectful to the 800m runners who have just barely broken it. Maybe this is an old school thought, but why talk about what you could do when just trying it is so easy? You don't even have to enter a race. Do it at practice, film it, then show the world you can.

SlowFatMaster wrote:

Uh, if you are running in the world championships and there is a qualifying time for the world championships, and you have run that qualifying time, then you are "world class" are you not?

At Doha 2:00 got you into the semis and 1:59 got you into the final. In fact, 2:00.8 got you into the final if you came in second in your semi-final section.

https://www.iaaf.org/competitions/iaaf-world-championships/iaaf-world-athletics-championships-doha-2019-6033/results/women/800-metres/semi-final/result

No, I completely disagree that the world champs qualifying standard is world class. World class is typically used to refer to performances that would get you into the final of a major champs year in year out. A top 8 performance if you will. What do you use to distinguish between athletes that qualify and athletes that would make the final? They aren’t both world class.

I’d refer to a female 800m athlete as world class once she runs a 1:57 time. In the final the women all have PBs between 1:55 and 1:58.0

There is not point looking at times run at the championships as indicative of what the athletes could run. Most races are tactical.

I stand by my comments. Having a PB of 1:59.x will not get you very far on the world stage, as Green showed. In a championship the heats will be run in a tactical 1:59/2:00 and you will struggle to get through. All the women have run under 2:00 to get there.

You can’t tell me that last in your heat counts as ‘getting far’

exrunner wrote, in part:

"What would you use to distinguish between athletes that qualify and athletes that would make the final? They aren't both world class."

Yeah, they are. They are competing in the freaking World Championships! We're gonna have to agree to disagree on this.

It hardly matter if we mean 2:00,5 (qualifier) or 1:58 (WC medal) to mean world class. 1:59 is very good and would be very impressive for Muhammad. Far more interesting is that if you scratch Semenya and Niyonsaba there are 20 women within 2 secs of the best mark (Wilson's). The 400m hurdles takes less than half as long but within 2 secs. of Muhammad there are only 8 athletes.

Taking 4 secs range in the 800m there are about 75 runners. So the 800m depth is about 3-9 times that of 400m hurdles. The latter has even less depth than the steeplechase where we have 12 women within 20 sec. of the best mark.

As a track coach in a state in which the 400 hurdles have been run for many decades I always felt that 400 hurdlers were well prepared to run the 800. It's not a surprise to me that she has such endurance. Her event requires it. I would often throw my 400 hurdlers into 800s and have success. The two races are similar in that they require pacing and hard running. Too many believe that the 800 is a distance event. It's not. It's a strength speed one. Many coaches get their 800 runners by moving up 400 meter runners. I have done that for years with great success.

Did anyone see her run in Doha this year? She ran a WR in the hurdles of 52.20, and a 4 x 400 relay split of 49.4. I never broke 50.00 in any 400, either relay or open yet easily ran faster than 2:00 in the 800 during college. I even broke 2:00 once in High School with a best of 52.xx 440 yd. I don't doubt with specific training that she or Sydney McLaughplin could run under 2:00.

Spudland wrote:

Did anyone see her run in Doha this year? She ran a WR in the hurdles of 52.20, and a 4 x 400 relay split of 49.4. I never broke 50.00 in any 400, either relay or open yet easily ran faster than 2:00 in the 800 during college. I even broke 2:00 once in High School with a best of 52.xx 440 yd. I don't doubt with specific training that she or Sydney McLaughplin could run under 2:00.

So Usain Bolt can probably break 1:40 for the 800?

Your calculator is off.

The truth is she need never run a mile at all, unless you want to say, add up her shorter interval work.

Both of our US 400H stars are

I hope she runs the 400 Hurdles in the Olympics and Maybe Worlds in Eugene Oregon in 2001, then from the 2002 season until her career ends focus on the 800 Meaning get an EXCELLENT 800 Coach (J.J. Clarke maybe) and TOTALLY FOCUS on the 800 I say 1:54-1:56 (She WILL run UNDER 1:57 AT WORST)

Most EXCELLENT 400 Runners or 400 Hurdles Runners NEVER make a serious try at the 800, even Jearls Miles Clark ran her first sub 1:58 after age 30.

Once TOP 400 Runners TRAIN FOR the 800 Kratochvilova's seemingly unbeatable record of 1:53.28 gets challenged.

Imagine if YOUNG Athletes like Naser and Sydney McLaughlin made the 800 their main focus when still Young and in their prime?

2:10 first time .

douglas burke wrote:

Imagine if YOUNG Athletes like Naser and Sydney McLaughlin made the 800 their main focus when still Young and in their prime?

400m Hurdles athletes are a borderline case but the general idea that sprinters, even 400m runners would all be world class 800m runners is just silly. It's exactly like the idea that Bolt or WVN would have run 1:39 in the 800m if they only had tried (or focussed on the event).

Unlike the 400m hurdles the 800m is not a niche event and generally not an event with weak depth (right now the women's 800m is somewhat special because Semenya etc. "scared away" quite a few actual or potential 1:56-59 runners and they are doing 1500m instead and thus this event has incredible depth atm).

Almost every teenager/collegian in athletics will run 800m at some stage. While there might be some 100-400m runners who would be very good in the event, it is extremely unlikely that many world class 800m runners are "missed" because they focus instead on sprints or hurdles. For women on the world class level 800m is a much deeper event than 400m flat or hurdles, for men the 800m is also much deeper than the 400m hurdles and for both sexes 800m is among the least predictable with the highest occurence of medal contenders not even making the final in worlds/olympics. Which would be a reason to stick to 400/400H. But it is also a reason that the ones excelling in the 400/H would not be even better 800m runners, because otherwise they could take the risk running (at least occasionally) the event with the higher depth.