Ok to phrase it a little differently, 400 training is sprint training and basically includes no mileage. 800 is endurance training and includes a lot of mileage (Bryce Hoppel is doing 50 mpw).
Long and middle distance runs will help an 800 meter runner, while short intervals will help a 400 meter specialist.
But, when the gun goes off both types of runners are going to be maxing their anareobic threshold, or they aren't doing it right. There is slightly more room for tactics in the 800 (and maybe in the 400 too, but I didn't run that enough), however the marigin for error after falling off pace is very small.
Some are ridiculing o.p., but overall, o.p. makes a great point and no one has thoroughly addressed it.
The pace differential from 400m to 800m is roughly equal to pace differential from 3000m to 1/2 Marathon. This is why Olympic and World Championship schedule rarely accommodate 400/800 double without overlapping schedules.
Since pace differential, 400m and 800m are so significant, we see far more individuals evenly skilled as teenagers but so rare at elite level.
Some are ridiculing o.p., but overall, o.p. makes a great point and no one has thoroughly addressed it.
The pace differential from 400m to 800m is roughly equal to pace differential from 3000m to 1/2 Marathon. This is why Olympic and World Championship schedule rarely accommodate 400/800 double without overlapping schedules.
Since pace differential, 400m and 800m are so significant, we see far more individuals evenly skilled as teenagers but so rare at elite level.
Along those same lines, the slower you are, the more sense it makes to train for the 400 and 800 at the same time. For example, a sub-50 second 400m runner will almost always be a sprinter, whereas a 65-second 400m runner will usually be better off training with mid distance because 15 seconds makes a huge difference in energy systems. Because of this, you'll see a lot more 400m girls who also run 800 and 1600, whereas most of the fast boys are 200m runners.
Some are ridiculing o.p., but overall, o.p. makes a great point and no one has thoroughly addressed it.
The pace differential from 400m to 800m is roughly equal to pace differential from 3000m to 1/2 Marathon. This is why Olympic and World Championship schedule rarely accommodate 400/800 double without overlapping schedules.
Since pace differential, 400m and 800m are so significant, we see far more individuals evenly skilled as teenagers but so rare at elite level.
Along those same lines, the slower you are, the more sense it makes to train for the 400 and 800 at the same time. For example, a sub-50 second 400m runner will almost always be a sprinter, whereas a 65-second 400m runner will usually be better off training with mid distance because 15 seconds makes a huge difference in energy systems. Because of this, you'll see a lot more 400m girls who also run 800 and 1600, whereas most of the fast boys are 200m runners.
This is complicated for T&F coaches.
When an athlete has a f.a.t. 400 m personal best, 46.xx or faster by junior year in college, 99% of T&F coaches will agree such a young man deserves a modified fall XC program his senior year or a XC waiver.
What about 9th grade? What is the cut off time to deserve special treatment, 9th grade for a fast 400m kid with potential, 800m? If brought along well, 400m time from 9th grade can drop as much as ten seconds by senior year in college. Make a kid a 3200m runner and 400m development is almost stagnant. [Due to U.S. high school T&F schedule, 3200m is immediately after 200m dash and immediately precedes 4 x 400m.]
Yes and no, and the answer also heavily depends on what type of runner you are.
Some 800m runners benefit from 400m training, so training for the 400m is not necessarily detrimental to 800m performance. At a certain point, however, it is necessary to introduce 800m specific work, and this is going to impact on the 400m to some extent. So, while it is not possible to reach top performance in both events at the same time, it is possible for a 400m in top 400m shape to run a good 800m and it is possible for an 800m runner in top 800m shape to run a good 400m.
If 400 is 90% anaerobic and 800 is 90% aerobic wouldn't training for these events pull in opposite directions?
Well the first issue is that your aerobic/anaerobic distribution figures are way way off.
