600m to 800m Prediction Validity?

Well for me a lot of running is mental, and I know that if I ran 1:19 in a time trial i wouldnt have a problem going out in 1:21 for a race. Just knowing what you can physically do is great for your mentality going into race day. Just like in cross country when it comes down to the final quarter mile and you think to yourself "400 to go, i've done this a million times, i can do this lets go!". I find time trials to be a bigger help mentally than actually predicting anything, except maybe a split as in the example.

I did 1:26 -2:01. I think the slower time trials should indicate a faster race for those who are more endurance oriented (or women)

whatever I can run alone in a time trial I can carry for 800 in a race (and less stressful on my body). I am more of a 8/15 guy but the 8 is definitely my event. If you are a 4/8 guy maybe you could do it in heavy trainers or something to get the same prediction.

YOU are missing a step in the middle, Mikeisswank. After the 600 time-trial you need to flip the coin. If you forget to flip the coin you will never know what your 600 predicts. Running a 600 in 1:23 and coming up heads is a lot better than running the same time and coming up tails. If you are going to try to measure heart and desire at least use the coin to augment your prediction.

do you realize that you just typed the worst joke ever?

1funrunner wrote:

YOU are missing a step in the middle, Mikeisswank. After the 600 time-trial you need to flip the coin. If you forget to flip the coin you will never know what your 600 predicts. Running a 600 in 1:23 and coming up heads is a lot better than running the same time and coming up tails. If you are going to try to measure heart and desire at least use the coin to augment your prediction.

mikeisswank wrote:

What then is the purpose of doing 600m time trials at all? Is the impact and stress really that much less than if an athlete were to run a full 800m?

Any thoughts?

600 repeats were a staple of my 800 training at PSU back when we had a stable full of 800 horses.

I think it was the cornerstone of our success back then. We did it both indoors and outdoors. It was always 2 x 600 and they were at race pace.

While it was never labeled a "time trial" and it was always 2, you can bet that none of us wanted to finish very far off the pace.

If you can run a good 600 in a practice type setting, hanging tough for that extra 200 meters in a race becomes second nature.

we've used 1.41 x 600 time as a predictor of 800 time. so a 600 in 1:18.0 predicts a 1:50.0 while a 1:25.0 would equal 1:59.9. we've never time trialed an all out 600 since i've been here but sometimes people will race it indoors and the formula holds up pretty well. we do have a workout of 600-300-300-150-150 where we never come to a stop for even one instant between reps but have to keep jogging at 45 seconds per 100 for the same distance that we just ran. so the fast 600 rep goes straight into a 600 jog in 4:30, the fast 300s go straight into 300 jogs in 2:15, and so on. all of the reps are supposed to be at 800 pr pace or faster when we're at our peak. we do that workout about twice a year, usually once indoors and once outdoors. when we did it this year 4 guys ran in the 1:21s on the 600 (maybe 1:20-high for the fastest guy), 40-41 on the 300s, and 20-point on the 150s (somebody had too much left and did a low 19 though). all the fast stuff was at 1:47-1:50 800 pace and the same guys all ran 1:50-point or better outdoors, which is just what the workout indicates.

we did a 700 all out time trial once this year and the rule of thumb we're given is to multiply the time by 1.17 to get an 800 time. 1:34.0 predicts a 1:50.0 according to this. i read seb coe did a 700 in 1:26.7, which would predict a 1:41.5 800 and as we know, he ran 1:41.73, so it seems pretty accurate all the way to the world record level. this year on the 700 we had two 1:33-high guys, two 1:35s and two more 1:36s. this predicts two 1:49-highs, two 1:51-lows and two 1:52-mids. The same guys ran seasonal bests of 1:47.9 relay, 1:50.40, 1:50.66, 1:50.80, 1:51.8 relay and 1:52.61. except for that 1:47.9, they were all within half a second of what the 1.17 x 700 time predicted. in 2005 we had two milers run 700 in 1:34.1 and 1:36.0. they never ran the 800 but ran mile times of 4:01.82 and a hand-timed 4:04.5.

so there you have two pretty reliable formulas. multiply the 600 time by 1.41 or the 700 time by 1.17 to predict the 800 time. obviously the 700 is a better predictor since it's almost a full 800.

cu mid distance guy wrote:

we've used 1.41 x 600 time as a predictor of 800 time. so a 600 in 1:18.0 predicts a 1:50.0 while a 1:25.0 would equal 1:59.9.

This, as with all conversions, does not work for everyone. I was a 1:18.5i guy, which would translate to 1:50.7. My indoor 800 pr was 1:48.44i. You could argue this might be reasonable for a 800 guy with incredible endurance, however, I was very evenly balanced between speed/endurance as an 800m runner (47.8, 8:33 3k).

My 11 yr old daughter ran a 600 time trial on her own about a week before her annual school league track meet. She didn't call it a time trial, it was just a hard lap and a half to her. She had never done anything more than a 400 race and did the 600 trial to see what she was capable of and to help get a sense of pace for the big race day. It was pretty useful. She did the 600 in 2:00 (80 secs per lap pace). At the track meet she did the 800 in 2:33 (76.5 per lap), so it was a little faster pace than her 600 trial.

old runner wrote:

My 11 yr old daughter ran a 600 time trial on her own about a week before her annual school league track meet. She didn't call it a time trial, it was just a hard lap and a half to her. She had never done anything more than a 400 race and did the 600 trial to see what she was capable of and to help get a sense of pace for the big race day. It was pretty useful. She did the 600 in 2:00 (80 secs per lap pace). At the track meet she did the 800 in 2:33 (76.5 per lap), so it was a little faster pace than her 600 trial.

How the f*** is this relevant? Your duaghter obviously has not done either distance enough to offer predictive information that can constructively contribute to this thread. Personally, I think you posted this to brag about your daughter. Well, here you go...that's a great time for an 11 year old girl. That's about it.

In my coaching experience, we've always done an 800m indicator workout about 6 weeks out from our National meet. We run 600m, take a 30 second rest, and then whatever you've got left for the last 200m. It's been within 1.5 seconds accurate for both men and women in terms of their marks in their next 800m race.

Inadvertently, it's the same as the poster who spoke of the 1.41 x 600m formula. I have found that the more strength based athletes tend to be a bit slower in their next race as opposed to the speed athletes who tend to be a bit faster.

in sub-4, nate brannen runs a 1:18 time trial yet manages a 1:46.00. Im not sure how accurate those predictors are. 1:26 vs 2:03. i dont think i could run a 1:26 (ive run 1:27) yet my 800m is more like 2:01. if you are a sprinter perhaps those are accurate, but not so much for a distance runner. my 400 pb is only 55. though