How much natural talent does it take to get under 1:48 in the 800?

Math wiz wrote:

People keep starting these posts hoping that they will get support in their theories that they can become elite through hard work. If fast times weren't based on genetics, women would run 1:48 and 50 year old men would run 1:48.

I’m not sure you know what genetics means.

Bad Wigins never sniffed 1:48.

'nuf said.

facts and reason wrote:

Guy Fawkes You wrote:

Why do you always pull out this strawman? Just because something hasn't been identified and named yet doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Genes are responsible for all physical traits.

Wigins is truly a bad dude. He makes all these judgment statements in a stubborn way.

The original post wasn't even about drugs at all. He was asking about natural talent.

But he obviously wouldn't know anything about that.

If you’re a 6’03” Masi Warrior with a dad who has an Olympic 4x400m Olympic medal, you could get all the way down to 1.40 for 800m.

Jowri wrote:

I have been training middle distance for 3 years at 30 miles each week on average with quality sessions and my best so far is 2:14. Would somebody like me ever have what it takes? I’m going to find out anyway but I also want to be realistic.

How old are you, really? Don't want to bother reading the whole thread. I ran a bit under 1:47 and I ran 1:52 in HS. Other guys I know at 1:48 and under all broke 1:55 in HS. Not commenting on your talent or lack of, just what I saw and experienced.

Was Fast wrote:

Jowri wrote:

I have been training middle distance for 3 years at 30 miles each week on average with quality sessions and my best so far is 2:14. Would somebody like me ever have what it takes? I’m going to find out anyway but I also want to be realistic.

How old are you, really? Don't want to bother reading the whole thread. I ran a bit under 1:47 and I ran 1:52 in HS. Other guys I know at 1:48 and under all broke 1:55 in HS. Not commenting on your talent or lack of, just what I saw and experienced.

I’m 29

Jowri wrote:

Was Fast wrote:

How old are you, really? Don't want to bother reading the whole thread. I ran a bit under 1:47 and I ran 1:52 in HS. Other guys I know at 1:48 and under all broke 1:55 in HS. Not commenting on your talent or lack of, just what I saw and experienced.

I’m 29

All these posters have been screaming genes this and genes that. Posters have been commenting as if your three years of training were from age 14 to age 17. If you would have started training at age twelve and gradually increased intensity and volume, maybe you could have willed yourself to 1:48 800m. Most elite 800m runners have aged out well before age 29.

Apple and tree wrote:

If you’re a 6’03” Masi Warrior with a dad who has an Olympic 4x400m Olympic medal, you could get all the way down to 1.40 for 800m.

Maybe but probably not if your mother is Rosie O'Donnell.

all this genes nonsense wrote:

Jowri wrote:

I’m 29

All these posters have been screaming genes this and genes that. Posters have been commenting as if your three years of training were from age 14 to age 17. If you would have started training at age twelve and gradually increased intensity and volume, maybe you could have willed yourself to 1:48 800m. Most elite 800m runners have aged out well before age 29.

Whew, that was close. Fortunately he is too old for you to have to prove your point. Just like Wigins with his excuses as to why he never made it.

Good 13 and 14 year olds can run 2.14 off 30mpw. The OP at age 29 is already at his physical peak. He might get down to 2.00- 2.05. But that's about it. The only qualifier to that I might offer is if he is relatively a lot quicker over 400. Say, low 50's. Then, with improved endurance he could possibly get under 2.00.

mhm123321 wrote:

Meaning that if someone starts at 2:00 minute 800 meter with no training, they have a chance of breaking 1:48 with training. Now on the other hand, someone that starts from 2:20 with no training has NO chance of breaking 1:50, probably not even the 2 minute mark.

Don't underestimate how slow someone can be with no training. Jim Ryun's first mile was 5:38 or 5:39, so probably a 2:20 800 runner on no training.

*probably NOT a 2:20 800 runner on no training.

I ran a 1:47 high in college. split 400m was 47.6, open 48.3. 600m was my best event I suppose. It took me until my last year in college to break into 147.

Ran about 5 races in a row that were 148 and felt like i could never break that barrier. Trained with more distance(>70 mpw) gained a little more muscle for 2 years during base training and it finally added up.

Bad Wigins wrote:

Genetics R Us wrote:

1:48 takes incredible genetics...period!

name the genes.

There are countless people who could run 1:48 if they had access to years of top-level coaching, training, facilities, and especially the drug regimens that top elites have used since the dawn of the sport.

There's a big difference between PED's administered by experts and those used independently. Put a 2:14 runner into the old East German program and I think they could churn out a 1:48 guy if they wanted to.

We could put jet packs on their backs too. We're not talking about using performance enhancing drugs. That was a bad post.

Will your way wrote:

all this genes nonsense wrote:

All these posters have been screaming genes this and genes that. Posters have been commenting as if your three years of training were from age 14 to age 17. If you would have started training at age twelve and gradually increased intensity and volume, maybe you could have willed yourself to 1:48 800m. Most elite 800m runners have aged out well before age 29.

Whew, that was close. Fortunately he is too old for you to have to prove your point. Just like Wigins with his excuses as to why he never made it.

For argument sake, let us assume S. Coe was always PED clean. His father, Peter Coe and David Martin, PhD. created 400/800/1500 metres talent. There are thousands of 14 year old boys with 56.xx 400m PB. Why was S Coe the one to race sub-1:42 800m? No family history of T&F success. Sub-1:50 800m runners come from too diverse of groups for anyone to say genes. Short, tall, black, white, north African/SW & S Asian, Latins. There is no sub-1:50 800m gene. I know genes is an overly simplistic answer for 60m to 100m success. I know genes is an overly simplistic answer for 3000m to Marathon success. Genes certainly is not the answer for athletes 400m to 1500m. Runners come from too diverse of backgrounds, middle distance.

Coe had genetics for success. Picking a random time and age for proof of not needing specific t genetics is silly.

That's like the guy with the best beard in the world needing to have a certain level of hirsutism by age 12.

Talent isn't where you come from or who your parents were. It's what you were born with.

zzzz wrote:

mhm123321 wrote:

Meaning that if someone starts at 2:00 minute 800 meter with no training, they have a chance of breaking 1:48 with training. Now on the other hand, someone that starts from 2:20 with no training has NO chance of breaking 1:50, probably not even the 2 minute mark.

Don't underestimate how slow someone can be with no training. Jim Ryun's first mile was 5:38 or 5:39, so probably a 2:20 800 runner on no training.

And how old was he? About half of 29?

Rocky Mountain High wrote:

I ran a 1:47 high in college. split 400m was 47.6, open 48.3. 600m was my best event I suppose. It took me until my last year in college to break into 147.

Ran about 5 races in a row that were 148 and felt like i could never break that barrier. Trained with more distance(>70 mpw) gained a little more muscle for 2 years during base training and it finally added up.

You guys could have run 2.14 on one leg.