this is my first year in athletics. I got 2:10 on wednesday in 800m...last sunday i got 4:34 in 1500m but 4:38 today. What suprises me is that since Febuary i have been through a base training program and therefore i would expect to be better prepared for 1500m than 800m. Would you say im genetically better suited to 800m? or maybe im more confident. With 800m i have clear tactics but with 1500m its a bit different.
thanks (also any training ideas would be great.)
I think a 4:34 1500m is better than a 2:10 800m personally.
V6 wrote:
I think a 4:34 1500m is better than a 2:10 800m personally.
Agreed. When I ran 4'34" for 1500, I can run 2'5" for 800.
2:10 is much better than 4:34. I'd think for a 2:10 runner you should be about 10 seconds faster for 1500m. Running a huge base isn't going to guarantee a fast 1500m. You need to do specific 1500m work and good deal of VO2 max work to get you through the second 1/2 of the race after a fast pace. If your base was as big as you say it is and you have that kind of 800m speed, through in some 3K and 1500m pace work with fairly short recoveries and your times will come down.
-Scott
When I was at 2.10 my 1500 was 4.24.
I'm now at 2.04 and my 1500 is 4.14.
Which one am I better at?
wel to answer that the last month and a half i have been doing 1500m/3k workouts too. Ive done some very tough hill workouts. 3x1500m with 3 mins rest and also 4x800m with 3 mins rest.
When i was doing nothing but long runs (around feb/march) i was somtimes doing around 50 miles in a week. (might not sound alot to you but for 15 years old as i was then its not bad)
3 x 1500m w/ 3 min rest is not a 1500m or likely a 3K pace workout. Probably more like 5K. Try something like 2 x 400 @ 67 w/ 90 sec rest followed by 1 x 800 at 2:22 w/ 3' rest and 2 x 300m at sub 52 pace. That's a low volume, later season 1500m workout. 3K work - something like 5 x 800m @ 2:35 - 2:40 w/ 1 min rest. That's what I mean by 1500 and 3K pace workouts. You have to generate some good lactic acid and be able to deal with a fast pace off of that. Think SPECIFICITY.
-Scott
I was at a 2:03 with a 5:30 1600. Although I think I could have ran at least 4:50. I don't know what that converts to but different people are better at different distances.
If his 435 is better than his 210, then my 800 must really suck. I went 436 in the 1600 and 202 in the 800. Are these times similar?
I'd say that's about right.
These are two kids that I know
4:33 2:03.5
4:37 2:03
Which of my times do you think is better?
2:02 or 4:16? Both indoors
I was a kid who was blessed/cursed with the ability that my prs were almost always equal. Therefore here were my equivalent times:
4:33 mile-2:05 880:
4:02 1500-1:58 800.
Where I fell off was at 2mi where I could barely break 10.
Take your 800m time and add 2 seconds, then double that. That would give you an equivilant 1500m time.
So a 2:02 800m -> 4:08 1500m
and a 4:16 1500m -> 2:06 800m
So your 800m performance is the better of the two.
well done Chris on your 4:16 yesturday.