The myth of 800 meter exceptionalism in training.

I kind of agree with this. However....

a kid could be your 51 / 1:56 guy in high school and still not respond to higher mileage. I actually coached a kid who hit those exact times with me while I was still kind of trying to keep him on a higher mileage protocol and have him be able to step up to the 1600 (for which he ran 4:31).

When he got to college, his coach moved him down to the more specialized 400/800 group and he ended up splitting 47 high on a relay and running 1:50.03 after 2 years with her.

I'm working with another of my former athletes right now and have been trying to get him ready for the higher volumes and race distances of college cross. He was a 400/800 kid for me and during cross struggled with longer tempos and CV workouts. However, with this kid, the increased volume and focus on more threshold efforts is starting to pay dividends after a few months and he is getting MUCH better at that type of work

I think the key for both of these athletes (and perhaps speed type athletes in general) is to build a little more recovery into the training menu. The kid I'm working with now is taking a very easy day or a cross training day or a day off once every 3 days. He doesn't take a day off once every three days, but it's just an easy 4 miler or an easy bike ride and if he's really feeling fried, he'll take a day completely off. He's been able to increase his volume so far from mid 30s doing no quality to 50mpw with 2-3 quality sessions per week. The pace for his threshold work has gone from 6:15-6:20 range to right around 6:00 pace.

Still others might respond fine to a steady increase in mileage, a la Houlihan.

47/1:50 still isn’t very good. 47 wont get you very far in the 400 and 1:50 is what 5k/10k guys run.

A few years of consistent distance training and that guy could be national class at 1500-5000.

Webb ran 47 in high school.

Ryan Hall ran 1:51 in high school. Was NCAA XC and 5k champ and became a pro marathoner.

Turn of the Century wrote:

47/1:50 still isn’t very good. 47 wont get you very far in the 400 and 1:50 is what 5k/10k guys run.

A few years of consistent distance training and that guy could be national class at 1500-5000.

Webb ran 47 in high school.

Ryan Hall ran 1:51 in high school. Was NCAA XC and 5k champ and became a pro marathoner.

And Alan Webb and Ryan Hall were WORLD-CLASS RUNNERS. Most kids running 49 and 1:55 in HS could never achieve anything remotely close to what they did even with perfect training.

This idea that any halfway fast 400/800 kid could be a great distance runner isn’t rooted in reality. Sure, some will definitely respond to higher mileage and will experience more success at longer distances, but many simply don’t have the right mix of talent/genetics for it and are simply just above average (not great, but better than most) at the thing they’re best at. This whole discussion reminds me of when people on the board would claim Jeremy Wariner could set an 800 WR if he only moved up.

You have no idea what is best for any athlete like this because the only thing you know is two PRs.

You don't know about training history, current training, height, weight, VO2, running form, injury training, response to speed training, response to distance training, what climate they run in, if they run CC or not, etc. You don't know nearly enough to decide what is best for someone with these PRs.

You say emphasize distance over speed training. You could be wrong or right with you're assessment. Because you can't do any valid experiments with this, you're essentially guessing on a coin-flip. Your strong opinion is really just you stating your bias out loud.

Has to be one of the dumbest posts I have ever seen on LetsRun. Comparing run of the mill high school guys to two of the best American runners in recent history.

I might legitimately not understand what you're saying, but this seems like an extremely cold take.

Are you saying that if someone runs good 400/800 times, it doesn't mean they're good 4/8 guys and that they need good aerobic development to run their real potential in the 1500+?

If so all I have to say is...it depends. Every runner is different and will respond to different training stimulus - if you could measure the ratio of fast/slow twitch muscle fibers in every runner you'd better be able to predict their potential in each event.

I was the 49/1:55 guy in highschool and wasted 2 years of training by focusing on increasing my mileage from 30-40 in hs to the 50-60 range to focus on the mile. All I got from it was injuries and slower times in every event. It took me awhile to get my times back from training in my sweet spot of 40-50 MPW with more emphasis on 800 pace work.

I agree. Anyone who can run sub 50 in high school off of less than 30mpw should be able to break 3:40 in college off of 80.

kiwis wrote:

I agree. Anyone who can run sub 50 in high school off of less than 30mpw should be able to break 3:40 in college off of 80.

Here come the “Jeremy Warriner should have moved up” posts

Your theory is based on a S. Houlihan podcast?

F.A.T. sub-54 400m athletes are important members of high school T&F teams. When F.A.T. sub-54 400m guys are willing to go out for high school XC, a high school XC coach cannot assume all or even most F.A.T. sub-54 400m high school guys are all future 5000m & 10000m guys.

F.A.T. sub-49 400m athletes are important members of N.C.A.A. D-1 & D-2 T&F teams. When F.A.T. sub-49 400m guys are willing to go out for D-1 or D-2 college XC, a college XC coach cannot assume all or even most F.A.T. sub-49 400m college guys are all future 5000m & 10000m guys.

The sub-54 400m high school guys may need a modified XC training program. The sub-49 400m college guys may need a modified XC training program. Thoroughbreds cannot be treated like Clydesdales.

This. Just meeting the minimum speed requirement to run a certain time doesn't automatically qualify you to run that time. Let's assume most world class 5k/10k guys run 49-51 for the 400. That doesn't mean you can take a 49 high school kid and turn him into a world class 5k runner (yes, even if he's skinny and white!)

Do you ever look at results?

48 second 400m runners are a dime a dozen.

When was the last time a 48 second 400m made an NCAA final in the 400 or 4x400? Quincy Hall won the 2019 400 hurdles in 48.48.

You aren’t making any 400 finals or winning anything outside of the C heat at an invite.

The point is SPEED WINS RACES. Mo Farah has enough speed to win the 1500 in 3:28 but he’s 4x Olympic Champ in 5k/10k.

Being great takes hard training over many years and most people never come anywhere close to realizing their full potential. They think it’s genetics and drugs that separates the best from everyone else. Most coaches are clueless.

How many world class 1500 runners have never broken 1:50? How many NCAA 1500 finalists have never broken 1:50?

TLDR: You have to find the distance where your speed can be competitive and develop your abilities to compete at that level!

the good thing is often times you will get a good idea of their mid distance or distance potential by seeing how they respond to xc training for a few years.

A guy like Brazier may prefer to stick to 800, but his cross results showed his potential in longer events as well. And after his recent 1500, it is more undeniable than ever. What he decides to do with that potential is up to him first and secondly his coaches.

To some extent, I think the original poster is correct. There are a lot of athletes at the high school level who could benefit by moving up in distance. This is not universal though. The athletes that he is talking about don't for a couple of reasons. 1) They are already having some success doing what they are doing. Why make changes at that point? There is a very real chance that it might not work. 2) They don't have grand plans in the sport. The can win most things in their current environment and that is good enough for them. They're comfortable. 3) And this one is the biggest one. Many of athletes, both fast and slow, who could benefit by moving up, don't have the appetite for the work that is required of running the longer distances.

Training properly for sprinting is hard work and also time consuming, but at the high school level there are lots of good and bad sprinters who aren't training properly and really have no desire to. If you want to be a lazy sprinter, you may suck, but you can get by without too much discomfort. And you may not even suck. If you are a lazy distance runner, it still hurts and you and you are going to suck.

So physiologically, I think there are a lot of decent quarter milers who theoretically could be better at longer races. But I don't think that the great result would actually happen as often as you'd expect.

And I didn't mean to ignore the kids who really were built to run shorter distances. Those athletes certainly exist too and even if they committed to doing all the training, would still see better success at the 400m and down than they would from the 800m and up.

^^^ This is all true, but incomplete.

The anaerobic engine is the x-factor in the 800.

Among the strength element and speed element, anaerobic capacity usually seperates the athletes who perform best in the 800 from the others, even among those who appear to have superior 400 speed or better 1500 strength or sometimes even both.

To boot, it's really hard to train the anaerobic system without hindering aerobic strength

(Those valuable mytochondria get wasted!)

You wrote a lot of words to say everyone should run more miles, which isn’t true.

Why is it, then, that doing the same mileage and training as my teammates resulted in my beating them in the 800m but getting waxed by then at 5000m?

anyone who would take my 16:50 5k on 70mpw over my 50 400m is an idiot

Agree strongly with that the capacity for speed serves as the fundamental limiting factor in 800m performance. Disagree that significant mileage and long distance- slanted training are required to develop 800m potential.

I am not going to say Wariner should have moved up. He now owns and manages a jimmy johns. He also is a member of the american flag football league. Again I'm not going to say Wariner should have moved up.