What is the minimum 400 speed required for 4:15/sub 9?

4:15 / 4 laps and 9 / 8 laps.

srsly, do they not teach math in school anymore?

62 seconds

I don't think those times are equal. Fewer guys run 9:00 in high school.

That said, to run near those times I think you'd need to be able to run 58ish for 400 or better. I'd guess 90% of sub 9 guys can run 54-55 for 400m.

I'm pulling these numbers out of my @ss obviously. Just guesses.

absolute slowest would have to be 54 high. If you're looking to run 4:15, you better be able to break 1:58, or 58 seconds 400s. An equivalent to 4:15 is around 1:55-1:56. So 58 should be you're 800 pace.

Not a chance. Yes MOST runners who run probably that fast over 400m. But surely there are sub 9 runners who could not run 54 high. I think the consensus from many threads on here was that roughly 52-53 is the minimum speed required to run a 4:00 mile. 4:15/9:00 are both worlds away from 4:00 for a mile.

I've gone 4:02 and 7:59(3000m), fastest ever 400m=57sec. Just get strong as hell!

I ran a 4:28 in high school, and ran a 51 as a split in the 4x400. I was speedier than most who ran a similar mile time though. I think for someone to run a 4:15, the absolute slowest you should be able to run a 400 is 54 seconds (which would be damn slow for a 4:15 guy). Of course, I do know someone who has run 3:50 for 1500, and says he has never run a 400 faster than 59 seconds.

Let me just add that the person who ran 3:50 for 1500, and only ran 59...and also this person in the previous post who ran 4:02, but only had a PR of 57 - I can almost guarantee that they never ran or extremely rarely ran 4x400's. If they did, of course they would be way faster. Without actually getting to race a 4x400, of course their PR has to come from a repeat in practice, or from a split from a longer race, which is an inaccurate data point. I think that the minimum speed for a 4:15 guy has to be around 54...and that's a very slow 4:15 guy. I've seen a guy who has no speed whatsoever with PR's of 4:25 / 9:30 for the 16/32, and still he was able to run 56.

Of course training for the 400 would result in a faster 400, and a slower mile and 2 mile.

The point is, what is the minimum 400 speed to run 4:15/sub 9, i.e. you're training for the mile/2mile, not the 400.

rtows wrote:

I've gone 4:02 and 7:59(3000m), fastest ever 400m=57sec. Just get strong as hell!

is 57 your pr or the fastest you could go? theres a big difference

54 for a 4:15 guy is average. Certainly not "very slow." what do you think is an average 400 for a world class 10k runner? Guys who can run say, 64.5's for 10k?

I think 56/4:25/9:30 is actually probably a pretty normal combination of times. Certainly doesn't indicate "no speed whatsoever."

rtows wrote:

I've gone 4:02 and 7:59(3000m), fastest ever 400m=57sec. Just get strong as hell!

No way is that what you could have run for 400m

You would be operating at close to max possible up to 800m

Your 400m best is irrelevant imo. It varies. Asbel Kiprop ran 48.9 for a 400m in Iten I believe, but I'm sure there are plenty 3:30 guys who would struggle to break 50.

J.R. wrote:

62 seconds

J.R. is brain dead. Excuse him.

aeql39dk3a wrote:

54 for a 4:15 guy is average. Certainly not "very slow." what do you think is an average 400 for a world class 10k runner? Guys who can run say, 64.5's for 10k?

I think 56/4:25/9:30 is actually probably a pretty normal combination of times. Certainly doesn't indicate "no speed whatsoever."

C'mon, 54 for a 4:15 guy is not "average." I ran 800/1600 in HS with a 1600 best of 4:23. In 800s I always felt short on speed, out of my comfort zone if it went out quick, and still I split a 51.9 in the 4x4. Your "average" 4:15 guy can go 51, and I'd agree that the answer the OP was looking for is 54ish--though of course this is not the true "minimum."

Lots of posters have a warped take on these prompts--"Just get strong AS HELL"--but the OP is likely in HS and asking "Am I fast enough to run these times?--if not, how fast do I have to get?"

~54"

It's different for everyone.

I ran a 4:21 1600m and 9:19 3200m in high school. 400m PR was 53ish.

4:15 is 63.75 for 400m. You should at least be able to do that.

joecrunner wrote:

Your 400m best is irrelevant imo. It varies. Asbel Kiprop ran 48.9 for a 400m in Iten I believe, but I'm sure there are plenty 3:30 guys who would struggle to break 50.

Nope, there is no way. Of course this may seem possible because a 3:30 is more common in the EPO age than it was in the Coe/Cram/Aouita era. Because in that era just about ONLY THEY COULD do it.

But now that many more drug-fueled men can do it, it looks like they may only be able to run what you said because they don't publicize what they really can run for 400m.

I have already responded to this on another thread a long time ago, but there are DOZENS of guys from 3:29-3:31.5 who have 800m PRs from 1:41-1:45. There is no practical way that you could run 3:30 (56.0 per lap) and NOT run under 1:45.0 (52.5 per lap). I don't see how you could not agree with this.

If you can run 52.5 per lap for 800 you are really closer to 48.5 for 400m than struggling to break 50. But if you want to keep believing this ... be my guest.

Look at the all-time list for 1500 and round up all the guys right around 3:30 and then cross-reference them with the 800m all-time list. They won't all be there, but if you look down far enough THEY WILL and most of them will be under 1:44.

what in the wrote:

I am brain dead. Excuse me.

You're excused.