Equivalence of 800 & 1500 times ?

quick try for 1500 & 5k, based on 800 times

3'26.00

with say 1'43.0 - 1'45.0

1'43.0 ->12'48.86

1'45.0 ->12'24.92

mean = 12'36.89

3'27.00

with say 1'43.5 - 1'45.5

1'43.5 ->12'52.60

1'45.5 ->12'28.66

mean = 12'40.63

3'28.00

with say 1'44.0 - 1'46.0

1'44.0 ->12'56.33

1'46.0 ->12'32.39

mean = 12'44.36

3'29.00

with say 1'44.5 - 1'46.5

1'44.5 ->13'00.06

1'46.5 ->12'36.12

mean = 12'48.09

3'30.00

with say 1'45.0 - 1'47.0

1'45.0 ->13'03.79

1'47.0 ->12'39.85

mean = 12'51.82

again, these are fairly reasonable

interesting to note that 1500 & 5k wrs seem pretty = presently

So you are basically saying is Rudisha can run 3:26.39 with his 45.5 and 1:41.01!

I'm thinking he'd be closer to 3:32.0. I've normally found that 2/3's of your 400 pb plus 1/3 of your 1500 pb normally gives you your 800 pb.

Coe 46.87 plus 3:29.77 (31.25 + 69.93 = 1:41.18). Given that he ran his 1500 pb a number of years after his 400, maybe using his converted mile pb (3:47.33) would be closer to his 1:41.7

Might seem a little simple, but it's normally pretty close.

I think that there is a systematic aspect of your projections to think about. Specifically, some people have non-standard performance curves -- some that are steeper on both sides and some that are shallower. Take a case where distances 1, 2 and 3 (shortest to longest) are used with 1 and 2, say being used to project 3. Your method will tend to give too fast a time at 3. For the case with a 'shallow' curve, the opposite occurs.

Shallow guys probably include Geb (3:31i/7:22(3?)/ 12:39 in a real race/26:20ish/2:03 although not achieved at the same point in time. Morcelli, I think, Jenny B (S) in college doing 3:59, great steeple, 5000, and then later a 1:59 (should could have had the CL for all the running events that did not start in blocks!), and Rono.

Wilson might be a steep guy but he did not race outside his event much, so in part the training and race peaking can account for a steep profile.

Respectfully, as a former 400/800 that moved up to 8/1500 I think your 800-1500 doesn't take quite enough into account how speed based the 800m can be, where 1500 seems significantly more aerobic...

Using Rudisha as a test subject since we know his 4/8 capacity 3:26 seems extremely fast for him, maybe 3:29-3:30? Question, where does Hicham fit into all of this? Put him maybe around 1:43.0 800m(don't care about his PR, maybe faster?) at WR 1500, so ~47.5 for 400m is probably about right, but what would be the ramifications on his 5k? With the formula you're using wouldn't it make it far too fast?

Keep up the great work, your formulas are a great benefit to anyone that cares about elite level running.

I don't think Ventolin was trying to say how fast Rudisha could run. I think he was just saying that 3:26.38 is an equivalent performance to 141. Meaning 1:41 is just as good in the 800 as 3:26:38 is in the 1500, with no indication of how fast Rudisha would run.

Wait... wrote:I don't think Ventolin was trying to say how fast Rudisha could run. I think he was just saying that 3:26.38 is an equivalent performance to 141. Meaning 1:41 is just as good in the 800 as 3:26:38 is in the 1500, with no indication of how fast Rudisha would run.

Thank You

JRinaldi wrote:

So you are basically saying is Rudisha can run 3:26.39 with his 45.5 and 1:41.01!

I'm thinking he'd be closer to 3:32.0. I've normally found that 2/3's of your 400 pb plus 1/3 of your 1500 pb normally gives you your 800 pb.

Coe 46.87 plus 3:29.77 (31.25 + 69.93 = 1:41.18). Given that he ran his 1500 pb a number of years after his 400, maybe using his converted mile pb (3:47.33) would be closer to his 1:41.7

Might seem a little simple, but it's normally pretty close.

But Coe's 400pb was from 79. He was much quicker in 81, with a 45.6 relay leg from stumbling start. I also think his 3:31.9 solo run was worth more like 3:28.3 with even pace.

If we take 46.0 & 3:28.5 as his potential in 81 that gives 30.66r + 69.5 = 1:40.16.

Your system is close, but I don't think even Coe was quite in that sort of shape. With a few paced efforts later in season more like 1:41.0.

Red Arrow wrote:With a few paced efforts later in season more like 1:41.0.

no chance

you seem to have some fantastistical over-belief in nebulous crap

at that level

you fight tooth'n'nail for every measly 0.1s off

you don't give them them a tenth unless you have some rock-hard physics arguments like :

1) like, lack of drafting between 150 - 400m & aerodynamics to take significant number of tenths off; region of 0.625 -> off berlin time, which looked peak run ->

1'40.46

maybe a tenth or 2 more off this for non-ideal splits for 200/400...

