Mr. Renato Canova: Could You Please Answer a Question About Effective Ways to Improve the Lactate Threshold?

From the Coe book Better Running for Distance Runners, Page 376 it says for Mon 23 Jul 1984 - just before Olympic Gold

Start of hard easy sessions, 6x800m hard @2:00 pace with 2 min recovery.

I have heard from others that Seb once ran 6x800 on the road off 3 minutes all under 1:50. Perhaps we should ask him or his father!![/quote]

1:48's were in an 80's Running Times or Runners Worlds

article under greatest workouts.[

Racer 1 said on page 45: "Marius Bakken reported that Kennedy had 52 second speed at his very fastest. Using Frank Horwill's rule for endurance in longer distance events (though these standards can be tightened for elite runners that are stronger), Kennedy would normally have the following longer distance abilities:

400- 52

800- 1:52 (52+ 4 secs/lap)

1500- 3:45 (56+ 4 secs/lap)

3000- 8:00 (60+ 4 secs/lap)

5000- 14:10 (64+ 4 secs/lap)

10,000- 30:00 (68+ 4 secs/lap)"

My apologies for responding to something so far back, but I'm gradually going through this magnificent thread. (PLEASE DON"T EVER DELETE IT!!!)

Racer1, that 4-sec Horwill rule is only a very general rule. And, some argue it's only for 800m and up. For some runners, 3sec may be appropriate, or 5sec, or 3.75sec etc etc. It's only a rough guide, but I'm afraid that you have used it in "very exactly" in order to support some mathmatically inclined discussions.

Generally, 3k to 5k is less than 4sec per lap!!!

Cheers

GILT

Gilt:

If you average out all performances of runners poorly aerobically and those well trained aerobically, the rule fits well.

Many, many high schoolers without a good aerobic base can perhaps run 55 seconds for 400 and yet cannot break 5:00 for the mile. There are people I have seen in high school running 51-53 seconds for 400 who have never broken 2:00.

Kennedy, on the other hand, is exceptionally trained aerobically, even more so than both Kenenisa Bekele and Haile Gebrselassie in a purely mathematical sense.

Horwill gave his example as relating to the 400m and the 800m with the best men and women.

Alberto Juantorena:

400- 44.26

800- 1:43.44

He slows (44.26 * 2 + 15 seconds) about 7.5 per 400.

Sebastian Coe:

400- 46.82

800- 1:41.73

He slows (46.82 * 2 + 8 seconds) about 4 seconds per lap.

Juantorena with Coe's endurance runs 1:36, and Coe with Juantorena's speed runs 1:36.

For this reason I can see Renato's description of the 800m WR as "soft."

The women are even worse. Kratochvilova, though probably not a good example because of her chemically enhanced performances, has 47-point and 1:53.28 (56-point) or a 9 second slowdown.

The rule applies for elite runners as well.

Juantorena focused on the 400m, Coe did not (certainly not to the level that Juantorena did).

A good 800m runner, can run several hard races a year(compared to say a 5k runner).

The 800m is m often a highly contested event.

people can throw out ARBITRARY, numbers out all day long.

But, the fact is that 800m is goddamn hard race to run.

AND, the three BEST 800m runners ever are the only human beings, to go sub1:42. AND, only one of them ever came very close to breaking sub1:41.

soft my ass.

I agree the 4sec rule fits well in many cases, but I don't believe it can be used in exacting arguments about what so-and-so should run for a certain distance, only as a rough guide.

3k WR = 58.7 laps, 60.6 laps = 2.9sec.

5k WR = 60.6 laps, 10k WR = 63.2 laps = 2.6sec.

I enjoy your posts.

Cheers

GILT

Madein_82 wrote:

Juantorena focused on the 400m, Coe did not (certainly not to the level that Juantorena did).

A good 800m runner, can run several hard races a year(compared to say a 5k runner).

The 800m is m often a highly contested event.

people can throw out ARBITRARY, numbers out all day long.

But, the fact is that 800m is goddamn hard race to run.

AND, the three BEST 800m runners ever are the only human beings, to go sub1:42. AND, only one of them ever came very close to breaking sub1:41.

soft my ass.

Coe was reportedly able to run 47-48 all year. He may not have raced the 400 often, but he surely focused on it extensively.

OF course the 800 is hard. But for someone with 44 second 400 speed, 2 50.5's should not be unduly difficult with good training.

But I suppose we best regard your opinion higher than that of a coach who trains Wilfred Bungei and Joseph Mutua (note the ill-concealed sarcasm).

Just cause someone is a good coach DOESNT make them irrefutable.

if you hadn't noticed many good coaches disagree on a great number of things.

maybe im just naive.

i really dont care, but i dont buy the argument that Coe and Kipketer ARE NOT the two BEST 800m runners.

OR, that they didnt run damn near there potential in the 800m.

Madein_82 wrote:

Just cause someone is a good coach DOESNT make them irrefutable.

if you hadn't noticed many good coaches disagree on a great number of things.

maybe im just naive.

i really dont care, but i dont buy the argument that Coe and Kipketer ARE NOT the two BEST 800m runners.

OR, that they didnt run damn near there potential in the 800m.

That's not what he said. He said if Coe had Juantorena's speed, or if Juantorena had Coe's endurance, the 800 m record would be significantly lower.

Yeah, wow.

So you telling me that IF i take an Olympic 400m gold medalist's speed.

And, combine THAT, with an endurance of an Olympic 1500m gold medalist's endurance.

That i will have a world record holder at 800m!?!?!?!?!?!(note the ill-concealed sarcasm).

LOL.

yeah so tell me again, how this makes the 800m soft?

I didn't say I agreed with his conclusion. You made a good point in noting how tough it was simply to get close to 1:41. It appears virtually impossible to possess the right combination of speed and endurance to run that fast.

I do think that the 800 record is a little soft simply because of how old it is.

"He said if Coe had Juantorena's speed, or if Juantorena had Coe's endurance, the 800 m record would be significantly lower."

I also disagree with this notion. Coe and Juan had their unique strengths, and they worked on these. Coe did his endurance work, Juan did his speed based stuff, to put it very simply, in order to get the most out of themselves. Coe had no hope in hell of running with Juan for 400m, and vice versa, Juan had no hope in hell running with Coe for 1500m.

They were 2 WR 800m guys with different strengths. We cannot infer that the 800m WR is soft because of these two seperate entities, and the somewhat arbitrary Horwill formula.

Cheers

GILT

OR MAYBE, it is old .....because it is not very soft.

a record is soft when someone breaks it.

Madein_82 wrote:

So you telling me that IF i take an Olympic 400m gold medalist's speed.

And, combine THAT, with an endurance of an Olympic 1500m gold medalist's endurance.

That i will have a world record holder at 800m!?!?!?!?!?!(note the ill-concealed sarcasm).

Humorously, you are unintentionally correct. Your sarcastic alter ego has disproved your attempted serious argument.

The great 800m runners do not get by on strength or speed alone. Borzakovsky has run 44-high for 400. That is the speed of a 400m medalist (though he's never done the event in an Olympic or World Championship). Ovett, 1980 800m gold medalist, was a WR holder at 1500m. Coe, too, ran 3:29.77.

You have shot yourself in the foot with that argument.

And Horwill's numbers are no more arbitrary than are the performances of decades of runners. Horwill crunches the numbers, as anyone can, and comes up with the number. There are people who exceed the ratio and people who go inside it, but as a general rule, it seems to fit well.

You also misunderstand the term "soft."

Obviously, speaking in absolute terms, running 2 50.5 second 400's is by no standard "easy." It is a phenomenal record.

But using the various race calculators, and looking at the new level of speed that middle distance runners bring to their event, 1:41.11 seems better suited to fall than 7:20.67, or 3:26.00, or 26:20.31.

There are many people who are fast enough (anyone with 47 speed for 400 or better, about) and many people strong enough to hold a high percentage of 400 speed for 2 laps (El Guerrouj, Gebrselassie, Kipchoge, Bekele), but until the right mix comes, we won't see a new WR.

Racer1 wrote:

You also misunderstand the term "soft."

Obviously, speaking in absolute terms, running 2 50.5 second 400's is by no standard "easy." It is a phenomenal record.

But using the various race calculators, and looking at the new level of speed that middle distance runners bring to their event, 1:41.11 seems better suited to fall than 7:20.67, or 3:26.00, or 26:20.31.

There are many people who are fast enough (anyone with 47 speed for 400 or better, about) and many people strong enough to hold a high percentage of 400 speed for 2 laps (El Guerrouj, Gebrselassie, Kipchoge, Bekele), but until the right mix comes, we won't see a new WR.

I dont know what the hell you think soft means, and i REALLY dont care, but i do know this.

more people have come close to 3:26, and 26:20.

than have come close to 1:41.11.

and my guess is the same person that ran 26:20, AND IS ONLY 22 YEARS OLD!!!, will probably break that record before any of the others you mentioned get broken.

also i wouldnt count EL G out for the 3,000m(hell even anyone can do it why not him).

anyway, NONE OF THOSE WORLD RECORDS ARE SOFT!!

"And Horwill's numbers are no more arbitrary than are the performances of decades of runners."

WHAT THE HELL?

horwills numbers are a MODEL they arent the only one, god only knows if it is even the best model.

but the point is it is a calculation MEANT TO reperesent reality.IT IS NOT REALITY

IT IS AN ARBITRARY CALCULATION!!!!

the performances , guess what THEY ARE REAL??

real people ran them, with real timers ,on real tracks.

Dammit, isn't the 800m TOPS??? :)

Persoanally, I think MJ 19.32 is the toughest record in running, followed by Kipketer's 1:41.11, followed by Komen's 7:20.

Coe was special, and it took a very special guy 16 years later to finally nail that record. Now we are 8 years later still....

That MJ run was Beamonesque. I might never live to see it broken.

7:20 has been attacked by the greats, and still it stands proudly head and shoulders above the rest of the 3000m times. 9 years now?

Cheers

Skuj

OK, lets get some perspective here. Have you seen the splits for Kipketer's record run? I can't remember them off the top of my head, but to say the rabbit was over enthused would not be too far off the mark. Maybe 0.5 seconds too fast at the 200m & closer to a second too quick at the 400m. That took something out of him that he paid for at the end.

Kipketer, in perfect condition (as he was), beautifully rabbited (now that's an expression!), would have done about 1.40 flat by my reckoning.

Kipketer has been one of the all time greats. No Olympic gold, but don't mark him down because of that. The only runner ever capable of a 1.40? Almost certainly.

Yasou,

AJ

Did my best to get Kipketer's WR splits from the video:

23.7 at 200m

49.00 at 400m (rabbit time -- Kipketer was a split second behind)

1:14.4 at 600m.

we all know the finish

yeah that does seem like odd splits.

But if i remmber right, didnt Coe go through the first 400m fast also.

I really dont know, but it seems that it might be pretty damn hard to get much of a finishing kick at that pace.

SO, maybe going out a little hard makes sence, in that you are still in the anaerobic stage, and haven't started to tie up yet?