If I'm looking to excel in the 800 meter run, would I be better off if my training was more directed towards the 400/800 or the 800/1600?
Some Background Information:
I'm a sophomore in HS with a 19:22 3 mile (XC) and a 62.4 in the 400.
If I'm looking to excel in the 800 meter run, would I be better off if my training was more directed towards the 400/800 or the 800/1600?
Some Background Information:
I'm a sophomore in HS with a 19:22 3 mile (XC) and a 62.4 in the 400.
Screw the 800 & run the 1600
800/1600 training
I say work on your speed. 400/800
800/1600 will serve you better in the long run. I have known a lot of pretty good 800m runners get flustered when they get to college because they spent all of high school working on their speed, doing 400/800 training. So they maybe graduate as 58.5/2:16 runners. But 58.5 just isn't fast enough to run the 800 in college, so their coach moves them to the 1500m. Not to mention 6k cross country! But because they have neglected their endurance for so long, they struggle mightily for a long time to try to adapt. If you do 800/1600 training, you can improve both your speed AND endurance. Instead of graduating a 58.5/2:16, these girls might have graduated as 60.0/2:15/4:59 and would have done much better in college.
I agree with fun facts.
To the OP, you need both - 400m speed comes from strength, the 1600m from endurance (sort of). I was coaching a girl this fall who ran 62.1 for 400m as a freshman in the spring, but could only run 2.27 (after changing coaches - she ran 2.30 with another earlier)off of that. Is it a matter of poorly developed or innately weak endurance? as many runners with that speed at that age (in my coaching experience) could run low 2.20's. This is also predicated on your 200m ability - you should make the effort to run at least one of these to find out whether you have ability to stay at 400m (as a second event) through HS. If you struggle (without too much specific training) to run under 28sec (sub 27 would be better), then look longer (800/1600)and balance your training with that in mind.
If your aim is to get faster, presuming that there is little reason why you can't, then getting under 60sec while in HS should become a target, while also developing the ability to run under 5.00 for 1600 (or faster). With a differential of 7sec (good but not great) at 60sec, that would mean times of 2.14(67)and 4.56(74). As FF says, you may have to move up to longer races in College if you can't run a lot faster than 60sec (57 with good speed endurance, so a differential of 4-5sec = 2.02-2.04, is required to excel in College over 800m).
Even with a relatively weak 3m XC (=~20min 5k) right now, this too can be improved if Threshold work (even if included in 2-3 week cycles) is regularly included in your training schedule.
I agree with most of the above posts. 800/1600 training will hep you out in the long run.
Remember training doesn't necessarily mean racing, in other words you could train like an 800/1600 runner but race like a 400/800 person.
If you are naturally quick you should work on endurance. And vice versa. You'll know which you are.