How Many People Could Do a 5 Minute Mile with a 55 400?

doot doot wrote:

CraZY wrote:

When there is a thread on here about how many people could do a 5 minute mile with decent training people often say that not many people could manage it. I think however, most humans at around optimum weight would have the endurance capacity to manage much better than a 5 minute mile however most are held back by their speed. If you have a 70 second pb for 400 then even if you do 100 miles a week you won't likely achieve a 5 minute mile.

I'd be willing to bet that a shit load of soccer players can run sub-5:00 and :55.

So could pretty much any male college middle-distance or distance runner.

I think the average person has the potential to run a lot faster than 70 seconds, most college distance guys aren't exactly blessed with a lot of fast-twitch fibers and will be somewhere around 50-55.

53.5s 400m and a 3:57 1500m PB. Only just managed the 400m though. Don't think its as easy as people think for a 55s 400m. But lots of 33/34min 10k types could do a sub 5mile on a track.

D3 sprinter

22.28 in 200 meters

51.32 in 400 meters(only ran a couple open ones but split several 50's and a few 49's in relay)

Right after college I ran 10-20miles a week for 6 weeks for a local 5k. I could only time trial a 5:48 mile. Just like some of you have absolutely no speed, several others that don't frequent this site(geared towards distance runners) have limited/no endurance.

No endurance sprinter29 wrote:

D3 sprinter

22.28 in 200 meters

51.32 in 400 meters(only ran a couple open ones but split several 50's and a few 49's in relay)

Right after college I ran 10-20miles a week for 6 weeks for a local 5k. I could only time trial a 5:48 mile. Just like some of you have absolutely no speed, several others that don't frequent this site(geared towards distance runners) have limited/no endurance.

My experience was similar. I was an NAIA very small school sprinter.

23.1 in 220 yds

51.7 in 440 yds.

I stayed fit but didn't do any competitive running again until after I turned 40. After getting back into competitive training and racing at age 47 I ran 57.1 for 400M, but could never get faster than 5:03 for the mile. I could run 400 repeat workouts with guys who were 2 minutes faster in the 5k than I was, but was out the back door for longer stuff.

My approximate PRs:

10000m: 30:40

5000m: 14:30

3000m: 8:30

1500m: 4:00

800m: 2:00

400m: 58

I was running under 4:40 for the mile before I could break 60 in a 400. Still have a pretty hard time with it. I'm all slowtwitch

Bad Wigins wrote:

I thought you meant a 5 minute mile with a 55-second lap along the way! And that's a much more interesting question, because there are probably quite a few 4:15 or 4:20 milers who could combine a 55 and a 4:05 1200. That's like 80, 85, 85, 55. Or start in 55 and jog it in.

I challenge all 4:15 or better milers (other than myself of course) to give it a shot.

I think it's a cool challenge. Bet it's harder than ppl think. I think best formulation is 55 or better for first 400. A lot of folks could run 55 for their last 400 after jogging 1200.

d4 phenom wrote:

doot doot wrote:

I'd be willing to bet that a shit load of soccer players can run sub-5:00 and :55.

So could pretty much any male college middle-distance or distance runner.

I think the average person has the potential to run a lot faster than 70 seconds, most college distance guys aren't exactly blessed with a lot of fast-twitch fibers and will be somewhere around 50-55.

Right. The average person who moderately exercises or does recreational sports can't run 70. These people would tear something trying to get to 200 in :30... Water is also wet. What's the point?

This is a stupid thread extrapolating from :55 as the starting point to sub-5:00?

I bet a shit load of younger, non-NBA sized basketball players can run sub-5:00 and :55. Like Allen Iverson types.

My PRs are similar to NJXC Guy:

Marathon: ~2:29

10,000m: ~30:45

5,000m: ~14;30

3,000m: ~8:15

1,500m: 4 flat

400m: 57.8

I broke 5 for the 1600 before I broke 62 for the quarter. Somehow the 3000 / 3200 has always been my sweet spot, despite having terrible raw leg speed. Even back in HS I was running 59, 4:35, and 9:30, while being only OK at XC (low 16s on our pretty fast home course). Definitely don't need to be able to run anywhere near a 55 in order to be pretty competitive at the 1600, 3200, and XC at the high school level. You won't be Footlocker level or anything, but you definitely can be in the mix at most state meets outside of CA and a few others.

