how many of you out there have done a 4min mile off of a 56 PR for the 400m, and how many 56s 400m runners out there (who do middle distance) have not? Also, qualify whether or not you have done the training of a middle distance runner and still failed to break 4mins with your 56 sec 400m.
I would be very surprised if anyone could even break 4 mins for the 1500m with a 400m time of 56. I think I read that a 1.51 800m is usually considered the minimum speed to be able to run a sub 4 mile. Therefore I'm guessing a minimum of 51 quarter speed would be needed for sub 4.
a 56-second runner will be lucky to break 2:00 for the 800m.
You're right. The formula I like to use is "add 5 secs to quarter time and double for half mile time." Add ten secs to quarter time and four fold it for mile time."
I don't think Mike Aish can break 56. His 1500 PR is 3.44
"My best 200 (meters) is only, I think, 26.9. That’s flat out with my racing singlet on and a number and everything like that"
http://dailynews.runnersworld.com/2007/05/a_brief_chat_wi_4.html
... probably because he's never run a competitive 200m or 400m since a very young age?
Trust me Mike Aish is at least a 51 sec 400m...you can't run a 3:44 with a 56 speed.
John Kellogg once told me that it would take, at a bare minimum, a 52-second 400 to be able to run a 4:00 mile. And even then, you'd have to compensate for the lack of speed with superior endurance. In other words, you'd have to be better at the 5k than the mile.
give up your dream.
Surely a runner with 56 second speed and great aerobic endurance could string together four 60 sec quarters. Granted, it would be a rare runner that would have that much endurance, but it's possible isn't it?
i kinda like running wrote:
Surely a runner with 56 second speed and great aerobic endurance could string together four 60 sec quarters. Granted, it would be a rare runner that would have that much endurance, but it's possible isn't it?
it'd probably take 20 years worth of endurance training to get that.
the best I've seen a 56s guy do is 1:58 800 and 3:52 1500 and that is being very strong on the endurance side. That is still 10 sec off a 4 min mile.
If there is a 56s/sub 4 guy he likely never ran a 400 serious; just at the end of workout etc. How ofter do miler-5km guys do a fresh, all out 400?
Usually a 56 guy who is a distance guy will be 2flat 800, 4min 1500/4:20 miler. THose are pretty close to my times a long time ago.
Usually the slow down as you go up is 4 to 5 sec. to pull it off you would have to be slowing down only 2sec; 4 to 8 to mile. Very, very tough.
Not 100% sure about the 400 speed of Dave Bedford or John Tracey (anyone wanna enlighten me) but they could break 4 minutes of huge aerobic bases and minimal speed. I think Tracey ran like 4.00.xx and I know Bedford would go out in 5ks in a 4.05 mile range
Fat Boy wrote:
You're right. The formula I like to use is "add 5 secs to quarter time and double for half mile time." Add ten secs to quarter time and four fold it for mile time."
Adding five seconds to your 400 to get your 800 pace sounds accurate for a miler. I had less speed relative to my endurance than the average miler. (I was much better at the 10k.) In my case, adding four seconds to my 400 time and multiplying by two equals my 800 PR. So five seconds is probably a realistic conversion number for a miler.
FWIW, Letsrun.com did an interview with Todd Williams a few years back (when he retired). Todd ran 4:00.9 for the mile and claims in the interview that his "legs can barely turn over at 60 seconds." When asked about his flat out quarter speed, he said "flat out, my hamstring would still be laying on the track, but it's probably 53-54."
No 56-second 400-meter guy is going to break 4:00 for the mile. It won't happen.
Arkham Observer wrote:
FWIW, Letsrun.com did an interview with Todd Williams a few years back (when he retired). Todd ran 4:00.9 for the mile and claims in the interview that his "legs can barely turn over at 60 seconds." When asked about his flat out quarter speed, he said "flat out, my hamstring would still be laying on the track, but it's probably 53-54."
But Williams was probably speaking about his 400 ability at the end of his career, which is when the interview took place.
If he were asked that question when he set him mile PR, he probably would have given a faster time for the 400.
I agree that 56 seems way too slow to break 4.
There are different kinds of 56s, however. Are you running a 56 in trainers in the middle of your base phase? With training, such a run could easily become a 52 high (with spikes). If you're reaching the point at which your flat-out 400 speed is an issue, than it's probably time to do more sprint training. You don't really know what your 400 speed is until you've trained it. I suspect that many distance runners could drop a 53 if they worked at it.
You may be able to pull off a 4:20 mile if you can build up to a 2:02 800 m