Just realized Wheating's 3:30 was at Monaco... no wonder it was a fluke.

Monaco ain't legit wrote:Or perhaps something is wrong with the Monaco track and 3:29 is really 3:31-32... we've come full circle!

then please explain lashawn's post-'00 track record there of 44.30 in '14 when he ran 43.9+ in both eugene & lausanne same year ???

why coudn't lashawn run 43.50 there last year ???

i'd settle for a "paltry" 43.9+ to match his eugene/lausanne times but he clocked 44.30 ???

There is no 50m mark or line in the home straight. He hits the 100m mark at 3:18.7 and the 90m mark at 3:19.9. The only other line on the track is at 3:28.2.

His last 400 was 54.3, 300 39.6, 200 25.8.

He was at the front at the 100m mark and then pulled further away from Kiplagat as the straight progressed. He didn't just burst ahead considerably half way down straight. It was a kick at 100 which gradually pulled him away.

Correction. It was Birgen he pulled away from in straight not Kiplagat

eh ???

the poster who i quoted was rojo, founder of site !!!

he said

"I had a long talk with Willis...

you doubt founder's veracity ???

it depends partly on how useless they are out of the blocks

also, as Nick has no listed 400pb, i assume he, like cram's alleged 48.0tt ran it nowhere near peak 1500 shape & at end of day after a brutal training session earlier in day & no proper 4 or 5 days rest for it

see above

eh ?

where ??

i only have talked about Nick on this thread

see above about : no listed 400 / likely run at end of brutal training session

then you were negligent in not doing any research

poor...

no

but rojo said he told him he had

no

they coud be if poor out of blocks & their 400 was last run of a brutal training session

why can't you learn to read or think ???

read rojo's quote :

that means he split 47+ on more than 1 occasion & probably more than 2

therefore, logically, his 47+ splits have lot more solidity than a 50+pb where no mention is made of "regular" open 400s in training

poor

you did no research to look into this "50+" question & when presented with info from highest possible source here, rojo, the founder, you decry it !!!

no

he told rojo he regularly split 47+

therefore, that is number to use to gauge his open 400

Piked wrote:

118 118 wrote:

Laughable, as expressed by other posters on the link given...

You are just being stupid on purpose. Ventolin provided an actual reference for that 47 split from Willis.

Thank You

It was also 47+ regularly !

I always strive to be objective as possible.

If subject is not amenable to objectivity due to lack of hard facts, I try to be as subjective as possible with least bias, to best of my ability, as I would expect of anyone here.

118 118 wrote:There is no 50m mark or line in the home straight. He hits the 100m mark at 3:18.7 and the 90m mark at 3:19.9. The only other line on the track is at 3:28.2.

His last 400 was 54.3, 300 39.6, 200 25.8.

He was at the front at the 100m mark and then pulled further away from Kiplagat as the straight progressed. He didn't just burst ahead considerably half way down straight. It was a kick at 100 which gradually pulled him away

- look for 10th 400m hurdle markings

those are at 360m

- alternatively, look for 4th from last 110H hurdle mark

that is 50.58m from finish

if no luck, thanks for effort

ventolin^3 wrote:

monaco past few years has had fast times because of only 1 factor

that factor is Asbel !!!

it's all about Asbel NOT the track !!!

Absolutely right.

ventolin^3 wrote:look at the 50.5 / 3'29.66 & think Komen '96

Komen in '96 possibly even slower than 50.5, maybe 50.75 - 51.00 with 3'30.0 but i didn't go that far out, so that line gives a "flavour" :

http://www.coolrunning.com.au/forums/?showtopic=9320

look for post of "tyler durden"

:

Komen (who is a hell of a lot faster than Buster over 1500, 1609.34, 3000 and 5000) did a 800TT and only ran 1:47.3 and he was flat out. A week later he ran 7:20 for the 3K!

ventolin^3 wrote:i obviously cannot confirm veracity of this...

...look at 50.5 / 3'29.66 for "flavour" of Komen-'96, then try 50.75 - 51.00 / 3'30.00 for maybe more like his "true" '96 shape

to help posters out :

the 50.0 / 50.5 with 3'29.66 line was "flavour" of Komen-'96

remember : he turned up in rieti on tired legs with a poor looking win in berlin just 44 hours before in dreary 13'02

he had suicidal opening lap of

~ 57.9 !!!

which must have crumbled already tired legs !!!

i don't need to add that just with 58-high opener & 1'57-mid, he shouda looked at 7'20-flat

add in fatigue of berlin 13'02...

anyhows, i always reckoned his fully rested rieti shape was

51.00 / 3'30.00 ->

1'47.24

4'45.44

7'19.67

12'36.93

see above of "tyler durden"

i will give you my house, my car, my ex-gal-friends telephone numbers ( they weren't bad ! ) if anyone can prove i am a "tyler durden" !!!

Nick ran a 400m TT today in 49.1 - flat out, bear on the back type of stuff.

Use that as the base line from here on in, not previous mentioned splits, where you may get the benefit of drafting for the entire 400m.

Facts are 3:29.66 with 49.1 (49.24e) speed.

.

Nice update, interesting. Was that at altitude?