2) or uneven pace of 48.3

that, with physics of energy use -> 48.3/52.9 with ridiculous 4.6 splits, with control of "accepted" 2.0 splits shoud be

1'40.8

with some 0.1 or more+ for lack of "direct ahead 2m drafting to bell"

-><< 1'40.8

your premise in firenze only offer at best :

1'41.3/1'41.4

Don't forget whether the track is surrounded by trees

Ventolin said: you seem to have some fantastistical over-belief in nebulous crap.

Ironic.

02 rich wrote:Don't forget whether the track is surrounded by trees

anyone figuring on taking a phd from level 2 or 3 college in "physiology" may consider asking/begging for some funding to go to rieti with an O2 meter & take some readings at every 100m point on the track & if mean is >>21.0% volume,

then, they gotta a "proof" for biggest mystery in athletics & a phd thrown in, & ivy league associate professor...

ventolin^3 wrote:

Red Arrow wrote:With a few paced efforts later in season more like 1:41.0.

no chance

you seem to have some fantastistical over-belief in nebulous crap

your premise in firenze only offer at best :

1'41.3/1'41.4

Rubbish! He ran at least 1.5m extra running wide on the curve after the bell. That's worth 0.2, so his run was easily worth a 1:41.5 that day, the first week in June.

It wasn't a world record attempt. His father/coach didn't go with him and they were anticipating a 1:43. If he was in WR shape his father would have gone to Florence with him.

Neither Kip nor Rudisha have ever run that fast in June.They were always faster by Aug, Sept, with repeated "fast, paced runs" over the distance. They get better throughout the season and both needed several attempts before they got the WR.

Coe left the 800 alone until easily winning big races in Aug/Sept at the European & World Cups. He would undoubtedly have been in better shape 2 or 3 months after his Florence run, or his he the only athlete ever to reach a peak in June and deteriorate throughout season with no injury issues? Even in the Mile, his 2nd WR was a much better performance than his 1st, and that was only 9 days later. Why? Because he knew what it felt like to run a t that speed and could build on that for the 2nd run.

Try this:

Add 4 seconds per lap from 800 --> 1500

from 1500 --> 3000

add 2 seconds per lap from 3000 --> 5000

from 5000 --> 10000

1:41.8 --> 3:25.5 --> 7:21 --> 12:40 --> 26:10

5k to 10k seems a bit hard, but then there are no good rabbits lasting long enough.

You know who is the best runner according to IAAF tables? Zersenay Tadese!

Ventolin, I am a 1:56.79 800M runner, with 50.5 400M speed. Wonder if you would be so kind to provide me with 1500M and 5000M equivalents? Just for fun to understand potential...

drivel

if he'd run whole of curve in 2nd lap, that wouda given him 3.8m extra

he did a slight swerve around billy at start of curve

it's nonsense to believe that was 40% of distance run entirely in lane 2

try less than 1m at most & that is less than 0.1s extra

so ?

kip ran a solo 1'42.67 in March !!!

anyone with a brain realises that was worth a low-1'41 outdoors & close, if not as good as his outdoor wrs later in year

what the hell does his dad have anything to do with him running on the track ??

does brother colm go to every wr attempt that his charge ,rudisha, runs ???

what exactly was his dad going to do for coe whilst he is running his race ??

nonsense

look at kip above

i also keep telling you that kaki ran 1'42.2pb 6/7 earlier in june than coe & told you then he won't beat that again in the season

in fact he has never beaten it

your peabrain has some deficit in being unable to understand a "season peak" run when you see it

anyone with half a brain at least who saw coe's run woud have no hesitation in saying that was going to be fastest 800 of his year - season, even career peak run

nonsense

wohlhuter ran 800wr of 1'43.5 2/7 before coe june date

snell ran 1'44.3wr in february !!!

ryun ran 1'44.3wr on same day in june as coe

you are dreaming

you cannot grasp concept of "peak run"

look at those examples above & don't spout this crap here

no

it was because 3'48.5 was a sub-standard time, worth only ~ mid-3'31 with 1.08 conversion

he was worth easily 3'30 shape that year & a time of at worst 3'47 expected

Boer wrote:I am a 1:56.79 800M runner, with 50.5 400M speed. Wonder if you would be so kind to provide me with 1500M and 5000M equivalents? Just for fun to understand potential...

providing both 400 & 800 in same shape/"perfect" races, etc, & if endurance is "perfect" above 800 :

50.5 / 1'56.79 ->4'05.9 , 9'10.9 , 16'30.9

'50.5 / 1'56.79 -> 4'05.9 , 9'10.9 , 16'30.9'

1:56 is much better than 16.30.Are you assuming that he has slowed so much from 400m to 800m that this will continue to longer distances?

Boer off 50.50 you should be running 1:51/2

16'30 is theoretical best time - maybe lucky to break 17 if his endurance is degrading quickly with increased distance

if you "tighten up" that 1'56 with still 50.5

1'56.0 ->4'03.1 , 9'02.3 , 16'12.9

1'55.0 ->3'59.5 , 8'51.4 , 15'50.1

1'54.0 ->3'55.9 , 8'40.5 , 15'27.4

1'53.0 ->3'52.3 , 8'29.6 , 15'04.5

1'52.0 ->3'48.7 , 8'18.7 , 14'41.8

1'51.0 ->3'45.2 , 8'07.8 , 14'19.0

1'50.0 ->3'41.6 , 7'56.9 , 13'56.3