For example:
1:03
1:03
0:57
0:56
But then when you put this person in an open 400, they only can run 1:00 because they need to "warm up" mid-race.
For example:
1:03
1:03
0:57
0:56
But then when you put this person in an open 400, they only can run 1:00 because they need to "warm up" mid-race.
By the way this does no apply to me because my 400 is 0:55.
In theory, but that runner and coach would have to be incompetent at a proper warmup.
Yes. I coached a high school kid who had a PR of 65 but ran 4:19 in the 1600. It took him 30 meters to get rolling.
I coached a kid that could keep increasing his pace as the distance increased and he finally went into orbit.
Yes it’s actually more likely than a 55 second 400m runner, because a 55 second guy likely has too much fast twitch muscle to run a steady pace.
CopperRunner wrote:
Yes it’s actually more likely than a 55 second 400m runner, because a 55 second guy likely has too much fast twitch muscle to run a steady pace.
That's just not true, I'd bet any money that a good portion of all sub 4 milers can squeeze out a 55.
To have a good shot at sub 4:00 for normal people you would need a 0:51.
Sham 69 wrote:
To have a good shot at sub 4:00 for normal people you would need a 0:51.
Yes thank you. You can't just run an all out 400 4 times because you're a "slow twitch guy". I don't even know how many 55 guys can break two for the 800. More than the mile for sure, but by no means is that a guarantee.
SDSU Aztec wrote:
I coached a kid that could keep increasing his pace as the distance increased and he finally went into orbit.
One of my teammates was a Toyota Prius. Their acceleration wasn't great at the start, but once they got up to speed they had really great endurance. We all thought they'd be great at the marathon, but they seized up at like 22 miles. I think they took in too many sugary drinks at the aid stations. Anyway, no amount of positive encouragement has gotten them running since.
Al Salazar's best 400 was 57 and he also ran 7:43 for 3000, probably the shortest distance he raced. I doubt he ever raced a mile (except maybe in high school) but he probably could have toughed out a 3:58 or something.
0/10 whyd i even open this thread.
Sham 69 wrote:
By the way this does no apply to me because my 400 is 0:55.
Wait a minute. You run 4:30 but can only manage a :55? You might be good enough to walk on to any D1 women’s program as their towel manager.
Sham 69 wrote:
For example:
1:03
1:03
0:57
0:56
But then when you put this person in an open 400, they only can run 1:00 because they need to "warm up" mid-race.
No
No ... and you know this.
nikee shill wrote:
Sham 69 wrote:
To have a good shot at sub 4:00 for normal people you would need a 0:51.
Yes thank you. You can't just run an all out 400 4 times because you're a "slow twitch guy". I don't even know how many 55 guys can break two for the 800. More than the mile for sure, but by no means is that a guarantee.
Only ever ran one race at each distance, as a middle-aged hobby jogger, but that the correlation fits for me.... 56 and 2:11
closest example I know wrote:
Al Salazar's best 400 was 57 and he also ran 7:43 for 3000, probably the shortest distance he raced. I doubt he ever raced a mile (except maybe in high school) but he probably could have toughed out a 3:58 or something.
That 57 was probably at the end of 5k or a workout😂 Seriously we have no legit 400m times for most distance guys. Especially 5k and up. We end up with 4x400m splits from when they were 15 or end of workout repa.
Pretty sure Al Sal did run a 345 1500m one time. Doubt he was in peak shape for it.
That would be a pretty fun job!
xc coach of high kids wrote:
Yes. I coached a high school kid who had a PR of 65 but ran 4:19 in the 1600. It took him 30 meters to get rolling.
What? No.