That was not me. metric miler that video is so weak though. If you ever saw a guy like Mo Farah train in person you'd realize it and understand the speed and mechanics. Salazar went to sprint coaches to help with Mo's kick.
That was not me. metric miler that video is so weak though. If you ever saw a guy like Mo Farah train in person you'd realize it and understand the speed and mechanics. Salazar went to sprint coaches to help with Mo's kick.
Y Kawauchi wrote:
That was not me. metric miler that video is so weak though. If you ever saw a guy like Mo Farah train in person you'd realize it and understand the speed and mechanics. Salazar went to sprint coaches to help with Mo's kick.
The video isn't "weak," it's reality. You just can't accept it.
I have seen Mo train in person. He does not have the acceleration power to run a fast 100 from blocks, just accept it.
Speaker of Hard Truths wrote:
Y Kawauchi wrote:That was not me. metric miler that video is so weak though. If you ever saw a guy like Mo Farah train in person you'd realize it and understand the speed and mechanics. Salazar went to sprint coaches to help with Mo's kick.
The video isn't "weak," it's reality. You just can't accept it.
I have seen Mo train in person. He does not have the acceleration power to run a fast 100 from blocks, just accept it.
How is Mo Farah relevant to this discussion? What's next? A video of Wilson Kipsang trying to sprint? "As you can clearly see, this video of Wilson Kipsang running a 13 second 100 proves that 800m runners are slow".
bigtool05 wrote:
Speaker of Hard Truths wrote:The video isn't "weak," it's reality. You just can't accept it.
I have seen Mo train in person. He does not have the acceleration power to run a fast 100 from blocks, just accept it.
How is Mo Farah relevant to this discussion? What's next? A video of Wilson Kipsang trying to sprint? "As you can clearly see, this video of Wilson Kipsang running a 13 second 100 proves that 800m runners are slow".
Y Kawauchi brought him up as an example of a sub 3:30 guy that could apparently run 10.9 lol.
Miller, he actually said he would "destroy" an 10.9 guy. Lmao.
Ooops, it was "crush". Suuuure. Maybe with a sledge hammer but I doubt he can pick one up.
old fat guy wrote:
currently in HS according to Milesplit:
#225 is 10.99 so is 1:57.02.
If sub 11 is REALLY fast then so is 1:57.02.
SOOOOOO my new claim: No elite 100 runner could come close to breaking 1:57 in the 800.
This is a good analogy highlighting how relatively slow a 10.99 is.
But as another poster has said, people have different strengths.
I've known plenty of guys who could run sub 11 that ran the 800 in 1:45/1:46. I was considered slow and ran 11.0x with a 3 step run up as part of workout and that wasn't at the fastest point in my career.
In college, I was FASTER than all of the 1500m guys and SLOWER than all of the 800m guys in a 200/400m.
So when he says "Mid D"...I'm thinking 800.
In that case, half of 800 runners are sprinters moving up and the other half are distance runners dropping down. So, on the elite level, I'd actually argue half of all 1:42-1:46 guys could break 11 from blocks. Just my personal experience.
Now, I've been around a lot of elite runners. I've also known a 28:3x guy who had a 400m PR of 58.x. Now, I think he could have bested that easily, but even if he ran 55/56..he was still would have been on the slow end of even the 5k/10k guys.
According to the iaaf scoring table a 10.9x is equivalent to an 1.53.mid-1.54.low
More on speed wrote:
old fat guy wrote:currently in HS according to Milesplit:
#225 is 10.99 so is 1:57.02.
If sub 11 is REALLY fast then so is 1:57.02.
SOOOOOO my new claim: No elite 100 runner could come close to breaking 1:57 in the 800.
This is a good analogy highlighting how relatively slow a 10.99 is.
But as another poster has said, people have different strengths.
I've known plenty of guys who could run sub 11 that ran the 800 in 1:45/1:46. I was considered slow and ran 11.0x with a 3 step run up as part of workout and that wasn't at the fastest point in my career.
In college, I was FASTER than all of the 1500m guys and SLOWER than all of the 800m guys in a 200/400m.
So when he says "Mid D"...I'm thinking 800.
In that case, half of 800 runners are sprinters moving up and the other half are distance runners dropping down. So, on the elite level, I'd actually argue half of all 1:42-1:46 guys could break 11 from blocks. Just my personal experience.
