1.49,5-1.51
1.49,5-1.51
I ran 1:52 off of a 49 high 4x4 split (I imagine I could have run low 36 for 300m. No worse than 36.5). And I would have been hard pressed to break 9 minutes for a 3k. I say there's no way an 800m runner doesn't break 1:50 with a 36.2 and an 8:14. 8:14 is quick. My official guess would be mid 1:48
Seems most think around 1.48 to 1.49.5
How old are you?
I based my prediction to his estimated 400m time, which I estimated to be ~50.5 sec based on his 300. You need to add up to 0,8 sec to 400m split times. With very good endurance 1.49 flat is a possibility if you can have a +3,5-4 sec difference vs 400m pace, usually the difference is bigger. But if he can go sub 50 @ 400 then 1.48 shouldn´t be a problem. I was more conservative in my prediction.
To the OP, what kind of race times actually have you run?
Just for fun, by McMillan pace calculator a 50,0 400m time indicates 1.49,8 @ 800 and 8.03,3 @ 3000m. With 51sec / 400m you get 1.52 and 8.12,9.
I've run 1 49 but the times I listed aren't mine. Regarding the pace calculator. I rate an 8 12 3000 way ahead of a 51 400m
Run by nature wrote:
I've run 1 49 but the times I listed aren't mine. Regarding the pace calculator. I rate an 8 12 3000 way ahead of a 51 400m
Me too. But if you can do both then it´s a very good combo. But it demands an "all-rounder" to be able to go even near the calculated paces at multiple distances. Many of 800m runners ain´t all rounders. The OP of this thread obviously is.
I am the OP. The initial times were not mine. They were another athlete's.
Run by nature wrote:
I am the OP. The initial times were not mine. They were another athlete's.
Oh, sorry. Well, then HE is an all rounder :) How fast he actually is at 400? 800? etc. Don´t say that he never has raced.
a 8:14 guy should be able to run a 37 but predicting a 3000 off a 300 time is a total crapshoot.
being equally good at those two event is not the norm.
Warren Tee wrote:
a 8:14 guy should be able to run a 37 but predicting a 3000 off a 300 time is a total crapshoot.
being equally good at those two event is not the norm.
I think you missed something
Warren Tee wrote:
a 8:14 guy should be able to run a 37 but predicting a 3000 off a 300 time is a total crapshoot.
being equally good at those two event is not the norm.
Read again what I wrote about those calculators. We don´t disagree.
I´m starting to believe that this runner doesn´t even exist.
I'd bet for sure a runner could run 36 and 8:14. I had a buddy who was 24:40 8k XC runner and who could click off a 36 any day of the week if he wanted to. He never ran the 3k so I don't have a 3k PR to list, but he was more of a mid D guy so I figure 8:2X was in the cards. I don't think it's unusual for a miler to have both of those times
Sure it´s very possible, didn´t mean that, but where´s the info of his actual pb´s?
Well it may not be a real person but I don't see what difference that makes. And it seems odd to make up those specific times for them to be completely fabricated.
Hi UNO
400 51.2
800 1.53.8
1500 3.45.2
U.N.O. wrote:
Warren Tee wrote:a 8:14 guy should be able to run a 37 but predicting a 3000 off a 300 time is a total crapshoot.
being equally good at those two event is not the norm.
Read again what I wrote about those calculators. We don´t disagree.
I´m starting to believe that this runner doesn´t even exist.
Sorry
Actually not responding to you but just as next in line to comment along the same lines. Too lazy to scroll back to OP.
Run by nature wrote:
Hi UNO
400 51.2
800 1.53.8
1500 3.45.2
Thank you!
You're welcome. Have you written a book?