If you’ve raced the 400 and the 800 multiple times and at a decently high level you’ll realize the 800m feels a lot more like a 400m than it does a mile. I also believe that the science says that the aerobic/anaerobic distribution of the 800m is more like in the 60/40 to 40/60 range depending on how fast you can complete it and other biological factors, and the anaerobic fall off is fairly exponential as distance/race time increases. If you run an 800m in 3:40, it’s gonna be almost entirely aerobic but once you are like 1:40-1:50 the anaerobic side of things actually start to outweigh the aerobic.
Another more subjective belief I hold is that you are either an 800m guy or you aren’t. 400/800m types tend to have a lot more sprinting/strength based training components and may hold more of a sprinting physique but the 800m is usually always stronger than the 400m by a solid margin, this is also the case with 800m guys that do more of the 1500m/3k type stuff. I think 600m-1000m is really it’s own event category because it’s not necessarily how fast you can sprint, but how long you can sprint for. You train that component of training entirely different from other types of sprint/distance training and you really only absolutely need to do that kind of work as an 800m runner. Basically every high level 800m runner whether they run 80 miles per week or 8 miles per week are doing workouts like 5-6x300m or 8-10x200m just about as physically fast as they can handle on the day, taking much longer rest than distance athletes but not the full rest you see in sprinters trying to develop their pure speed. It tells me that sprinting until your legs are lactic over and over again is the most important training component in 800m running, but it is also a useful training component when training for the 400m AND middle distances. Because of this, you can lean your training one way or the other or even try to balance it so that you still have a good 400m and/or 1500m in your arsenal.
To give you an actual reply OP, most 4/8 specialists lack the acceleration to be primarily 1/2/4 guys and have the endurance to put up a quality second lap; there are a number of ways that people arrive at this. But, what the 4/8 guys typically do is low mileage (15-20MPW) with high intensity and intervals that would be considered long for a 400 specialist (e.g. 5x300 5 min rest) that would be pretty short for a distance runner. Bryce Hoppel doing 50MPW is more characteristic of a pure 800 or 8/15 type runner, a big 4/8 guy would be someone like Will Sumner
Some are ridiculing o.p., but overall, o.p. makes a great point and no one has thoroughly addressed it.
The pace differential from 400m to 800m is roughly equal to pace differential from 3000m to 1/2 Marathon. This is why Olympic and World Championship schedule rarely accommodate 400/800 double without overlapping schedules.
Since pace differential, 400m and 800m are so significant, we see far more individuals evenly skilled as teenagers but so rare at elite level.
We are making fun of the OP because his ratios are nuts. Now the exact ratios are methodology dependant but something like 40/60 for the 400m and 60/40 for the 800m. Elite guys go a bit more anaerobic. Woman go a bit less. Different methodology will move the exact numbers around but relative difference stays pretty constant. The studies that go 10/90 for the 400 are 35/65 for the 800m.
It is pretty to adapt 400m training to run an 800m. Go look at Clyde harts programs. If you have a sub 46/1:45 guy, you probably arent running 70+mpw.
Now 1500m guys who run 800m can do distance. But they haven’t been in favor much since we have progressed to where you need to be a 1:43 guy to medal. Or even in high school. We get a lot more sub 47.5/148 guys than we do sub 1:48/3:58 guys. Some is that some guys don’t run a ton of high end 800ms but some of it seems to be a lot of these guys are mid 1:49 guys.
Some are ridiculing o.p., but overall, o.p. makes a great point and no one has thoroughly addressed it.
The pace differential from 400m to 800m is roughly equal to pace differential from 3000m to 1/2 Marathon. This is why Olympic and World Championship schedule rarely accommodate 400/800 double without overlapping schedules.
Since pace differential, 400m and 800m are so significant, we see far more individuals evenly skilled as teenagers but so rare at elite level.
We are making fun of the OP because his ratios are nuts. Now the exact ratios are methodology dependant but something like 40/60 for the 400m and 60/40 for the 800m. Elite guys go a bit more anaerobic. Woman go a bit less. Different methodology will move the exact numbers around but relative difference stays pretty constant. The studies that go 10/90 for the 400 are 35/65 for the 800m.
