For those of you who've done the workout 3 x 300m all out, with full rest (i.e. 10 minutes + between reps), did the sum of the 3 reps come close to your current 800m time.
For example, if you ran 40, 41, 41 for this workout, were you in 2:02 shape?
And before you guys get in to the "it's only one data point" and all that other stuff, ya I get it. I'm not advocating that the sum of the 3 reps is your 800m, I'm just curious to see what the experience of the board is.
10 minutes is too long imo. Do them with 5 min rest and do some drills during the rest.
2:02 is possible.
The paces are too different to provide a consistent prediction.
J.R. wrote:
The paces are too different to provide a consistent prediction.
The pace for these should be pretty close to your 400m pace. So your 400m pace is too different from your 800m pace to provide a consistent prediction?
(Actually, 3 x 300m, full rest is more of a 400m workout than an 800m workout.)
First of all, 10 minutes between 300's if those 300's are sprinted is not enough for full recovery. Full recovery would be 20-30 minutes, which would be slightly faster than 400 pace.
3X300 with 10 minutes is probably just a little slower than 400 pace.
For 800 pace, typical workouts are 6X300 with 2-3 minutes or 3X400 with 4 minutes. The 3X400 workout, if run almost all-out is a very good indication of 800 race pace. 8X200 with 45 sec is sometimes used as n indicator workout, but I find that the 200s are too short to give a good indication (you recover too quickly).
Bin Der Dun Dat wrote:
For those of you who've done the workout 3 x 300m all out, with full rest (i.e. 10 minutes + between reps), did the sum of the 3 reps come close to your current 800m time.
For example, if you ran 40, 41, 41 for this workout, were you in 2:02 shape?
And before you guys get in to the "it's only one data point" and all that other stuff, ya I get it. I'm not advocating that the sum of the 3 reps is your 800m, I'm just curious to see what the experience of the board is.
I did 3x300 like 2 weeks ago, ran them in 43-44 and ran 1:59 a week ago. Rest was around 5-6 minutes.
To answer your question, yes, I think it may come pretty close in most instances.
I can see a strong 1:48 guy running 36, three times with about 10 minutes rest. Or a speed based 800 1:48 guy going 35, 36, 37
Or a 1:50 guy going 36, 37, 37
Or a 1:55 guy going 37, 39, 39
This workout may be a pretty good 800 indicator.
A few summers ago I was doing 3x300m all in low-38 and there's no chance in hell I could have broken 2:00 in the 800. I'm more of a long sprinter type though.
STL_Runner wrote:
A few summers ago I was doing 3x300m all in low-38 and there's no chance in hell I could have broken 2:00 in the 800. I'm more of a long sprinter type though.
idk where you've been but last i checked the 800 is a long sprint now buddy.
btw 3x300 w/ 10 min is more of a 400 runner workout. a true 800 workout would be like the guy above mentioned 6x300, 3-4x400, etc
try doing the 4x400 w/ 5 min rest and that'll def tell you what your 800 ability is. try to run the same time for each one but still run them fast. if u run 95% effort instead of going all out you'll be better at judging how fast you're going that way u don't do something like 56,59,61,64. try being realistic and going 58,58,59,59. that would indicate you're capable of a 1:57-59 800.
Especially towards the end of a season a runner should always hone the underdistance speed. So a 5k guy works on mile speed, miler works on 800 speed, etc...If you wanna get faster in the 8, your 400 speed needs to be faster
It isn t a good indicator, maybe for the 400.
I used to do 3*300 of 1min or 40sec recovery.
Off one min you have to add about a sec per 300, off shorter 0.5sec Per rep to get your pace.
Mom used to do similar workout as you mentioned 3*300off 15 min in 38-37-37 and ran 51-2.01
Doesn't work for a sprinter. They could knock those out in 35 and not be able to complete an 800 in 2:05.
Never done that exact session, but I reckon it would be about right for me. I ran 1.50 and estimate I could do those in ~37 with 10 mins rest. I estimate this based on an actual session of 3x400 (rolling start) off 10 mins in 50/51/51
You could only hit 37? That is going through 200 at just under 25. Betting you would run them faster.
This isn't a critique but why not just go to your track and run an all out 800? Lol. You will have your best indicator time right there. And your answer in 2 minutes.
Or why don't we advocate say a 90% effort 800m and just take off a few seconds? Seems so much simpler and I'd imagine more of a consensus around it. Hell you can have an answer on your 800m fitness before getting to the end of this thread haha
sprinters rule wrote:
Doesn't work for a sprinter. They could knock those out in 35 and not be able to complete an 800 in 2:05.
It doesn't work for a sprinter because a sprinter doesn't race an 800.
Obviously the gist of this workout is for an 800 runner to judge where he/she is for 800 readiness outside of a race.
Fast 300s with full rest are painful.
Even with 20 min rest you still have some junk in your legs after one.
After the second one you've built up more.
Anyone that could run the third as fast as the first was holding back that first one. So completing the 900 m in 800 m race pace isn't easy.
My 800 best was 1:49.7
Averaging 36.5 for 3 300s even with a long rest would be tough, but maybe doable.
And when I was in 2:00 shape, 40.0 average would seem about right.
Interesting workout correlation.
Bin Der Dun Dat wrote:
J.R. wrote:
The paces are too different to provide a consistent prediction.
The pace for these should be pretty close to your 400m pace. So your 400m pace is too different from your 800m pace to provide a consistent prediction?
(Actually, 3 x 300m, full rest is more of a 400m workout than an 800m workout.)
You misread it. His hypothesis is the sum of 3 300's is your 800 time, not the pace. So if you average 40s (53 second 400m pace) the sum is 2:00 which would predict 2:00 800m fitness.
I didn't look at the date, sorry for responding to a 9 year old post. I hate it when people do that.