Now, I've been around a lot of elite runners. I've also known a 28:3x guy who had a 400m PR of 58.x. Now, I think he could have bested that easily, but even if he ran 55/56..he was still would have been on the slow end of even the 5k/10k guys.
I don't think it's a great analogy considering sprints are more popular than middle distance, well at least they are where I come from.
bigtool05 wrote:
Speaker of Hard Truths wrote:The video isn't "weak," it's reality. You just can't accept it.
I have seen Mo train in person. He does not have the acceleration power to run a fast 100 from blocks, just accept it.
How is Mo Farah relevant to this discussion? What's next? A video of Wilson Kipsang trying to sprint? "As you can clearly see, this video of Wilson Kipsang running a 13 second 100 proves that 800m runners are slow".
Mo Farah is relevant because, even though he is primarily known for the longer distances, his absolute best PR is in the 1500 (mid-D), and he is a guy known for having "blazing speed". He runs the last 200m of distance races in a blazing 25 seconds, give or take. He even LOOKS really fast at the end of races. But I think the video of him against other Olympic athletes in the 100m illustrates the original point perfectly: he looks silly trying to run 100m in a FAT situation, getting absolutely creamed by a couple of guys who would never cut it as elite sprinters.
Say what you will about Farah not being in peak condition - watching that video shows that there is no way that guy is ever going to run a sub-11 100m FAT.
Yeah all comparing your 800m to 100m ranking does is shows how deep your country is in each event. In the UK it is different.
The IAAF tables tell a better story.
Just checked, last year in the UK 10.99 ranked you 219th and the same ranking in the 800m ran 1:54.20 so yeah, meaningless data. 10.99 does not equal 1:57 or 1.54 based on those analyses.
Here you go again posting back to back under two different aliases. Funny that you bring up 219 people breaking 11 in the UK and you don't think a guy like Farah or Kiprop can go under 11? You are out of your mind or just plain stupid. Your video is of a ridiculous rainy November bbc superstars event from what 4 years ago where the timing was not legit. That was before he ran 3:28. Kiprop too, what about him? I don't know any sprinters that can run 46 that can't break 11.
Your trolling is tiring.
I'll bite, I personally know a sprinter with 10.55/21.05 pbs that moved to the 400m. After specializing for the 400m for a couple of years and running his record, 46.66 he topped at 10.90 on that same year, running several times over 11. A sprinter, training for sprints.
It was 10.96, just re-checked.
My point is, a very fast Mid-D runner is not running sub-11 from Blocks FAT while training to be an mid-d type, maybe Rudisha but I still think he would lack the power for the first half to be at the proper pace fast enough to be at sub-11 by the end of the 100m (obviously he has max.Velocity requirements to do it, but not the training).
That Guy 1.0 wrote:
Where is Ventolin when you need him?
no easy answer
IMO, a general scheme for a "pure" 800 guy who never ran 100/200/400 or even in moving to 800, for their current under-distances, a working list woud be :
1'44.00 ->
~ 46 - flat / low
~ 21- low / mid
~ 11- flat
i woudn't take this to the bank, but a "pure" 1'44-flat guy who never ran under-distance, but ran enough 100s in his peak-800 shape woud maybe expect to asymptote to
~ 11-flat
Ventolin, I don't particularly care whether your argument is supporting or refuting mine, but would you mind using actual sourced data in future? Most people in this thread have been discussing real PBs by real athletes and trying to draw conclusions based on their experiences and observations, such as from the video of Farah. Just posting some numbers with no justification at all is tiresome and anyone can do it.
1'44.00 ->
~ 48- flat / low
~ 22- flat / low
~ 11- mid
See?
Your trolling has gotten to the point of stupidity.
Y Kawauchi wrote:
Here you go again posting back to back under two different aliases. Funny that you bring up 219 people breaking 11 in the UK and you don't think a guy like Farah or Kiprop can go under 11? You are out of your mind or just plain stupid. Your video is of a ridiculous rainy November bbc superstars event from what 4 years ago where the timing was not legit. That was before he ran 3:28. Kiprop too, what about him? I don't know any sprinters that can run 46 that can't break 11.
Timing was legit it went up on Po10.
Why are you mentioning a 46 second 400m? To my knowledge neither Farah or Kiprop have ever run that time in a 400m.
Stop arguing that Farah can run sub 11, there is no evidence to support it. Just stop.