Brazier 35mpw myth

[quote]Impala31 wrote:

It's not about the training but about the performances

3:35.8 converts to 45.21.

And he can probably do much better in the 1500 in a real race.

So Bazier is defenitely better at the 1500 than at the 400m

So please guys, stop calling him a 400/800 guy

45.21 puts you 444 all time 3:35.85 puts you 495 all time, and the 400 in my opinion is more competitive than the 1500m.

I'd bet Rudisha could run 3:35.8 but I would not call him an 8/15 guy. The 800 is more similar to the 1500, even most 4/8 types won't be competitive in the 400. Brazier could be called a pure 8 guy though if you want, Brazier is built for the 800 he would need to improve 6 more sec to even think about running the 1500. By the the Iaaf standards though braziers best distance is in the middle of 800 and 400, its the 600m. When he runs 3:30.5 or better I'll call him an 8/1500 guy.

Chet Manly wrote:

A 4x(2x300) at race pace is just 1.5 miles, .

This is exactly why most of these posts about low mileage are ridiculous. That workout clearly isn't 1.5 miles, in reality it's going to be more like 6. Or maybe you don't warm up or warm down (or do any strides or anything before the workout). I guess that's why the workout is so hard.

Warm up would be usually up to a mile jogging plus 20-30 minutes of drills and strides. After the workout, if we were still able to run at all, there could be another mile at 10 min/mile just to flush lactic acid. Overall, less than four miles in total and this would be a fairly typical workout.

paris2024hawk wrote:

This is pure conjecture, but I think most 400/800 runners chose to be mediocre sprinters in college. Its hard to convince a 46 to 47 sec 400m runner to run the 800.

Sprinters have ran 1:47-1:49 with little to no 800 specific training, these are the 400/800 guys.Rudisha was a 400m runner who ran 1:49 on his first try on a dirt track.

I personally view the 800 as a hybrid event sprinters and distance runners can excel at it but they don't train the same way.A 400/800 may not need more than 30mpw for them 50mpw is excessive.

Most of those 46/47 guys would be even more mediocre 800m guys. A few would turn out to be decent 800m guys. And if you are running low 46, you aren't exactly mediocre. You are scoring in pretty much every conference meet and have a great chance of making the championships. Pretty hard sell to go try a new event that you might not be any good at.

Every distance guy goes man if I only had 47s 400m speed. I would be running 1:43/3:29/12:50 and be a super stud. But those 47s guys don't have the genetic ability to develop their aerobic systems to that level normally. I am sure there are a couple of brazier type guys who just never tried but I bet they are pretty rare.

We know Nick Symmonds was a 55-60 mile type of guy and he is clearly slower than DB over 400 (at least 1 sec) and only marginally quicker over 1500 - given Nick ran his PR in Monaco, I'll call them even.

Nick trained more from the endurance side of the 800 - his long run was 10-12 miles and he also doubled a lot. His WU and CD were often 5 miles in total, where as DB may prefer a short 2 mile WU and drills and only a 1 mile CD (3 miles total)

Long Run + 4 miles extra

Doubles + 15 miles (5x3miles)

WU/CD + 6 miles (3 days x 2 miles extra)

TOTAL EXTRAS = 25 miles *estimates only

35 miles a week seems very reasonable to me

The dude split a 45 as a senior in high school. he's the 600m indoor WR holder. His indoor 600 converts to 44 low. Y'all just pressed cause mileage isnt always the answer

Tell that to Emmanuel Korir, a 44/1:42 guy who ran 33:30 for the 10k, that if he stopped lying to himself that he's 400/800 guy he could run a 32 minute 10k.

FutureOldHead wrote:

The dude split a 45 as a senior in high school. he's the 600m indoor WR holder. His indoor 600 converts to 44 low. Y'all just pressed cause mileage isnt always the answer

This. There's more than one type of mid-d runner, people!

Exactly!! My junior year I focused on the 800/400. I ran 20 mpw and ran an open mile in 4:35. my senior year I focused on the 5k for XC and the mile for track. Ran only marginally better times in the mile on 50 mpw but way better 3200 and 5k performances. you can attack training from different perspectives and still end up with the same result

Can anyone explain how it makes logical sense to run 50 mpw to prepare for race that's a 105 seconds on the elite level.Its different if you run the 1500 and the 800. But if you only run the 800 there is no reason to run that much mileage. The 800 is still very aerobic but it is much less aerobic than any other distance event, the training should be very different because the physiological demands of the race are different.

My previous posts may have mentioned people like Brazier, but I did not actually mean to compare myself to an “exceptional 800m runner” like Brazier or Rudisha at all. If I’ve only split 50 in a 400m but have run 1:52/4:13 (flat 200m track) that would suggest, by your examples, that I do not have much of the speed/talent that can just carry over to a decent 800m while being undertrained. Instead I think it shows I have the trained and specialized ability to be an 800m/mile runner. And I am arguing that, for some people, you can achieve that 800/1500 ability (so more in the Symmonds category) with low mileage training.

I wouldn’t replace a 2nd race/post race workout with a 5 mile training run because that race/workout is going to improve fitness a lot more than just a 5 mile run. I can get that steady run type effort in via cross training 2x/week.

paris2024hawk wrote:

Can anyone explain how it makes logical sense to run 50 mpw to prepare for race that's a 105 seconds on the elite level.Its different if you run the 1500 and the 800. But if you only run the 800 there is no reason to run that much mileage. The 800 is still very aerobic but it is much less aerobic than any other distance event, the training should be very different because the physiological demands of the race are different.

exactly. now if youre less speed oriented (your 400 speed is your limiting factor) you can come at the 800 from a highly aerobic perspective which isn't the optimal training but it can still make you a good racer at that distance just because your aerobic abilities offset the need for top end speed. This isnt meaning that aerobic training is the key for everyone, its the opposite. those who don't need high quantity of aerobic training to run fast will always be better because for them top speed is the factor they can continue to develop which is more important over this distance