Serious training question. What do people think is the requisite 400m time for a HS girl who wants to run 2:18 for the 800m. Assume good training base and good development over a few years of HS training/racing.
Serious training question. What do people think is the requisite 400m time for a HS girl who wants to run 2:18 for the 800m. Assume good training base and good development over a few years of HS training/racing.
65
6x 400m in 68 seconds with 2 minute rests.
is that a training option for a kid who wants to run 2:18 for the 800. Interesting. Here is the deal. I am a HS coach. I have a Senior girl who wants to run the 800m in outdoor in 2:18 - a lofty goal for her since her PR last year is 2:25. She quit soccer and ran xc this fall. Then she had a nice indoor season and ran 10:59 for the 3000 and 5:04 for the 1500. her speed is not good and I think 2:18 is not a realistic goal. I don't think she has run better than 68 sec in the 400m. I think she has more potential in the 1500/3000 due to limited power/speed.
You are dumb if you don't think a girl can improve from 2:25 to 2:18 in a year. Especially if she stopped doing soccer to do cross country. And yes, she may be better at the longer stuff, but that doesn't mean she can't run 2:18.
a little harsh with the dumb comment. just looking for opinions/suggestions.
ian edwards wrote:
You are dumb if you don't think a girl can improve from 2:25 to 2:18 in a year.
Way to be an A-Hole Ian! Sure the guy might be misinformed...But its amazing to me that the information we always hear on this site is "Listen to your coach." So here is a coach who is thinking his athlete might be a bit aggressive with her goal setting and you come on here IAN and act like a jerk. It really is no wonder there isn't much support for this sport because the fans just eat their young and are not supportive at all. A-HOLE!!!
Her speed/800 is actually pretty much on par with her 1500/3000 times. She will need to run about 4:52 and 10:35 before she can start thinking about running around 2:18 which sounds doable.
Thanks "running in the rain". I also think 10:30/4:50 are doable goals for the spring season. So anyone think the training for the 10:30 and 4:50 is a little different from what is needed for 2:18? Remember I have only 12 weeks. She just ran 10:59 and 5:04 indoors.
You shouldn't be guessing as to what her 400 time is, you should know. The fact that you don't probably means you have a distance bias, which also shows in that you would rather have her run the 4:50/10:30 than the 2:18. Not a big criticism, just the way some coaches are. While there are always exceptions, a 2:18 runner can almost always run a 64 or better for the 400. Most of my sub 2:20s run between 59-62. Watch almost any girl run a 2:18 and her split will be 66-67 so you need a little cushion there. Since it seems like you're a distance guy anyway and aren't comfortable training an 800 runner, might as well run her in the 15/3 where you are confident training her. Keep in mind though, speed will eventually be a limiting factor. She most likely won't be running any better than 4:50 if you can't get her under 2:20.
Even the score wrote:
ian edwards wrote:You are dumb if you don't think a girl can improve from 2:25 to 2:18 in a year.
Way to be an A-Hole Ian! Sure the guy might be misinformed...But its amazing to me that the information we always hear on this site is "Listen to your coach." So here is a coach who is thinking his athlete might be a bit aggressive with her goal setting and you come on here IAN and act like a jerk. It really is no wonder there isn't much support for this sport because the fans just eat their young and are not supportive at all. A-HOLE!!!
I don't like when people set limits on someones ability. Especially a goal that is not unreasonable at all.
I also don't like coaches.
Sorry. I was upset when I posted that.
I would gander that you HAVE to be able to run 65.x as a pure endurance runner, but very few youngsters have the combination of aerobic background anaerobic capacity to do that. If you're looking for an equivalent performance, I would say right around 59-60 out of blocks.
60
60/2:18/4:59
mileage capped at 30-35/week.
I ran 61 - 2:09 - 4:31 (guy) in the individual events.
You don't like anything, do you?
ian edwards wrote:
Even the score wrote:Way to be an A-Hole Ian! Sure the guy might be misinformed...But its amazing to me that the information we always hear on this site is "Listen to your coach." So here is a coach who is thinking his athlete might be a bit aggressive with her goal setting and you come on here IAN and act like a jerk. It really is no wonder there isn't much support for this sport because the fans just eat their young and are not supportive at all. A-HOLE!!!
I don't like when people set limits on someones ability. Especially a goal that is not unreasonable at all.
I also don't like coaches.
Sorry. I was upset when I posted that.
63 point = 2:18 for me as an old man with 35+ years of mileage on his leg.
For a low mileage high school girl, probably need to be 60-61 minimum.
with 2:25 800 speed and now more stamina since she ran xc, she should be better than 10:59 and 5:04. If she can run a 63 quarter she should beable to go through the 400 in her 800 in 67 or 68 and come back in 70 or 71 depending on her stamina.
[quote]bruinboy wrote:
You don't like anything, do you?[quote]
Just LSD and track workouts.
ian edwards wrote:
Just LSD and track workouts.
Are you the same guy from r2w who wants a 4 minute mile? If so, as a first suggestion, lay off the LSD.
xcplayer wrote:
ian edwards wrote:Just LSD and track workouts.
Are you the same guy from r2w who wants a 4 minute mile? If so, as a first suggestion, lay off the LSD.
Tell that to Peter Snell.