1:50 800 Meter Racing

You are gonna have to break 50 in the 400...can you do that?

stop thinking about it. breaking 1:50 isnt a big deal, dont treat it like it is.

(not saying it isnt fast, just dont make it something more than it is)

dont think in terms of sprinter or distance oriented. just think in terms of what the individual needs to do to acomplish it for themselves.

a lot of the time its just about believeing whatever (reasonable) stradegy, and then acting on it.

You are so full of shit.....1:50 is huge and less then 1% of all runners get below this.

ccrunner609 wrote:

You are so full of shit.....1:50 is huge and less then 1% of all runners get below this.

Maybe you read quickly, but the guy you were responding to was not trying to diminish the difficulty of running 1:50. He was talking about a mindset for the athlete approaching a barrier. I thought it was a good post.

Canttellmenothinng wrote:

stop thinking about it. breaking 1:50 isnt a big deal, dont treat it like it is.

(not saying it isnt fast, just dont make it something more than it is)

dont think in terms of sprinter or distance oriented. just think in terms of what the individual needs to do to acomplish it for themselves.

a lot of the time its just about believeing whatever (reasonable) stradegy, and then acting on it.

Reminds me of a letsrun homepage quote a couple months ago that was something along the lines of that you need to be incredibly cocky to set a world record. To be able to do so you have to actually believe you are better than anybody else in the history of this planet.

Obviously mindset is huge, but does anyone think that there is an actual method that would save energy by using running economy most efficently depending if you are more sprinter geared or distance geared in a half mile?

The old world records (correct me if I'm wrong) have always been close to even splits until Rushida. Is it more practical for a sprinter to go out hard in 52-53 and put time in the bank bfore those fast twitch muscles die and fade into a 1:50? Is it more practical for a distance kid to run straight 27.5 until the very end using endurance energy like a miser?

Justcurious wrote:

[quote]Canttellmenothinng wrote:

The old world records (correct me if I'm wrong) have always been close to even splits until Rushida. Is it more practical for a sprinter to go out hard in 52-53 and put time in the bank bfore those fast twitch muscles die and fade into a 1:50? Is it more practical for a distance kid to run straight 27.5 until the very end using endurance energy like a miser?

Wilson Kipketer ran something like 48.7 when he went 1:41.1, 48.1 when he ran 1:41.24 and 49.7 when he went 1:41.73

Seb Coe was sub-50 when he went 1:41.7

Alberto Juantorena went 50.8 and 1:43.4

from what i've experienced with the 800, you run PR's when you go out hard. (but you need to feel good!)

find that pace that feels manageable, that you could probably run 900 meters at. That you can maintain with smoothness.

Then come race day, re-find that smooth pace, but push it a little. run easy but aggressive.

so for a 1:50 it'd look like 53, maybe 54 for the 1st lap.

I think bottom line distance vs. speed method is jsut preference on the athlete. Because the goal is the same reguardless, to feel like your not having to sprint when you run.

but no i dont feel even splits are as practical. usually when you do that, you feel like you had enegry left over. But, some athletes just overall get in a better mind set when they allow themselves to do that. So dont just assume there's one right answer.

I'm not so sure the racing/pacing strategy is more important than how one has trained/prepared for the 'race' itself.

I know a HS guy from ~4 decades ago, who ran 1:50.1y, first lap was 56 and ran uncontested on 2nd lap, in 90+ heat, 90+ humidity.

I'm an 800 runner (1:54.1 PR) who is distance oriented (50-55 mpw, and 70-75 in XC) and I have been dropping time over the past 2 years. I've found that in the races where I PR, I'm going out faster.

For example, I ran my PR this season and I went 56.5, 57.6. I think it is smarter as a distance oriented runner to go out a little faster than goal pace and control how much you slow down that second lap.. those extra miles will serve wonders.

I've been on a team with two 1:50 guys who had very different philosophies, however. One of them was a 1:48 guy whose splits were 27, 54, 121, and 148. Dead even. He was a moderate mileage guy, doing 40-45 a week and stressing his weight program.

The other was a sprint oriented runner (a 48.x 400 runner, doing 35-40 mpw) and he took it out in 52 and brought it back in 58. His philosophy was gap the pack and let the second lap do what it may.

I mean, everyone has their styles, like said previously, it really comes down to the attitude... if you do the work and believe you can do it, it will happen no matter what way you run the race.