other race distance times required for 4:00 mile

I would say somewhere along the lines of 1:47 and 7:55.

Anything above that isn't relevant.

probably sub 150, sub 8, sub 14 and mid to low 24s during xc

52, 1:52, 8:30, 15:30, 26 min

Minimal times for each distance, doesn't work for minimal times at every distance.

If you are slow on one end, you need to compensate by being faster at the other end.

Ex - 52 400 requires sub 13:50 5000.

15:30 5000 requires sub 49 400.

Under 60 for the 400 and probably under 2:00 for 800

* wrote:

52, 1:52, 8:30, 15:30, 26 min

Minimal times for each distance, doesn't work for minimal times at every distance.

If you are slow on one end, you need to compensate by being faster at the other end.

Ex - 52 400 requires sub 13:50 5000.

15:30 5000 requires sub 49 400.

How did you calculate those times?

I didn't calculate the times I just followed the sport enough to feel that those times seem reasonable.

Plus I have been close to 4:00 myself and have a base reference point.

I was more on the speed side.

The question is - does anyone know of someone that was slower than all of those times and still ran 4 flat?

And does anyone think a faster base speed is needed or that anyone running 4 flat would easily beat 15:30?

I was going to say 15 flat but thought some speed based milers just can't mentally stay with a 5000.

* wrote:

I didn't calculate the times I just followed the sport enough to feel that those times seem reasonable.

Plus I have been close to 4:00 myself and have a base reference point.

I was more on the speed side.

The question is - does anyone know of someone that was slower than all of those times and still ran 4 flat?

And does anyone think a faster base speed is needed or that anyone running 4 flat would easily beat 15:30?

I was going to say 15 flat but thought some speed based milers just can't mentally stay with a 5000.

Mentally is irrelevant. I assume the OP was talking about physiological limits. What's your 5k estimate for a 49 guy considering physiology not mentality?

No, you can be a 1:54 guy and break 4:00 (I'd put that at the minimum). You can also be a 1:47 guy and not break 4:00.

Hardloper wrote:

No, you can be a 1:54 guy and break 4:00 (I'd put that at the minimum). You can also be a 1:47 guy and not break 4:00.

That 1:54 guy would be able to run a 25:00 10k.

jsjsk wrote:

[quote]Hardloper wrote:

No, you can be a 1:54 guy and break 4:00 (I'd put that at the minimum). You can also be a 1:47 guy and not break 4:00.

--------

That 1:54 guy would be able to run a 25:00 10k.

Doubtful. I would guestimate mid-27's. 1:54 / 4:00 are the times I'd expect from a slightly faster but similar to Wejo or maybe Rupp 5-6 years ago.

The problem is these people never race the 800 so no one realizes just how bad they are at it.

FWIW, ol' Ventolin's calculator gives 1:54 / 4:00 / 13:19 / 27:44 as a line of fit. I tend to think his 10K estimates are too slow but yeah, it's a reasonable fit.

Hardloper wrote:

FWIW, ol' Ventolin's calculator gives 1:54 / 4:00 / 13:19 / 27:44 as a line of fit. I tend to think his 10K estimates are too slow but yeah, it's a reasonable fit.

There is no way that's true. To run 4:00 with 1:54 ability gives you better endurance than Bekele.

3:58 for 1600 is a good start

you can't run a 4 mile off a 1-54 800 ability..

"you can't run a 4 mile off a 1-54 800 ability.."

What's Ritz's 800 PR? He never ran sub-4, but his 1500 PR is close to equivalent.

I tend to agree, though. Ritz, if he is in fact a 1:54 sub 4 guy, is the extreme case. I think you probably need to be 1:51-1:52 at the minimal side. And as another poster said, this is a sliding scale. That 1:51 guy can probably also break 14:00 (or at least 14:30) in the 5k, while there might be 1:47 guys who can't break 15:00 (or even 15:30), but can break 4:00.

In general, I'd say you need to be able to run 47-52 in the 400. 1:47 to 1:52 in the 800. Any thing above will have much larger ranges: 8:12 (ritz again) to 9:15 for the 2 mile, and all the way up to 15:30 for 5k. Your typical mile who also runs cross at least as a 4-7 guy on most teams is low 14's or under.

Hardloper wrote:

FWIW, ol' Ventolin's calculator gives 1:54 / 4:00 / 13:19 / 27:44 as a line of fit. I tend to think his 10K estimates are too slow but yeah, it's a reasonable fit.

Ritz at the end of college would not be too much better than 1:54/4:00/13:19/27:44

There was a guy a while back claiming he had no faster than 54 400 speed and broke 4 for the mile. There was definitely some skepticism but he did seem to prove himself in the thread.

I think that the avg for a 4:00 miler would be 49-50 400m speed, 1:48-50 800m speed and around 8:00-10 for 3000m. That was my assumption for equal endurance and speed. obviously the faster your speed the less endurance you need, and the better your endurance the less speed you need.

Leo Manzano ran I believe only 14:54 in the 5k at Carlsbad and he's 1:45ish 800m and low 3:30s in the 1500. That scale means nothing really