800m times to 1500m prediction?

Approx.

(800 time + 2sec) x 2

or the same as that..

(800 time x 2) + 4

So if my best 800 is 1.57.3, what can I run for 1500m?

3.58.6

This is ridiculous. There is no formula. We're talking about a race that's almost twice as long.

When I was in high school and was a 400-800 guy, I ran 1:57.6 and would have been only about 4:25-4:30 for 1500m.

In college, when I had more distance training I was still only 1:55 for 800, but also 3:56 for 1500m.

There is no formula because people vary so much in their ability to run these two distances. The 800 and 1500 are very different types of events.

Do the math wrote:

3.58.6

Wrong. 3.53.0. You failed.

ummm no he is correct.... that is unless you are saying that you have run a 1500 in that time trying to boast that you are better than the system... and to that you sir are a complete herb and your time sucks balls, have a nice day

Or, that formula sucks.

Derek wrote:

Or, that formula sucks.

I agree, that formula is worthless.

what?? that would mean that seb coe should have run a 3:31-3:32 for the mile. and was a very strong runner, the average runners mile would probably be between 15-25 seconds slower than his 800m time x 2. so 1:50x2=3:40, so a 1:50 guy could be between 3:55 and 4:05 depending on how strong they are at longer distances.

seeing as i know a guy who has run 151 342 that makes 0 sense

This thread is absurd. Who in their right mind expects conversion formulas to be 100% accurate. The idea is to give you a rough estimate of a comparable time at a different distance, not to tell you exactly what you will run at a different distance, based on one performance at a different distance for which you may be more or less well prepared. Are you guys serious?

For a bit more subtlety and sensitivity to a range of skill levels, use the calculators:

http://www.sarkproducts.com/runningpredict.html

http://www.mcmillanrunning.com/rununiv/mcmillanrunningcalculator.htm

webby wrote:

This thread is absurd. Who in their right mind expects conversion formulas to be 100% accurate. The idea is to give you a rough estimate of a comparable time at a different distance, not to tell you exactly what you will run at a different distance, based on one performance at a different distance for which you may be more or less well prepared. Are you guys serious?

For a bit more subtlety and sensitivity to a range of skill levels, use the calculators:

http://www.sarkproducts.com/runningpredict.htmlhttp://www.mcmillanrunning.com/rununiv/mcmillanrunningcalculator.htm

I agree that the idea is to get a rough estimate not an accurate prediction. Thanks for the links. The second one looks interesting.

Thanks to Lenny for his (800m plus 2s) x 2 formula. That looks good enough for my needs.

ya good call wrote:

what?? that would mean that seb coe should have run a 3:31-3:32 for the mile. .

What?? Let's call Coe's PR a 1:41. Add two seconds and you get a 1:43. Multiply by two and you get a 3:26. 3:26 1500 is generally considered about equal to around a 3:43 mile. Not 3:31-3:32.

If you're someone who considers yourself roughly equally skilled in the 800 and 1500, the +2x2 formula seems like a pretty good rough tool.

If you plug in 1:41, the WR 800, you get 3:26, the WR 1500.

Plug in 1:49, you get 3:42, both times put you on the god side of the cusp of making NCs.

The poster who said he's a 1:57, 3:53 is, in my opinion, clearly more accomplished in the 1500.

Anyway, the OP already said he's satisfied and I'm tired of plugging in numbers so I'll move along.

(1500m Time)=(800m Time)x 2.04142305

For a well trained runner/elite runner you can double the 800m time and get the 1500m time within a second or so. For this formula you have to be properly trained for the 1500 with a strong aerobic base, because obviously if you are only training for the 800 you're not going to be able to double your 800 time and get an accurate 1500m time. Otherwise David Rudisha would be running the 1500 (1:40.9x2=3:21.8)

Kiprop: 1:43.15x2=3:26.3 (his pr is 3:27 something)

Centro: 1:45.85x2=3:31.7 (his pr is 3:31.08)

However, what this formula works best for is for showing what's the slowest you could possibly run in the 800 and still achieve a certain 1500m time. For example it is widely thought that minimum 800m time necessary to go sub for is right around a 1:51. This doesn't mean that people with prs of 1:53 don't break 4:00 in the mile, but rather that they are capable of running around a 1:51 if they go sub 4 in the mile. (1:51x2=3:42) The conversion for a 4:00 mile from a 1500m is 3:42.7

This formula is for someone who is training for the 1500 as their primary event. As such their 1500 will be a better time relatively speaking since that is their speciality event. The (800x2)+4s is also a very solid formula that I would go with for a younger, less elite runner.

mdsc83k wrote:

Is there a formula for converting 800m times to a 1500m prediction, and vice versa?

Thanks.

I honestly think it is a bad idea to try to predict 1500 from 800 or vice versa. They are very different races requiring different training approaches. The standard formulas will give you the average of the distribution but the distribution has some very fat tails.

I do agree this thread is a little stupid. But it isn’t so bad. I’d say generally, for someone who specializes in 800 and 1500, it is pretty accurate. I run a 2:10 800 and about 4:24 for 1500 (i’m in 8th grade) but for example, i know people who run 1:55 for 800, with a 4:15 1500.