How good do you have to be in high school to break 4 in your life?

crete wrote:

Brooks Launch wrote:

Good luck with that. I think it would be an awesome set of data to look at - lifetime sub 4 PR and corresponding U19 PR for the few thousand or so people who've done it.

I guess it will probably average out to somewhere between 4:10 and 4:20 for older generations and between 4:05 and 4:10 for newer generations (with HS coaches getting better recently).

Here's one data point for you:

3:59

4:17 (1600)

Minimum 400 speed is probably :54 or so. Not sure how you'd measure aerobic capacity.

54?? are you crazy? that's about what you need to break 2 in the 800. try like 50 ...

54 would be a stretch yes. I would expect a runner might have an outside shot at 4:00 if with that speed if he was like a sub 13 5k guy.

Disagree about the 800 though, a well trained aerobic guy can easily drop 2:00 off of 56, and strong aerobic guys can do it with 57 low speed.

Marcus O'Sullivan was not close 4 in high school, and he managed sub 4 over 100 times.

oh please wrote:

This cannot be accurate.

What we do know is that Ritz has run 12:56 for 5k. This is basically 62s flat per lap, 12.5 times.

So you suggest that in peak mile form he could only manage 59s per lap 4 times?

I'll buy the idea that Ritz is more "strength" opposed to "speed", however properly trained as a professional and no doubt Ritz is closer to 3:50 than he is to 4:00.

u think ritz is closer to 350 than 4? thats foolish.

Asdfghjkkl wrote:

A lot of potential sub-4 milers are running the 400m or playing soccer instead, so that's not even how it works.

i highly doubt this as well. lots of 400 guys?? do u understand genetics? fast twitch and slow twitch. i think there are hardly any 400 runners that could possibly break 4. soccer players ? yes. 400 guys. zero.

Tom von Ruden, late 60s-early 70s miler. I think he broke 4:00, he ran only 4:35 in high school.

rojo wrote:

i highly doubt this as well. lots of 400 guys?? do u understand genetics? fast twitch and slow twitch. i think there are hardly any 400 runners that could possibly break 4. soccer players ? yes. 400 guys. zero.

It's quite clear that YOU don't understand how genetics and muscle fiber types work. You would think that someone in charge of one of the biggest running news websites in the world would actually know the basics of running physiology.

Sigg wrote:

I think about 10 billion is the correct number.

How did you work that out? There are 7 billion on the planet today.

4:42 / 1600m. See Matt Elliot.

rojo wrote:

oh please wrote:

This cannot be accurate.

What we do know is that Ritz has run 12:56 for 5k. This is basically 62s flat per lap, 12.5 times.

So you suggest that in peak mile form he could only manage 59s per lap 4 times?

I'll buy the idea that Ritz is more "strength" opposed to "speed", however properly trained as a professional and no doubt Ritz is closer to 3:50 than he is to 4:00.

u think ritz is closer to 350 than 4? thats foolish.

Asdfghjkkl wrote:

A lot of potential sub-4 milers are running the 400m or playing soccer instead, so that's not even how it works.

i highly doubt this as well. lots of 400 guys?? do u understand genetics? fast twitch and slow twitch. i think there are hardly any 400 runners that could possibly break 4. soccer players ? yes. 400 guys. zero.

I sorta get what you are saying Rojo, but I'd think its far from unheard of that good sub 4 talent could find it's way into sprints. Lots of times these kids can run low 50s or high 40s pretty quick, which for a less than knowledgeable coach might just mean "train this guy as a sprinter cause clearly he is fast"

the anti-rojo wrote:

rojo wrote:

i highly doubt this as well. lots of 400 guys?? do u understand genetics? fast twitch and slow twitch. i think there are hardly any 400 runners that could possibly break 4. soccer players ? yes. 400 guys. zero.

It's quite clear that YOU don't understand how genetics and muscle fiber types work. You would think that someone in charge of one of the biggest running news websites in the world would actually know the basics of running physiology.

Haha. So you dog Rojo's comment, but bring no information to the table to prove your superior understanding of genetics and muscle fiber types. I'm not saying I'm a master, but the only thing I see wrong with what Rojo said is that muscle fiber types are classified as Type I, Type IIa, Type IIc, Type IIx as opposed to referring to them as 'Fast and Slow twitch". That's not even that big of a deal and is more of an advancement in lexicon. They still all refer to the same thing. Referring to runners as "400 guys" assumes that their best event is the 400. In that case, they wouldn't have the right percentage of Type I vs. Type II fibers to run sub 4 minutes in the mile.

LM wrote:

crete wrote:

54?? are you crazy? that's about what you need to break 2 in the 800. try like 50 ...

54 would be a stretch yes. I would expect a runner might have an outside shot at 4:00 if with that speed if he was like a sub 13 5k guy.

Disagree about the 800 though, a well trained aerobic guy can easily drop 2:00 off of 56, and strong aerobic guys can do it with 57 low speed.

Did I go to sleep and wake up on planet Crazy?

You cannot possibly be suggesting someone with only 57s 400 speeed can break 2:00 in the 800? I'm sorry, but there is no way.

Back to the mile ... I highly doubt any sub-4 miler could only run a 54 400. You need speed to run a sub-4 mile and 54 is not fast enough.

