Basically the title but I was having trouble coming up with a solid order for the relative ranking of each of these times.
400-55
800-2:10
1600-4:40
3200-10:00
5k (flat-ish xc)-17:00
send help running gurus
Basically the title but I was having trouble coming up with a solid order for the relative ranking of each of these times.
400-55
800-2:10
1600-4:40
3200-10:00
5k (flat-ish xc)-17:00
send help running gurus
It depends on the type of training you have been doing. I would hope that a 2:10 800 meter runner could run a 4:40 1600 and a 10:00 3200 if he had proper middle distance training. But experience tells me that it takes time to develop that base then specific training for it.
I've had 10 minute 3200 runners who couldn't run a 55 second 400. I like the speed, it's certainly harder to develop and or harness.
Again it depends on the type of training and time spent on a team.
4:40 = 10 = 55 > 2:10 = 17
roughly
For sure, seen many 2:05-10 guys who could not run 4:40 and certainly not 10:00.
10:00 > 4:40 > 17:00 > 2:10 > 55
VirkCity wrote:
10:00 > 4:40 > 17:00 > 2:10 > 55
OP didn't give us clear criteria for ranking. Assuming we can make our own criteria, I'll choose competitiveness at the high school level (let's say, most likely to score points in a weak league meet), and would rank it as this poster did above, but could consider reversing the 2:10 and the 55.
If it is in terms of competitiveness overall, not just at high school, the order would be different. Then I would choose:
10:00, 4:40, 2:10, 55, 17:00
This is because for older athletes, they have had time to develop their aerobic system more. I've been to many all comers meets with a bunch of random 30 and 40 year olds who could run 16 minutes in the 5k, but they couldn't run better than 4:45. Those same guys would be around 10 flat in the 2 mile.
55 is the fastest
2:10 is next
4:40 is after that
10:00 is after that
17:00 is slowest
4:40 is the best by a lot. I ran 2:10 as a frosh! I could hardly break 11 then and ran like 4:55.
4:40 and 10:00 are the best in my opinion.
next fastest is 55
then 2:10
then 17:00
NoWay wrote:
4:40 is the best by a lot. I ran 2:10 as a frosh! I could hardly break 11 then and ran like 4:55.
You were probably better than 55.
I'd put 10:00 > 4:40 > 2:10 = 55 = 17:00.
55 is probably a better absolute time than 2:10 or 17:00, but for kids who are underdeveloped aerobically (most high schoolers running these times) I'd expect a 55 before a 2:10 or a 17.
TrackBot! VDOT 0:55 400 m
TrackBot! VDOT 2:10 800 m
TrackBot! VDOT 4:40 1600 m
TrackBot! VDOT 10:00 3200 m
TrackBot! VDOT 17:00 5000 m
VDOT for 0:55 0.4km: 0
Equivalent race times based on VDOT:
Marathon: 23:48:24
Half marathon: 11:54:12
15K: 08:27:47
10K: 05:38:31
5K: 02:49:16
3Mi: 02:43:26
2Mi: 01:48:58
3200m: 01:48:20
3K: 01:41:33
1Mi: 00:54:29
1600m: 00:54:10
1500m: 00:50:47
VDOT for 2:10 0.8km: 65
Equivalent race times based on VDOT:
Marathon: 02:32:31
Half marathon: 01:12:52
15K: 00:50:39
10K: 00:33:00
5K: 00:15:54
3Mi: 00:15:19
2Mi: 00:09:53
3200m: 00:09:50
3K: 00:09:09
1Mi: 00:04:37
1600m: 00:04:35
1500m: 00:04:17
VDOT for 4:40 1.6km: 63.7
Equivalent race times based on VDOT:
Marathon: 02:35:11
Half marathon: 01:14:10
15K: 00:51:33
10K: 00:33:35
5K: 00:16:11
3Mi: 00:15:35
2Mi: 00:10:04
3200m: 00:10:00
3K: 00:09:19
1Mi: 00:04:42
1600m: 00:04:40
1500m: 00:04:21
VDOT for 10:00 3.2km: 63.7
Equivalent race times based on VDOT:
Marathon: 02:35:11
Half marathon: 01:14:10
15K: 00:51:33
10K: 00:33:35
5K: 00:16:11
3Mi: 00:15:35
2Mi: 00:10:04
3200m: 00:10:00
3K: 00:09:19
1Mi: 00:04:42
1600m: 00:04:40
1500m: 00:04:21
VDOT for 17:00 5.0km: 60.2
Equivalent race times based on VDOT:
Marathon: 02:42:54
Half marathon: 01:17:54
15K: 00:54:08
10K: 00:35:15
5K: 00:16:59
3Mi: 00:16:22
2Mi: 00:10:35
3200m: 00:10:31
3K: 00:09:48
1Mi: 00:04:57
1600m: 00:04:55
1500m: 00:04:35
I am a bot. Info: habs.sdf.org/trackbot
Was curious to see what Trackbot says, as I did some of these times even back in HS, but others were never within my grasp.
10:00 > 4:40 > 17:00 > 2:10 > 55
But an aerobic monster, heel striker might disagree.
Trackbot (Daniels, VDOT actually) isn't good for anything below a mile. But it does show that the 3200 and 1600 times are basically the same. But as previously said, most high school kids are under developed aerobically, so for high schoolers 10:00 is probably better than 4:40
jdklfa; wrote:
Basically the title but I was having trouble coming up with a solid order for the relative ranking of each of these times.
400-55
800-2:10
1600-4:40
3200-10:00
5k (flat-ish xc)-17:00
send help running gurus
Looking at that, for HSers, the 10:00 3200 and 17m XC 5k jump out at me as far superior. Next would be the 4:40 which is close but not quite as good as the 10:00 3200.
The 2:10 is the worst of the bunch.
55>2:10>4:40>10:00>17:00
I have run 4:55 pace for 10k, 4:40 pace for 5k and faster than 4:20 for a mile. I will never be able to run a 55 in the 400 as long as I live. My best is a 58. Dipping under 30 in a 200 is a huge ordeal for me and doing it twice happens once in a blue moon
Freshman year of HS, my first 6 months of running, I ran 2:10 but couldn't break 60 in a 400. Still have a hard time breaking 60
thebiglay wrote:
55>2:10>4:40>10:00>17:00
I have run 4:55 pace for 10k, 4:40 pace for 5k and faster than 4:20 for a mile. I will never be able to run a 55 in the 400 as long as I live. My best is a 58. Dipping under 30 in a 200 is a huge ordeal for me and doing it twice happens once in a blue moon
Freshman year of HS, my first 6 months of running, I ran 2:10 but couldn't break 60 in a 400. Still have a hard time breaking 60
Wow - on the spectrum of speed v endurance you are just about the furthest to the endurance side I've ever seen. Sub 15 5k and you can't run a 30s 200?