Please try my very simple little calculator designed to roughly determine your 800m from an inputted 400m and 1500m time.
Performances must be maximal or honest efforts and you must have been in similar shape when running them. It is no good taking your 400m time from when you were injured and your 1500m time 2 years later after consistent training.
Enjoy and please report your findings! I am looking to improve this formula, not declare it as infallible.
1.2 x 400m + 0.216 x 1500m = 800m
Came out as 2:09.2, PB is 2:05.1. I think it's a little conservative.
Agreed. My 400 Pr is 49.8, and my 1500 is 4:00 from last year and it predicted 1:51.6. Have run 1:49.00 in the last month.
Formula seems more heavily weighted towards 1500m specialists. It predicts Alan Webb should have run something close to 1:41-mid.
Any way you could add in an algorithm that weights the 400 and 1500 times? Like IF the 400 is between the values of 44-50,THEN the multipliers are one value, IF it is greater than 50, THEN different multipliers.
Could be fairly simple to put into a spreadsheet so that the formula itself can determine if the runner is speed or endurance based.
Thanks!
Only 0.5 out for me
3 sec off, 2:06 guy, gave me 2:09
Make a formula for the mile and I may try it.
52 & 3:50 = 1:52.08 calculated. Pretty close for me. 1:54 actual, but i only ran it twice.
It gave me 1:48.9 and my PR is 1:50.7. Not bad, but still 2 seconds off.
I got pretty close (trying to only use 1 decimal place multipliers) with
400m x 1.3
1500m x 0.2
This thing actually works well, pretty neat
Thanks for the feedback guys.
Also must add that 400m relay times don't count. Flat 400s only.
Or you can use any of a number of middle distance running calculators already on the web.
208 in rain and wind, gave me 204. Interesting
Balian wrote:
Or you can use any of a number of middle distance running calculators already on the web.
If the creators of those calculators took this attitude, then they wouldn't exist!
Also, make sure you use times to 1 decimal place.
E.g. 50.7, 3:52.3
1:48.34 conversion for me, 1:49.7 PR. I know that this is your attempt for it to make sense that Slagowski is going to run 1:46.low (that's what his time comes out to), but it's obviously off by a little bit and it's trending upwards. Your boy is going to run 1:47.mid to high this season, and that's the reality, which of course means that he's really, really good..
He doesn't have the race openings in his schedule to run it. The Idaho state meet is shit weather today, and he's got Brooks PR and Prefontaine. Why screw up the chance to run 3:55 by tossing in an 800 in the middle of that? He probably has a better shot of making a US junior team at 1500 than he does 800 with Brazier, Harris, Orange, among others, and especially of making a final at World Juniors, so I doubt he runs it at US Junior champs. I would think he runs one more 800 outside of the Idaho state meet.
The latest research shows that the 800 is mostly dependent on the 400 time. Some simple multiplier is not going be effective in determining what a potential 800 time is going to be. Especially on the world stage when milers and 800 runners rarely compete in the other two.
loller_skates wrote:
1:48.34 conversion for me, 1:49.7 PR. I know that this is your attempt for it to make sense that Slagowski is going to run 1:46.low (that's what his time comes out to), but it's obviously off by a little bit and it's trending upwards. Your boy is going to run 1:47.mid to high this season, and that's the reality, which of course means that he's really, really good..
He doesn't have the race openings in his schedule to run it. The Idaho state meet is shit weather today, and he's got Brooks PR and Prefontaine. Why screw up the chance to run 3:55 by tossing in an 800 in the middle of that? He probably has a better shot of making a US junior team at 1500 than he does 800 with Brazier, Harris, Orange, among others, and especially of making a final at World Juniors, so I doubt he runs it at US Junior champs. I would think he runs one more 800 outside of the Idaho state meet.
This calculator has nothing to do with that, but thanks for your input.
To Nostrashoemas: this calculator has little use for an elite, this is intended for use as a training aid for inexperienced athletes. Thanks for your input also.
So is this intended for high school? Runners rarely do the 8 as adults unless they have competed at it earlier. Why only this distance unless you're trying to prove your point about Slagowski. Really does seem as though you're trolling.
Nostrashoemas wrote:
So is this intended for high school? Runners rarely do the 8 as adults unless they have competed at it earlier. Why only this distance unless you're trying to prove your point about Slagowski. Really does seem as though you're trolling.
The 800m is my favourite distance.
You are really reading into this far, far too much. I developed this formula before I knew who Slagowski was. You are clearly the troll here.
Thank you for attempting to ruin my thread.
Whatever, what is the purpose of your calculator for one distance solely? I am debating this with you despite other calculators and science against it. This completely numerical calculation would be wrong at least half the time.