What is the key to having a really good range? Obviously having talent and running mileage plays a part but what other factors are there that make you capable of running fast 800-10k's in a relatively short period of time? I am not talking about different seasons, simply the athletes that can run 1:52 one weekend and then 14:15 or 29:30 the next??
How do people have such a large range?? 800-10k??
College Running
College Training
Report Thread
You are reporting this thread to the moderators for review and possible removal from the forum.
-
-
They are amazing runners.
-
Yea, winners win! Talent fixes everything
-
I think having good range is overrated, unless the aim is mediocrity. I can think of only two people at elite level who have the kind of range you describe: Sifan Hassan and Mo Farah. Every other elite runner who is capable of winning medals has specialised. It's a similar issue when we compare elite marathoning: US athletes see the marathon as part of their range, something to move onto when they are past their best. East Africans specialise early so you get athletes like Brigid Kosgei in her physical prime training specifically for the marathon going against US athletes at the tail end of their careers who are basically trained for track but have added mileage for a couple of years. And then you ask why don't Americans compete? So year, the concept of "good range" is a myth in elite running. Where was David Rudisha's range?
-
Rudisha was a sprinter. I think we should rather speak to 1200 to 2000m and up for the range argument; any event with an overwhelming aerobic aspect.
-
Almost a necessity for high level distance running. Look at world class 5kers closing in 52. Or off the top of my head when Solinsky broke the 10k record he closed in 57/2:00ish....not blazing but think about what he could run fresh. Talented runners
-
Not the same. Solinsky was not close to world class in 800. Hasan is. Webb was. Centro is very close.
-
Because it's all largely aerobic.
-
Correct Answer 100 wrote:
They are amazing runners.
That's not the point here. Even a low/moderately talented male could be described as "amazing range" with 2:04/4:33/15:35/32:30 for example. The point here is that some runners would score similarly on the IAAF scoring tables for a large range of events.
On the other hand you got someone like Rudisha who surely can't run anything close to an equivalent 5k/10k to his 800m PR. His range would not be described as good, but he is still an "amazing runner".
Webb was often described as "amazing range", but he admitted that when he was in his 800 PR shape his 10k was lackluster and when he was in godly 10k shape he didn't have the same 800m ability anymore. So in this case, it's just good, quality training for the current events a runner is training for.
If someone has the perfect range at a given time, it's rather a sign that his training is not ideal, because he is not peaking in any even at that time. He just trained himself to be mediocre at all events, without being good at anything. He could have a globally better range by focusing on each event temporarily, PRing, then doing it for a different event. -
wammy was my hamster wrote:
Because it's all largely aerobic.
This is largely the answer. You have some runners who are fast, with great leg speed. You have other runners who can go long and grind and have amazing endurance. Every now and then you get someone who has great natural speed and amazing strength endurance. If you have a trained aerobic system and good natural speed, you'll be decent at anything from 800-10K -
LateRunnerPhil wrote:
Webb was often described as "amazing range", but he admitted that when he was in his 800 PR shape his 10k was lackluster and when he was in godly 10k shape he didn't have the same 800m ability anymore.
If someone has the perfect range at a given time, it's rather a sign that his training is not ideal,
This. Training is event specific. Yes, you can train to race the 800m and still race a decent 5k-10k and vice versa, but if you train for both, you will be less than your best at both. -
Cool update.
-
migrant wrote:
Not the same. Solinsky was not close to world class in 800. Hasan is. Webb was. Centro is very close.
Webb > Lomong > Centro -
Hocker can run 1:46/13:15 today. Jakob can run 1:46/12:50 today. Hasan is world class in 800-1/2M on the same training.
-
Talent.
Natural speed to start, with long term aerobic development as a focus. This, of course, with continued focus on strength and speed (strides don't count). The natural speed doesn't take much to keep around, but is often entirely forgotten. -
you take somebody with great natural speed and give them 20-24x400@ 5k, rest to 120, and give them sunday off for recovery.
No problems.
MAGIC range. -
migrant wrote:
Hocker can run 1:46/13:15 today. Jakob can run 1:46/12:50 today. Hasan is world class in 800-1/2M on the same training.
If Cole Hocker broke 13:30 I'd be surprised, and it would be a great time for his level. He is nowhere near 13:15 shape. I don't know where you think Ingebrigtsen could pull 12:50 from either. He's never broken 13:00 so to get close to 12:50 he'd have to train specifically for the 5000m. Like I said, the only athletes I've ever seen who have crazy range at any given moment are Hassan and Farah. Alan Webb ran a good 10k, once. I think even he has said he doesn't think he could have done it again so let's distinguish between someone having a good race and having good range. -
You are way off with those 5k predictions. 13:15 and 12:50 right now for those 2 guys are accurate. Those aren't stretch goals but what they would run.
-
Anybody has that range. Who can't run 1/2 to 6 miles? The key is how fast, aha!
-
I think the ideal here is someone like Mo who is a 5k/10k runner who runs decent mileage who can close.
If you're training for the 5k/10k and mixing in some speed I feel like it wouldn't be too unusual to run a decent 8/15. You might be a couple seconds off of what you could run if you were all in on the distance but you could come pretty close.
