Donovan Brazier fastest 4x4 split

600yd/600m man wrote:

he could do it wrote:

Actually not as tough as you think. Top 6 at nationals. Also, having the mixed 4 x 400m might open it up more.

45 low or even mid will get you too 6 at USAs if you can make it through the rounds.

What are you typing?

You are taking D. Brazier's ability to run 45.xx 400m on a relay leg and you are attempting to state Brazier has the skills to race top six, U.S.A. T&F 400m. You do know poster, D. Brazier has never broken 47 seconds, F.A.T. 400m outdoors. Brazier does not have it in him to make it to U.S.A.'s 400m final.

D. Brazier cannot run mid-45 400m, F.A.T. No one gets a rolling start to make 4 x 400m relay.

This. He ran a 47.02, F.A.T. at 18 years old. I mean that's decent, but the best 18-year-olds are running almost a second faster. Plenty of 47 flat guys can run 45 mid relay splits in the right conditions, so I trust this FAT time is a good all-out effort in decent conditions. When he ran this 400m time, his 800 PB was already 1:43.55. So he has only improved 1.21 seconds over 800m since then. While it's pretty obvious Donavan would at least be able to consistently run 46.40 F.A.T. right now, with no 400m specific training, that's still not enough to make the relay. Even if we assume that all of that 1.21-second improvement over 800m would manifest itself over 400 [rather than just half of it], he's at best in 45.81 F.A.T. shape.

Remember folks, in order to run at the trials in the 400m, he needs a 45.20 F.A.T. mark just to qualify!

Now of course he could start training for the 400m, and I think if he put a years worth of training into it, he would indeed make the relay, but why would he do that? He wants to win the 800m, so he'll be doing 800m training. Unless he can make the relay on mostly 800m training there is no way he gets to the 45 low FAT mark he needs to make the men's 4x400 team. Now, perhaps he would be able to make one of the relay squads if they take 8 or more guys due to the new mixed 4x400m event and they run him in the heats, but it is still a stretch. Would they take him without running at the trials? I think not. So he really needs a 45.20 to make the team.

dr mitohormesis wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

No way. In FAT terms the difference would be nearly 2 seconds - huge over that distance. He would be lucky to run sub-46 FAT. You don't seem to get that the 400 is a sprint, whereas the 800 requires significant aerobic capacity. If that were not so the best 400 guys would be running 800's - and winning. They aren't. (And don't talk about Juantorena, the exception who proves the rule. He was a 20.7 runner over 200. Brazier would be nowhere near that.)

Running for 44+ seconds requires a ton of aerobic capacity nimrod. There is a reason pure 60-100m guys used to running for 6-10s dread and are not world class at the 400.

Running for 100 seconds is a lot more energeticly similar to runninh for 44s than running for 10s is.

I suggest the 400 is more like a 100 than an 800. The one lap race is largely anaerobic whereas there is a substantial aerobic component to the 800. That is why very few sprinters, including one lap specialists, run the longer event. I would say there are more 1500 runners who can compete over two laps than 400 runners who can move up. Juantorena stands out as a remarkable exception. Runners like Snell and Cram and even Aouita (doper though) show that middle distance chops typically beats pure speedsters over two laps.

And why isn't he running 400 on a regular basis in competition? The obvious answer is that he isn't fast enough to be as successful over that distance as he is over 800. I would say he could go sub-22 over 200 but be nowhere near 21-flat or below, which is what he would need to succeed over the 400.

Bump. Best post yet.

Armstronglivs wrote:

Les wrote:

Brazier with his 47.02 400 PR, does not possess "world class 400 speed." It's doubtful he could even make the final at nationals in the event. Very few 800 guys in history could also be competitive at 400. Alberto Juantorena, more than 40 years ago, was the last one. They are very different events. Being good at one does not automatically make you good at the other. It works the other way as well. People on here were salivating at what Jeremy Wariner (43.45 PR) could do over 800 meters until he struggled to beat low-level collegians in a 1:53 race. After that, no one talked up Wariner's 800 potential.

This. Brazier may be capable of 46 but that won't make him a top national 400 runner. The 1500 is his alternative.

+1

While Brazier probably has enough 400 speed (45 low relay/46.0 open) to run for the GB national team, it isn't good enough to run for the USA! lol

He appears to have much more potential over 1500m, especially if he can maintain that c. 46 secs 400 speed while ading extra mileage.

Brazier does not have good 400m speed. 45.5 relay split isn't good, there are D3 guys who can do that.

People think he must have sprint speed because he's black (or because he himself thinks so), yet there's no data to support it. All data points to him being better at 1500.

If Brazier were a white guy with the exact same PRs everybody would laugh at the idea he was a 4x4 threat and assume he was a 1500 guy.