Here's my formula:Using yards (I'm old):(440 yards + 5 seconds) times 2 = 880 yards(440 yards + 10 seconds) times 4 = mileYou need to have about 50 400 speed to break 4:00. And guys who can only run 56 most likely will not break 2:00 for the 800.

LM wrote:

crete wrote:

54?? are you crazy? that's about what you need to break 2 in the 800. try like 50 ...

54 would be a stretch yes. I would expect a runner might have an outside shot at 4:00 if with that speed if he was like a sub 13 5k guy.

Disagree about the 800 though, a well trained aerobic guy can easily drop 2:00 off of 56, and strong aerobic guys can do it with 57 low speed.

crete wrote:

Brooks Launch wrote:

Good luck with that. I think it would be an awesome set of data to look at - lifetime sub 4 PR and corresponding U19 PR for the few thousand or so people who've done it.

I guess it will probably average out to somewhere between 4:10 and 4:20 for older generations and between 4:05 and 4:10 for newer generations (with HS coaches getting better recently).

Here's one data point for you:

3:59

4:17 (1600)

Minimum 400 speed is probably :54 or so. Not sure how you'd measure aerobic capacity.

54?? are you crazy? that's about what you need to break 2 in the 800. try like 50 ...

Hell no!!

I ran 3:44 for 1500 off a best 400m split of 54. Ran 1:52 also. I approached it more from the endurance side and turned out a 5000m runner in the end but 50secs is 100% NOT a prerequisite. I suspect I had a bit more in me over 400 but I'd never have got anywhere near 50secs. Maybe sub 53.

PS, I ran 1:52 for 800 also. I wish I'd had more raw speed but it shows what is possible with effective training.

PPS, my HS PR for 1500 was just inside 4:20 I think. My "freshman" year (I'm a brit so the academic yr I turned 19) I ran 4:01 for 1500 and 2:01 for 800. You can be shit at high school and improve rapdily so don't put a limit on it. I ran my best 1500 at 23 years of age and I think I could have done sub 4 the following season but I missed it completely due to injury. Once I returned to track, at 25, I ran 5000 and that was that.

i suggest you actually had better 400 speed than you think you did.

I suggested as much! 50secs was never going to happen though on the basis that I could only just about manage that pace for 200m.

The point though was that theres no magic number (other than being able to run 60secs for a quarter is an absolute pre-requesite...) and if there is, it isn't as fast as 50.

simoni wrote:

I suggested as much! 50secs was never going to happen though on the basis that I could only just about manage that pace for 200m.

The point though was that theres no magic number (other than being able to run 60secs for a quarter is an absolute pre-requesite...) and if there is, it isn't as fast as 50.

point taken. but i still think nobody has broken 4 on 54-56s 400 speed. i could see 52.x but no slower. it would be a sign of an unconventional athlete with unconventional miler training.

There is no set time standard in high school. Matt Elliot ran 4:42 in high school and has a best of 3:54.7

Ritz is the textbook definition of a runner blessed with incredible endurance, pristine Speed Endurance, but absolutely no basic speed.

I would believe that during his peak track shape (12:56 5k/27:22 WCh 10k, or 8:11 2-mile), he was good for about 53 for 400m, and maybe 3:58 or so in the mile. Although this sounds crazy, do remember that he's taken multiple attempts at the 4:00 barrier; his best being a 3:59-high equivalent 1500m.

In professional T&F, there's a HUGE difference between running 59's compared to consistently run 62's (5k pace appx). I'd go so far as to say it's the same as an elite 800m going out in 48.8-49.0 as compared to 50.0 + . Another thing to remember is that professional mile races almost NEVER go out consistently for every lap (of course, Lagat's 2k this weekend was just about perfect...). A fast first lap is usually followed by two slightly slower laps, and then a push on the final.

So theoretically, lets say Ritz jumps into a mile race after his 12:56, burning on all cylinders. Lets say he's good for 53; maybe we can even give him 52. The field goes through the 400m in 57.xx appx. for 90% of the field, it's fast but not insane. However, for Ritz, it's only 4 seconds off of his 400m PR. One may say "Well Ritz would hang back, be patient & pick people off. Run 59 or 60 for that first lap and build his way back". Unlike his 5k's or 10k's that he's done & successfully implemented this strategy, it wouldn't work in a fast Mile. He'd lose contact with the group, and be forced to try to run his PR in no-man's land with nobody to push him.

I remember reading an article a couple years back which said that the minimum 800m time required to break 4:00 in the mile, with absolutely optimal conditions (weather, pacing, etc) and basically perfect training/endurance, was 1:52. Most runners really require 1:49 or so, but I believe Ritz fits perfectly into the 1:52 mold. Isn't his PR 1:54? (From High School, I know... but when else did he run as many short-distance races... i also admit he could of gone faster as a pro)

rojo wrote:

i highly doubt this as well. lots of 400 guys?? do u understand genetics? fast twitch and slow twitch. i think there are hardly any 400 runners that could possibly break 4. soccer players ? yes. 400 guys. zero.

I've always thought that if Alan Webb had gone to my high school, the coach would have turned him into a 48-49 second 400 guy instead of a 3:53 miler. Some HS coaches don't know when to move a guy up in distance.

didn't webb have 47s speed reportedly?