Minimum 400m speed for 4:20 1600m?

Sage Canaday ran a decent 1500 and I think he said he couldn’t crack 28 in a 200 and I forget what he said about the 400

56.6 400 or

4:21.0 full mile which would be just under 4:20 @1600

Also ran 1:58.8 and 10:06 two mile

Really Bro wrote:

Is this a troll post, bro? You should have already broken 4:20.

53 is pretty fast for a high school distance runner. Either you aren't training for enough distance (at least 50mi/week base), or you should really be a middle distance runner (like 1:53/4:10)

I ran 51 and 9:49 and did not even break 4:30. I was training to peak at the state meet my senior year but I got sick just before so maybe I couldve run 9:40/sub 4:30

ironside wrote:

I'm so stupid; I can't figure anything out boohoohoo.

Hifyfy.

I can barely break 57, but ran 4:19 full mile indoors while training for 10k.

You should be fast enough with a 53. I never ran faster than 53 (never raced it much) but you should be close with 53 and 930.

***

In college, there was a guy on our team who couldn't break 4:00 for 1500m, but ran ~8:low teens for 3k ... forgot his 5K, but he once ran a 5k PR in the second half of a 10K. He was

Some distance runners regularly run on their teams 4x400 relay team. As a result they learn how to run a 400. However, most never run a 400 in competition. Perhaps occasionally their coach may have them race one at practice. If one doesn't run a certain distance on a competitive basis a number of times the time that they do record might not be accurate to what their general leg speed is. For example I once coached a boy who had run a 4:31 mile the year before. He also regularly ran 880s. He did tell me that he had run a 54 400. Soon after our conversation he was anchoring a sprint medley. He received the baton in last place. At the 440 mark the time was 55 sec. He looked good and was catching the pack. I decided not to tell him his time as it might mess up his head. I just yelled something to the effect that he looked great and keep passing people. He ended up with a 1:55 which he later duplicated in open races. Thinking about it later I knew that that 54 time that he had given me for his best 440 was not accurate what he could do. He wouldn't have held up that way in which he had had he been a true 54 sec quarter miler.

ThatAverageRunner wrote:

You are way too into this.

I seem to be 'into this' as much as you are.

Seth Hirsch ran 4:14 and in some interview he said he doubted that he could break 60 for the 400

Coach J46 wrote:

Thinking about it later I knew that that 54 time that he had given me for his best 440 was not accurate what he could do. He wouldn't have held up that way in which he had had he been a true 54 sec quarter miler.

Alberto Cova won the 1984 Olympic 10000m with a 53 for the last 400 meters.

Soon after, the coaches timed him for a flat out 400 meters in Italy. His time for the flat out 400 was 52.6 seconds.

Carlos Lopes ran 3:41.6 for 1500m and his fastest 400 was 56 seconds.

4:22 / (3:41.6 x 1.08) = 4:22 / 3:59.3 ... x 56 = 61.3

My best mile was 4:46 and 2 mile was 10:01, but could barely run under 70 for 400. My best was 67 but getting under 70 always took a really, really hard effort.

CoachJ46: I 100% agree. There is a reason physiologist with whom I spoke and the one's I read, Owen Anderson and David Martin, liked to have athletes time trial @ 200m. 200m, long enough so the start won't be a factor; short enough that proper pacing a 400m won't be an issue. Athletes from junior high school PE class to world class 400/800 runners race 600m 2 1/2 to 3 1/2 seconds slower than 400m PB pace for one's 600m pace, as you know. People responding, stating they were 60 or 61 second 400m athletes while they were also 4:04 1500m runners to 4:22 one milers makes absolutely no sense. If true, small adjustments in their running form would most certainly lower their 400m PB.

dsrunner wrote:

If in a small state, get to some bigger meets

Coach can’t go to a big meet with me. Any other advise?

westsouthrunner wrote:

Really Bro wrote:

Is this a troll post, bro? You should have already broken 4:20.

53 is pretty fast for a high school distance runner. Either you aren't training for enough distance (at least 50mi/week base), or you should really be a middle distance runner (like 1:53/4:10)

I ran 51 and 9:49 and did not even break 4:30. I was training to peak at the state meet my senior year but I got sick just before so maybe I couldve run 9:40/sub 4:30

Was your 51 a relay split? If that was open 400m, you should have broken 4:30 with ease.

Based on those times you should have already gone under 4:20. You didn't list your 800 time? I ran 52 for 400, 1:55 for 800, 4:10 for 1600, and 9:17 for 3200 my senior year of HS. The 1600 was my main race, and I really focused on it more than the other middle distances. If your goal is to break 4:20, then that should be the focus of your workouts and races. Running the 400, 800, and 3200 at meets would be additional training.

SouthernFriedRealist wrote:

westsouthrunner wrote:

I ran 51 and 9:49 and did not even break 4:30. I was training to peak at the state meet my senior year but I got sick just before so maybe I couldve run 9:40/sub 4:30

Was your 51 a relay split? If that was open 400m, you should have broken 4:30 with ease.

Even if it was a relay split, he should be able to break 4:30 with ease. Kid doesn’t know how to race

ironside wrote:

ThatAverageRunner wrote:

You are way too into this.

I seem to be 'into this' as much as you are.

Wrong.

had to be said wrote:

65 seconds

Not quite. You have to remember that you have a running start for every lap other than the first lap, so you can average 65 second laps even if you can't run that fast for a single all-out lap. I'd say 67 second speed is probably good enough.