just what we know wrote:
what does the board think his mile time would be given only the info we have
he ran a 28 second 200 at undisclosed effort
he questions if he can run 56.5 for a 400 under race conditions.
good point
Do we have enough (or any) useful info from his tweet to form an opinion on his potential 400 leg time?
We might as well start getting ready for the "WEBB IS BACK BABY!!" And "ALAN MF'in WEBB" threads
think he has a 143.8 pb in the 800. that's about 51.4 seconds per lap. if he did two laps like this in the past I would say he is capable of maybe 53 seconds for one lap taking into consideration a loss of some speed and endurance over the last several years.
Was the 28 relaxed?
Look at it this way wrote:
think he has a 143.8 pb in the 800. that's about 51.4 seconds per lap.
*sigh*
Look at it this way wrote:
think he has a 143.8 pb in the 800. that's about 51.4 seconds per lap. if he did two laps like this in the past I would say he is capable of maybe 53 seconds for one lap taking into consideration a loss of some speed and endurance over the last several years.
That was 10 years ago and he lost most of that speed AND endurance a few years after that. Webb has been old and slow for longer than Wejo.
facepalm wrote:
Look at it this way wrote:think he has a 143.8 pb in the 800. that's about 51.4 seconds per lap.
*sigh*
lmao.
No its not, and that was a decade ago.
facepalm wrote:
Look at it this way wrote:think he has a 143.8 pb in the 800. that's about 51.4 seconds per lap.
*sigh*
What are you sighing about? He does have a 1:43.8 PR in the 800m, and that is about 51.4 per lap.
"about" not "exactly" wrote:
facepalm wrote:*sigh*
What are you sighing about? He does have a 1:43.8 PR in the 800m, and that is about 51.4 per lap.
For anyone over 5, their rough math should be better.
A few people said 67/68, Webb will be faster than that when he's 50 years older and 10 pounds heavier. Someone said, 52. that's actually possible if he has been training to sprint, which I doubt. The last serious training he did was a year ago and that was triathlon training, which is very aerobic, not good for sprinting. For an ex-elite athlete, the question is always how mush weight have they gained. Apparently, he hasn't gotten fat; which I would say 55-56 and he won't be able to get out of bed the next day.
I got off the couch and ran a 54 once after a few months off and my mile or is 30 seconds slower than his.
crusty futon wrote:
I got off the couch and ran a 54 once after a few months off and my mile or is 30 seconds slower than his.
You need to go by current mile shape.
I wonder if Webb read that recent thread about the dude who went down to the track to run a quarter?
just what we know wrote:
what does the board think his mile time would be given only the info we have
he ran a 28 second 200 at undisclosed effort
he questions if he can run 56.5 for a 400 under race conditions.
4:40
He ran cross nationals in December in 34:45. Nothing like his old self, but still decent. He actually looks thinner than when he was competing, perhaps the lack of miles lets him better control his diet. But anyway, I think he'll go High 53's- low 54s if he where's spikes and goes all out.
milethon wrote:
if he where's t.
Not sure this will catch on like moran, moran.
milethon wrote:
He ran cross nationals in December in 34:45. Nothing like his old self, but still decent. He actually looks thinner than when he was competing, perhaps the lack of miles lets him better control his diet. But anyway, I think he'll go High 53's- low 54s if he where's spikes and goes all out.
*** wears***
about 51.9 wrote:
"about" not "exactly" wrote:What are you sighing about? He does have a 1:43.8 PR in the 800m, and that is about 51.4 per lap.
For anyone over 5, their rough math should be better.
Ummm, that would be about maths rather than rough math.
66, BUT IT WAS RELAXED BABY.
about maths wrote:
about 51.9 wrote:For anyone over 5, their rough math should be better.
Ummm, that would be about maths rather than rough math.
There is nothing to indicate that the other poster performed the math incorrectly. He could have correctly calculated the average per lap pace, and then reported it as "about 51.4 seconds."
If I ran 9:58 for the two-mile, and then told people that I ran "about 5 minutes per mile," it wouldn't be because I had incorrectly calculated my average pace; it would be because I knew my exact average pace, but was choosing to report a close approximation instead of the exact average.