It is pretty ??? to adapt 400m training to run an 800m. Go look at Clyde harts programs. If you have a sub 46/1:45 guy, you probably arent running 70+mpw.
Now 1500m guys who run 800m can do distance. But they haven’t been in favor much since we have progressed to where you need to be a 1:43 guy to medal. Or even in high school. We get a lot more sub 47.5/148 guys than we do sub 1:48/3:58 guys. Some is that some guys don’t run a ton of high end 800ms but some of it seems to be a lot of these guys are mid 1:49 guys.
I wonder if you intended to state easy or difficult.
In the real world this is not easy. Are you judging by observing current or former teammates? Are you making your analysis as a current or former coach?
You certainly are not referring to current elite athletes. The only current elite athlete who demonstrated medal potential in 400m AND 800m, Athing Mu. Sub-1:43/sub-3:29 800m/1500m are no longer.
O.P. asked how. Alberto Juantorena, Mark Everett and Emmanuel. Only three men in history of T&F, sub-45 400m & sub-1:44 800m. I will give Rudolf Harbig an honorable mention.
It looks almost impossible to properly coach to me.
Or even in high school. We get a lot more sub 47.5/148 guys than we do sub 1:48/3:58 guys.
First of all, both examples are really rare. My guy was the #10 400/800 guy in the US (according to mile split) and he was 47.85/1:51.95. So when you say "a lot more" you mean 3-4 rather than 0-2
Or even in high school. We get a lot more sub 47.5/148 guys than we do sub 1:48/3:58 guys.
First of all, both examples are really rare. My guy was the #10 400/800 guy in the US (according to mile split) and he was 47.85/1:51.95. So when you say "a lot more" you mean 3-4 rather than 0-2
You don’t think 2x as many is a lot more? Look at your kid and tell me where his mile ranked compared to his 400m…
Off the top of my head the 800/1500 crowd is Webb/colin. The 400/800 has Granville, sumner, brazier(ok his 400m might be .25s slow), and cade Flatt. I want to say Kershwas 48.0 but it has been a long time.. he also had a decent mile(4:15?) but it was way down compared to his 800m
Go down the all time 800m list and tell me who you think has a better 1500m than 400. Some of that is that it is just easier to get closer speed max versus developing aerobic endurance and lot is at lower level of competitions, it is easy to dominant in off events.
First of all, both examples are really rare. My guy was the #10 400/800 guy in the US (according to mile split) and he was 47.85/1:51.95. So when you say "a lot more" you mean 3-4 rather than 0-2
You don’t think 2x as many is a lot more? Look at your kid and tell me where his mile ranked compared to his 400m…
Off the top of my head the 800/1500 crowd is Webb/colin. The 400/800 has Granville, sumner, brazier(ok his 400m might be .25s slow), and cade Flatt. I want to say Kershwas 48.0 but it has been a long time.. he also had a decent mile(4:15?) but it was way down compared to his 800m
Go down the all time 800m list and tell me who you think has a better 1500m than 400. Some of that is that it is just easier to get closer speed max versus developing aerobic endurance and lot is at lower level of competitions, it is easy to dominant in off events.
I think you misunderstood his point. CoachB is saying that it is really uncommon to see high schoolersrun 46-47/1:48 or 1:48/3:58, regardless if they're "400/800" or "800/1500"
Though yes, I agree the 400/800 group will almost always top the 800/1500/mile group.
Evan Sebastian Coe ran 46.8 in the open 400 and would split 45.xx in the relay, despite being more of an 800/miler.
The point is, you need to have speed to be competitive in the 800.
I also met the kid CoachB is talking about. He was the state champion in California last year.
Him saying his 47.8/1:51 athlete was ranked among the top 10 in the nation is supporting the statement that 46/1:48 kids is rare. Which, it is. #1 that season was probably Xai Ricks, and he ran 46.0/1:49. And Ricks is a once in a generation talent.
On the average year, the top 10 US 400/800 combo guys are probably running 47/1:52ish