Not trying to rag on anyone, but I noticed a lot of smaller school college sprinters would lose to top distance guys over 400m and even over to the fastest over 200m. Are there any top sprinters who could take on small school college distance runners over 1500m or 5k? How come many top distance guys can throw down respectable sprint times but not vice versa?

51 and 4:32 for the same reason as this guy.However when my pr was 55 I was around 4:41. And when my pr was 57 I was at 4:59

pt26 wrote:

In high school I had PR's of 4:30 for the 1600m and 52 for the 400m. That was with no training for the 400m, I used to just run it for points.

In high school and college, I could run a mile in the 4:20s, but never broke 56 in the 400m.

actually I once went out in 55 in a DMR

it was the 1200 leg and I was hanging on after that lap

55, 62,62.8 = 2:59.8

would like to think I could have ran another lap in 64-66 = 4:04-4:06

but who knows

go home hobbyjogger wrote:

adfasdfa wrote:

My PRs are 4:47 (1600m) and 16:55. There is no chance in Hell I could ever manage a 55 second 400m.

Then this question isn't for you fatass.

No he's just proved that anyone should be able to run sub 5 off 55 second​ speed

The ops question is a waste of time.

No big deal but my senior year of high school I ran a 9:27 3200 while closing in 55 sec. I beat this stud named Nate Moore, no biggie. Hi James

No endurance sprinter29 wrote:

D3 sprinter

22.28 in 200 meters

51.32 in 400 meters(only ran a couple open ones but split several 50's and a few 49's in relay)

Right after college I ran 10-20miles a week for 6 weeks for a local 5k. I could only time trial a 5:48 mile. Just like some of you have absolutely no speed, several others that don't frequent this site(geared towards distance runners) have limited/no endurance.

On the flip side of the coin, my 400 PR is 1:14-high, and ran 2:37-high 800 & 5:37 mile when my 400 time was 1:15-mid.

go home hobbyjogger wrote:

adfasdfa wrote:

My PRs are 4:47 (1600m) and 16:55. There is no chance in Hell I could ever manage a 55 second 400m.

Then this question isn't for you fatass.

Only on LRC can you legitimately be heckled for your 4:47 mile. Awesome.

Most sprinters who can run under 55 seconds could not run a mile in under five minutes. They're just such different races and require such different strengths and tactics. Ive run the following throughout my running days:

200- 23.64

400- 52.00

400 Hurdles- 58.49

800- 2:08.10

Mile- 5:06.7 (Only ran twice)

5K- 18:32

8K- 30:48

Half Marathon- 1:29:11

Obviously there are plenty of people who can achieve both but I would say 90-95% of high school runners could not accomplish such a feat.

Illinois Hurdler wrote:

Most sprinters who can run under 55 seconds could not run a mile in under five minutes. They're just such different races and require such different strengths and tactics. Ive run the following throughout my running days:

200- 23.64

400- 52.00

400 Hurdles- 58.49

800- 2:08.10

Mile- 5:06.7 (Only ran twice)

5K- 18:32

8K- 30:48

Half Marathon- 1:29:11

Obviously there are plenty of people who can achieve both but I would say 90-95% of high school runners could not accomplish such a feat.

Yup.

Among those who can run 55 there are a TON who can't now nor ever break 5 for a mile. There was a kid a couple years older than my son who trained dillgently for XC every year, had a 52 400 PR and couldn't crack 5:20 in track. (His XC PR was, I think, 20:30 or so).

I think people here drastically underestimate the talent they have for taking in and using oxygen, or the talent they have for developing that ability to such a high level. As someone up-thread said, sub 5 is no joke.

So you're pretty much saying the average human with decent speed can run a 5 minute mile with no training? No.