Firstly, being 6' 2 is more advantageous over 200m and 400m than being 5' 9. Without a shadow of a doubt. And Donovan is explosive - he ran an FAT 47 second 400m dash as a high schooler. It's unreasonable to say that someone putting together two sub-24 second 200s before or at the age of 18 isn't explosive. Also, I didn't compare Brazier to Norman in terms of their build or ability. I said both have competed in longer events and demonstrated their ability to perform at a high level under-distance. Also, Norman has the fastest 100m PR of any world-class 400 meter runner in history, so to characterize him as a long sprinter is unfair to his remarkable speed. He is in a class of his own, and 9.86 is absolutely not his 100m floor.

Yes, Brazier couldn't even qualify for the trials. His 400PR is almost two seconds short of the 45.20 standard. To put things in perspective, Brazier's 47.02PR wouldn't win some high school state meets. If people want to talk about an elite 800 runner who possesses world class 400 speed try this: 44.99. That's Nijel Amos's 400PR.

Les wrote:

Yes, Brazier couldn't even qualify for the trials. His 400PR is almost two seconds short of the 45.20 standard. To put things in perspective, Brazier's 47.02PR wouldn't win some high school state meets. If people want to talk about an elite 800 runner who possesses world class 400 speed try this: 44.99. That's Nijel Amos's 400PR.

Yeah or Emmanuel Korir who made a world final.

Although to clarify further I do not think Brazier is as good in the 400 as Norman is in the 100. Just that Brazier is an excellent 400 runner

Norman has nothing to do with this topic. Stop talking about Norman.

The answer to the question posed on this thread is so obvious it is boggling. If Brazier had never run the 800 but was a 23-year old whose best 400 was 46.9 the thread wouldn't exist. No one would have heard of him. The suggestion that this runner would be capable of making the national relay team would be laughed out of court.

The mistake made here is to assume that if you are fast over 800 you will be fast over 400. You mean, like Cram was? (He was also a 1.42x man.)

well my dudes, I just watched the USAs final where Fred K and Michael Norman blasted incredible sub 44 performances each. When you see them cross the 200m split sub 21 seconds from blocks you no this aint no messing around. I love Brazier and for his sake since he has stated that he wants to run the 4X4 i hope him well and that he convinces his coach to focus on events that interest him. But to say whether or not it is a given that he will have any success seems, to me now, to be silly since the US field is more stacked than I first considered!!

stop that already wrote:

Norman has nothing to do with this topic. Stop talking about Norman.

I was making the point that sometimes it is reasonable to make inferences. Making predictions is one of the most fundamental aspects of human cognition, and our greatest evolutionary tool. Norman is an example of how it might be appropriate to infer an athlete's ability underdistance. Watching Brazier run longer events like the 600 and 800 tells you that he has improved his speed and his endurance since he left college. This thread was about what his fastest 4x4 relay split is and given the improvements he's made to his running, it seems like that he could run faster than his 45.5 now.

JumpsDoctor wrote:

stop that already wrote:

Norman has nothing to do with this topic. Stop talking about Norman.

I was making the point that sometimes it is reasonable to make inferences. Making predictions is one of the most fundamental aspects of human cognition, and our greatest evolutionary tool. Norman is an example of how it might be appropriate to infer an athlete's ability underdistance. Watching Brazier run longer events like the 600 and 800 tells you that he has improved his speed and his endurance since he left college. This thread was about what his fastest 4x4 relay split is and given the improvements he's made to his running, it seems like that he could run faster than his 45.5 now.

Lydiard took the view that "basic speed", as he described it, is pretty much set in a runner. What he said they could improve upon is endurance. His measure of the basic speed of an athlete is what they could run over 220y (or now 200m). (The improvements that sprinters make in their careers doesn't disprove his argument, as these are at best in 10ths of seconds if not in hundredths - and are achieved largely by improvements in technique.)

Brazier's improvements over the 800 (and 1500) can be ascribed to increased endurance, which does not require - or infer - increased basic speed. Improvements in anaerobic events will typically be smaller, as these events are based on speed, which is more or less set in a runner and is less improvable (in a mature athlete) than stamina (according to Lydiard).

Every event that Norman runs is essentially an anaerobic (speed) event and so it is unsurprising that he has pace from 100m to 400m. (His improvement over the 100 may be due to an improved start and early part of the race). In that he was like Tommie Smith, who in 1966 could run 10.1 (at 6'3" he was a poor starter), 19.83(1968), and 43.8 (relay). No one would suggest either athlete was capable of a competitive 800m. By the same token, the 1.42 of Brazier or Cram doesn't suggest that they would have necessarily had pace in the anaerobic events - as the 400 is - and been potentially competitive at those events at a high level.

You mention Brazier"s speed over the 600. He recently ran 1.15 over the distance. To put that in perspective, Snell ran 1.16x en route to his 800/880 wr's in '62. Snell was a 22-low 200 runner who could barely beat 48secs for the 1 lap.

The argument can certainly be made that Brazier is capable of better than sub-47secs for the 400, his current best, but that time and sub-45 are in different universes. Can we imagine a 45sec runner (at age 23) could carve off 2 full seconds, to 43 flat? Rudisha is a 45-low runner.