minimum 400 speed for sub 2 800

That would technically be enough but you’d need pretty good endurance. If you’re a freshman in high school then you’ll likely get faster at 400m with age.

Just keep gradually running more, lift, do strides and short hill sprints, and you’ll have sub 2 in no time. I’m willing to bet you have more than enough talent to, it just takes consistency.

58 for a pure distance runner.

59.9999999999-60.0 seconds if you want to run sub 2 or 2 flat.

Generally 54-55 is considered fast enough to get it done, if you have good endurance.

The 800 isn't all speed, someone who runs 51.xx but runs over 5 minutes in the mile probably won't break 2:00. They'll be on pace for 500-600 meters, but won't be able to finish the job. A runner who can go 53.xx and runs closer to 4:30 probably has a better chance.

Good question, better answer wrote:

59.9999999999-60.0 seconds if you want to run sub 2 or 2 flat.

You formal logic purest ruin letsrun.

Sprint-based: 51-52

800-based: 53

endurance based:54-55

55 at bare minimum. With 54.7 you should definitely be under 2:10. I ran 2:02 with a similar 400m best.

I agree with ThatAverageRunner. Follow his insight on this and you'll get to sub-2. I've read on LRC and elsewhere that 55 is the general benchmark for a sub-2 800, though it's hard to pin down due to differences in speed and endurance base. 54.7 is very good for a Freshman. Maybe shoot for a sub-50 by the end of high school as an additional goal. Good luck!

@#$%^&{FICv68robreg wrote:

Generally 54-55 is considered fast enough to get it done, if you have good endurance.

The 800 isn't all speed, someone who runs 51.xx but runs over 5 minutes in the mile probably won't break 2:00. They'll be on pace for 500-600 meters, but won't be able to finish the job. A runner who can go 53.xx and runs closer to 4:30 probably has a better chance.

Sounds about right. I was a 51/4:50s guy and I ran 2:01 3 times at my best.

ThatAverageRunner wrote:

That would technically be enough but you’d need pretty good endurance. If you’re a freshman in high school then you’ll likely get faster at 400m with age.

Just keep gradually running more, lift, do strides and short hill sprints, and you’ll have sub 2 in no time. I’m willing to bet you have more than enough talent to, it just takes consistency.

This might be the worst post of all time. 57 400 runners could never break 2

formal logic ... wrote:

Good question, better answer wrote:

59.9999999999-60.0 seconds if you want to run sub 2 or 2 flat.

You formal logic purest ruin letsrun.

I had an acquaintance years ago. He was a 2:10 marathonn guy.

He ran 2 flat for the 800, off a 61 first lap.

A kid on my son’s college team can only run 57 but he runs 2 flat and 30 flat for 10k.

Happening now wrote:

A kid on my son’s college team can only run 57 but he runs 2 flat and 30 flat for 10k.

There aren't many (if any) high school kids that can run a 30min 10k

What's your 1600 time? The faster it is, the slower of a 400 you can get away with, very rare to see anything slower than 57 speed to sub 2 though so id say that's the minimum

Bob Schul Country wrote:

ThatAverageRunner wrote:

That would technically be enough but you’d need pretty good endurance. If you’re a freshman in high school then you’ll likely get faster at 400m with age.

Just keep gradually running more, lift, do strides and short hill sprints, and you’ll have sub 2 in no time. I’m willing to bet you have more than enough talent to, it just takes consistency.

This might be the worst post of all time. 57 400 runners could never break 2

Uhhh that’s a pretty bold claim to make considering you can’t read.

I never said 57. The OP never said 57. He did say 54 POINT 7, which is very different than 57.

It’s not impossible for a 57 guy to run 2:00 but they’ll need to be a super aerobically developed marathon type.

54.7 is more than enough for sub 2, but will require solid endurance.

If the kid stays consistent and gradually progresses in 400m speed and endurance he’ll have sub 2 easy.

easy. You need lim n-->infinity of 60 - 1/n.

of course, you'd need perfect speed endurance

I would rather say

52

54

56