Based on stats_gangsta's calculator:

http://timescalculator.appspot.com/

400 0:49.24

800 1:44.95

1000 2:14.22

1500 3:29.66

1-mile 3:46.45

3000 7:28.11

2-mile 8:03.82

5000 13:02.66

Based on ventolin's formula:

400 00:49.24

800 01:45.47

1500 03:29.66

1609.344 03:46.37

3000 07:25.55

5000 12:54.80

JRinaldi wrote:Nick ran a 400m TT today in 49.1 - flat out, bear on the back type of stuff.

Use that as the base line from here on in, not previous mentioned splits, where you may get the benefit of drafting for the entire 400m.

Facts are 3:29.66 with 49.1 (49.24e) speed

Sir

That still has the 800lb gorilla in the room :

Has he learnt to start a 400 ???

if not, then we shoud still knock few tenths off 49.2

also :

- Was he fully rested ?

meaning 4 or 5 good days rest as if running zurich-400 as Butch in '88 !

- Does he know how to run a 400 ?

An ideal 400 ( like 800 ) shoud be run off +ve splits

we know a 800 shoud be run off 2s splits, regardless of what distance you drop down from

( even if a 27-flat 10k guy runs 1'55.00pb, he wouda likely run it off near 57.5 / 57.5

Ask what he thinks he couda run off 56.0 opener ???!!!

You can eviscerate even 56.0 opener for 800 out of a 27-flat guy !!! )

From above :

IMO from lot of research, etc :

everyone's ideal 400 shoud be off

~ 1.0s

+ve 200 splits

It is is churlish to ask, but do you have Nick's splits ?

Were they

24.0+ / 25.0+ ?

Below is what Willis said on the last page of the thread you posted a link to.

Now it might not be him but he certainly sounds convincing.

Hey Guys,

My 400 relay PB is 48.4, and my FAT is 50.07, which was set in HS (I split 48.6 right around that time).

As much as I have tried to improve my speed since HS, I have had little success. I put this down to many more miles in my legs, and the inability to taper sufficiently to get the pop backto really roll a 4hundy. My 200m PB from HS is 23.40 (FAT), and I have split 22.9 at the start of relay legs.

So why would my 400 FAT be so much slower than my rolling start, but my 200m have less differential? We used to race 100m and 200m most weekends in HS as a secondary event (these were city club meets in NZ), and thus our block starts were of a reasonable standard. However, the challenge I found for the 400m was not the reaction time, but the power required to get up to speed. I had used up so much explosive energy to get up to speed, that by the time I reached the home straight, I was toast. From a rolling start, I can get up to speed with little effort, and coast for the first 250m, and still hold form reasonably well through tot he finish line.

So there you have it. I am stuck as a non-sub50 guy, and it hurts!

The fastest milers I have seen are Nate Brannen (46.8 relay), Gabe Jennings (10.9 100m rolling), and David Krummenacker (I bet he could split 45 high, 46 low). I'm sureWheating could roll too.

Read more:

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=5793041&page=2#ixzz3hKH7VVEz

If this is legit then the fastest Willis has ever shown in competition is a 48.4 relay leg. This is what 49.0-49.5 for an open depending on how bad his start is?

I usually go with 0.7 making him a 49.1 400 man.

HardLoper wrote:

Based on stats_gangsta's calculator:

http://timescalculator.appspot.com/

400 0:49.24

800 1:44.95

1000 2:14.22

1500 3:29.66

1-mile 3:46.45

3000 7:28.11

2-mile 8:03.82

5000 13:02.66

Based on ventolin's formula:

400 00:49.24

800 01:45.47

1500 03:29.66

1609.344 03:46.37

3000 07:25.55

5000 12:54.80

go look at the 800

Nick probably in 1'44-low/mid shape

( i haven't inputed into calculator yet - experienced eye )

other is only poor effort

i think you need to use for Nick, much better than 3'29.66 as he had uneven pace & likely some wide on bends

probably

~ 3'29.25 - 3'29.50

for ideal race

try

48.50 - 48.75 / 3'29.25 - 3'29.50

see what it gives for 800 / 3k ?

i haven't looked

& as you know, the 3k/5k are off "lasting perfectly" off his likely 1500/800 training, so add secs+ to those

also : see post of whether he still has learnt to start a 400 & whether he ran it off 1s +ve splits, otherwise that 49.24 shoud be < 49.24 or maybe even

< < 49.24

JRinaldi wrote:Nick ran a 400m TT today in 49.1 - flat out, bear on the back type of stuff.

Use that as the base line from here on in, not previous mentioned splits, where you may get the benefit of drafting for the entire 400m.

Facts are 3:29.66 with 49.1 (49.24e) speed.

Sir

I did not congratulate you enough.

Thanks for this hugely valuable information.

It is not likely it could have been eked out without such Stakhanovite efforts made earlier to ascertain Nick's possible current 400

His 49.1 ( 49.24-"auto" or whatever ) makes his 50+ previous quoted a total nonsense

It is presumptious to ask, but it has to be asked :

- Was he fully rested for it ?

- Has he any clue about standing start now ?

- Did he run it off 1s +ve 200 splits ?

- What do you think his fully rested, "ideal" start from blocks , off 1s+ve splits would be ?

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated...