200 reps on a 5-6% grade hill. Can this workout give me idea of my 800/1600m race ability?

Can't say much from that.

If you do it again faster or with less rest, then you may have improved.

Try some 200s on the track and see how it feels.

I thought this was going to be some zatopek inspired session of 200 x a hill.

I feel like my fitness has improved steadily over a year. On this same hill, this time last year I could manage 8 x 200 in 49 seconds on average with maybe 1:40 jog rest, my times were about 3:10/6:55 then.

Aim for 5:55

Thanks, will try!

..And the 800?

keep doing it...it will pay off with very fast running. Good luck!

The best formula I know is: multiply each positive meter in height by 5. multiply each negative meter in height by 2 and subtract it from a total distance, if necessary. This works in moderate terrain.

In your case: 200m with about 5% : 10 meters in height x 5 = 50m extra.

So you have done actually something like 12 x 250m with 90s jog rest in about 45s and faster.

Some say that 12 x 200 / 90s active rest at 800m pace is a good workout (though I think that 4 x 400 is better). If you really ran 200m and the gradient is definitely 5%, you should should target a sub 2:40 at least. Check out on a track if you are capable of 12 x 200 / 90s active rest in sub 40s each.

Addendum:

You see that it is really important to measure the hill exactly. In your case the calculated result of 250m (see my post above) means that you passed in every rep the 200m mark in about 36s virtually. I consider a runner who is capable of running 12 x 200 /90s active rest in 36s to be ready for a 800m race in the range of 2:24 - 2:30.

It looks like that you have improved drastically, if your workout on the hill is exactly measured. To be honest I don't think so and therefore I have written "sub 2:40 at least". I can confirm the given formula to be a good one.

Although I can run a 36 second 200m, maybe a couple of seconds slower all-out I don’t think I could do 12x200 at that pace, I actually don’t even think I could do more than 3-4 seeing as that would probably be around 400 effort for me. I already know that under 2:30 (much less 2:24 which would be other-worldy for me) would be extremely unrealistic for somebody with my speed. However, I do feel like I am in good shape right now so I guess 2:40 shouldn’t be too far out of the equation, although I would be decently happy with sub 2:45. Anything over 2:50 would disappoint.

Old man hj wrote:

Although I can run a 36 second 200m, maybe a couple of seconds slower all-out I don’t think I could do 12x200 at that pace, I actually don’t even think I could do more than 3-4 seeing as that would probably be around 400 effort for me. I already know that under 2:30 (much less 2:24 which would be other-worldy for me) would be extremely unrealistic for somebody with my speed. However, I do feel like I am in good shape right now so I guess 2:40 shouldn’t be too far out of the equation, although I would be decently happy with sub 2:45. Anything over 2:50 would disappoint.

Faster.**

Sorry to confuse anybody!

Last year, Charlie on the 50+ training thread suggested that a 1200m solo time trial would predict my one-mile race time. A week before the race, I ran 1200m at 5:40 mile pace. On race day I ran 5:38.7.

Maybe try this time trial technique instead of trying to translate approximated hill repeats? I did the 1200m on one of my recovery days -- it didn't take much outta me.

I assume you are stronger than you are fast and because of this the hill repeats do not translate into your 800 m time according to what the calculator guy predicted.

I was also thinking when I saw your times that I would go faster than you in the 800 but slower in the mile.

Viceland wrote:

I thought this was going to be some zatopek inspired session of 200 x a hill.

Since I usually do the 5 X 18 workout on the weekend, I normally do my 200 X hill workout on wednesday.