How fast could world class marathoners run 400m?

Kindness wrote:

Sub 2:12 runners. I'm sure some can run 50-51, if so, wouldn't that mean you need speed to be an elite?

Is the 400m a good measurement of speed?

Alan

Obviously you need speed to be elite. No one goes 2:12 without being able to sprint at least decently. I would say the majority of the top guys could go between 49 and 52, depending on the runner.

There are 2:08 marathon runners who cannot run faster than 57 for 400m.

Mo has run 2:08, he has finished the last 400m of a 5k in 50 flat. (To put that in perspective that is faster than the 400m split for the 800m WR)

This would honestly surprise me. Let's back into this. 2:08 (4:53 pace) is the rough equivalent of a 13:19 5000m, which is run at average of 64-65 per 400m. I am hard pressed to believe that someone who can run 65s for 12 laps couldn't drop down below 57.

I had a good kick for a runner at my level, but my level was exactly a minute slower for the 5k than the time above, and I was still able to close an 8-10 x 400 workout with a sub 60 pretty consistently.

I know that my math assumes that folks are equally capable across distances, but that is why limited my comparison to the 5000m, and didn't drop it all the way down to the mile, where the equivalent to a 2:08 is 3:51 (or 57 high per quarter),

yuiii wrote:

Mo has run 2:08, he has finished the last 400m of a 5k in 50 flat. (To put that in perspective that is faster than the 400m split for the 800m WR)

moran

49 point

anti moran wrote:

yuiii wrote:

Mo has run 2:08, he has finished the last 400m of a 5k in 50 flat. (To put that in perspective that is faster than the 400m split for the 800m WR)

moran

49 point

It was like 50.9 for the record.

Lots of them would run 55 at best.

Come on. Take Luke Puskedra as an example. He isn't quite a 2:08 guy - he has run 2:10 once, a solid rung below the level we are talking about here.

He ran an average of sub 65 per 400 for a 5000m run when he ran his PR (13:31). I don't have any splits for any of his races or finishes, but I have to think if you can string together 12+ 64s, you can drop down below 55.

And I picked Puskedra intentionally - first because he is a rung below what we are talking about, and secondly because he is a classic long distance guy, and not a speed guy who moved up over time.

2:08 isn't really World Class anymore.

Smoove wrote:

This would honestly surprise me. Let's back into this. 2:08 (4:53 pace) is the rough equivalent of a 13:19 5000m, which is run at average of 64-65 per 400m. I am hard pressed to believe that someone who can run 65s for 12 laps couldn't drop down below 57.

I had a good kick for a runner at my level, but my level was exactly a minute slower for the 5k than the time above, and I was still able to close an 8-10 x 400 workout with a sub 60 pretty consistently.

I know that my math assumes that folks are equally capable across distances, but that is why limited my comparison to the 5000m, and didn't drop it all the way down to the mile, where the equivalent to a 2:08 is 3:51 (or 57 high per quarter),

Back in the day Al Salazar ran 2:08 and 57 was his best quarter.

I am not sure how we prove or disprove that.

I can tell you that he averaged 64 seconds per quarter for an indoor 5000m, on the short track that they used for The Millrose Games at MSG. He also averaged 63.28 per 400m when he set the American road record for the 5k.

You are telling me that he never ran faster than 6-7 seconds faster than his 5k pace? That just doesn't make sense.

Also, he averaged 59.89 per 400m for a 1500m (running 3:44.6 in 1979). I suspect that he did not run perfectly evenly and dropped a 57 or so at some point in that race.

And I kind of think Salazar sums it up in that he is so heavily distance oriented. If you were to look at the VDOT scores for Salazar, you would see that his 3:44.6 was way out of line with his other races+:

VDOTs across various distances:

1500 - 75.9

2 mile - 78.2

5000 - 80.7

10,000 - 81

Marathon - 79.6

So again, we are talking about a 2:08 guy who is not a speed guy by any stretch of the imagination - clearly slanted toward the longer distances - yet he pretty much certainly ran a 57 as part of his 1500m run. Common sense dictates he likely dropped a faster time than a 57 as part of a workout.

My PR in the 1500 is 3:59 and my 5000 PR is just under 14:20 and I was able to drop a 55.6 in a workout. No way I was going to beat the equivalent of 4 flat miler in a 400m. That just defies common sense, even if we cannot find a 400 split for him.

Smoove wrote:

Also, he averaged 59.89 per 400m for a 1500m (running 3:44.6 in 1979). I suspect that he did not run perfectly evenly and dropped a 57 or so at some point in that race.

I remember reading in the 80s that Salazar's best 400 was 57. It was well known and widely discussed how slow he was.

Salazar could of course run faster than 57. The 57 was a teenage time.

Probably kind of like my 2:03 800m PR. I just almost never raced at that distance (because I didn't start running until college), but I probably came very close to running that time at the end of some of my other, longer races.

newsflash wrote:

2:08 isn't really World Class anymore.

Really? The bronze medalist from the last Olympics isn't world class?

I'm sure Bekele could hammer a fast 400m. My second thoughts was Kipsang with that long stride. Also Galen but idk if he's considered a world class marathon runner but him & farah can close sessions in 50 sec but that was years ago all the mileage probably made him a lil slower.