Can most people run a sub 60 400?

JFBB wrote:

A friend of mine that is not a runner asked if any trained man can run a sub 4 mile pace for a lap. At first I thought this was way too fast for everyone to do it, but then I thought it might be possible for the average person to pull it off. Obviously an obese guy cannot run a 59 second 400, but assuming that they lost enough weight, could most young men run that time? Assuming they train properly?

There has to be a point where talent plays a factor but at what point?

And yes, I know that we've had similar threads for longer distances (sub 5 mile, 16 minute 5K, etc), but I can't find much discussion about <a href="

https://mouseclicker.net">auto

clicker</a> train-ability for sprints.

I do flat or hill sprints occasionally, some shuttle runs occasionally. 6' tall, 210 lbs. no idea bodyfat but 34" waist pants. After reading a mile training thread here i tried the 10x400 with 1 minute rest. Got thru 7 reps at about 88 and died. Have never tested myself in a 400 because I know how painful it will be.

Anonanonanon69420 wrote:

I just started up track this year, and we did 10x400 repeats today. I hit around an average of 78, but I'm not physically disabled, lol. I'm 5'11/160 and my mile PR is 6:32. I don't imagine many people can run sub-60, and I feel like it's a really hard thing to do.

Training like that, it'll take you near forever to TT sub-60 400m. I had a college T&F F.A.T. 46.xx 400m teammate. I doubt he could do 10 x 400m with one minute recovery faster than averaging 69 seconds. Ten x 400m workout does not correlate strongly with 400m performance. Build up to doing: 12 x 110m with 90 seconds walking or standing recovery, averaging sub-16. You will break 60 seconds, 400m. No rolling starts.

This thread has got me really intrigued. To the point where I went to the track a few days ago to see what happened. I am 42, a little overweight and have been casually running for just over a year with a weekly mileage of around 30-35.
so here’s what happened:

4 lap warm up, @8:30 mile

4x400 with full 8 minute recoveries

lap 1= 76

lap 2= 74

lap 3= 78

lap 4= 75

so not dazzling times but seeing as I’ve done no speed work at all and I’m relatively new to running I will take it. Plenty of room for improvement.

can anyone point me in the direction of some solid training programs I could adopt for the next few months to see what happens? I’d personally be very happy with anything close to 60. I’m sure technique alone could save a few seconds surely?

You don’t have to get overly complicated with 400m training, the workout you did is a good tempo workout, and then you’ll want to do the shorter stuff like 150m and 200m repeats with moderate rest, and occasionally stuff like 300m repeats with full recovery. Also hill reps of 50-200m at nearly 100% effort with full recovery are a great stimulus too. If you’re coming form a distance background, a 3-5 mile shakeout run with a few strides won’t hurt on your recovery/lift days.

Id highly recommend getting into the weight room too. Deadlifts in the 5-6 reps per set range, leg press, squats, lunges, all in the 8-12 reps per set range. I also like to train arms and upper body with higher 12-16 rep type stuff to build lactate/fatigue tolerance. Things like curls, rows, running arm motion with dumbbells and bench press will all help to iron out your form and help you hold it while fatigued.

Thanks for the reply, okay so yes I have read similar things to what you have suggested but my main element of confusion or lack of understanding is the volume at each session. Are we saying run 3-4 times each week including a shakeout run? So when we say 300 repeats with full rest for example, we are literally saying:

warmup

300/rest x 4

cool down

nothing else on that day? coming from a distance perspective it seems alien. Don’t get me wrong, I’ve completed 2 sessions on the track now and I was smashed after each!

The good news is that I am in the gym doing various full body workouts. I’ve heard that the clean is a good one which I haven’t gotten round to doing yet, lunges, squats, leg press, machine curl etc. then some upper body and core.

maybe:

monday 300’s w full recovery

tuesday gym full body

Wednesday 100’s or hill sprints

thurs gym full body

fri shakeout run for an hour and gym

sat/sun 400’s

haha, I know this is an old post but I just couldn't resist!!

I believe I cracked 60 seconds in the 400 for the first time in the 9th grade.

By the 11th grade I was running 54 second 400m times, 2:04 800m times, 4:42 1600m time, 10:29 3200m time. I was a distance runner. My best 5k xc race was 17:05 that year.

In the 12th grade my best 5k XC time was 16:28 but missed out of Track and Field.

It was normal for guys on my HS Distance team to run under 60 seconds for a 400m. There were a number kids we competed against (distance runners) that clocked 400m times faster than I did at races. At my old school a current runner ran his personal best 800m at 1:56, yet he has yet to run under 15:30 for a 5k xc race.

I find it odd that someone would run in the 15:30s but be unable to crack 60s for a 400m!!

You bumped a 2 year old thread just to humble brag your 54?

Yes, most people can run sub 60sec 400m, if by 'most' you mean 0.02%

Most people in western countries couldn't run a 60sec 250m.

Yes most can break 60 just like Ritz or Mike Smith can coach most healthy males to sub 13 5000. You guys are just hobby joggers if you can't do either.

Easily. I know a 17:5x runner who couldn't break 60 and a 15:5x runner who hasn't broken 60 (but he had run multiple 27s in practice and a 2:00 800, so he could).

However, everyone else with moderate talent (2:10 / 4:50 / 10:20) has.

cant be that hard I'm a 16 year old basketball player no running history really ran 68

yeah we gotta stop the cap 60 is way too quick. Remember a few years ago when they had the Kipchoge pace treadmill at the Boston marathon expo? virtually everyone flew right off the back of the belt. Some lasted longer than others the longest i recall was a guy who was in good shape who stayed on for around a minute. and that's at around 66 second pace so i'm saying probably no chance an untrained guy comes out and pops a 60

I run 17 5k, low 36 10k and a 70 second 400m would be a big challenge.

My XC team had a hard 400 (probably a hair faster than 800) at the end of a relatively easy workout (16x400 from tempo to 10k + the 400). Our slowest twitch person in our top 7 ran 62.

I don't think so. My 3200 PR in high school was 9:48, and I don't think I ever ran sub-65 in the 400. Some peoples' legs just don't move that fast...

Let'srun sample bias errors.

A lot of you sprint first 440 yards, XC races sub-62.5.

Either 8 1/2 or 9 1/2 years ago, I was standing at 800m mark, New Mexico high school state XC championship, net up hill. A bunch of guys split 1st 800m in (2:10.xx to 2:20.xx). Some of you don't like to sprint train. Just say that.

Seriously sub 70 is hard for you? The average player on my high school soccer team ran a 56. And average at 5:30 for the mile and 12:00 for the 2 miles. Obviously some coming in sub 5 mile and we had a sub 10 2 mile in there but every average person can train for sub 60. Training is the key. Sub 60 is not hard. It is 4-15 100s. Its a hard run but no sprint whatsoever. Get to top speed quick then slow into a pace

I knew a kid like you.. ran a 10:15 2 miles during soccer fitness week with ease. Legit the slowest player on the field. I think yall just dont have muscle. Maybe stop training for 3200 and youd be able to do 400 under 60

Well than, you are far better at shorter distances for sure.