What can my athlete run in 800 when pushed?

Might be a 2:07-08 there with a pacer for the first 400/600. Any more race options?

Nope, done for the season and that's ok. We'll be excited to see what she does in college. This was more just a mental exercise to see if others agreed she probably would be a bit faster.

YMMV wrote:

Might be a 2:07-08 there with a pacer for the first 400/600. Any more race options?

We were thinking 2:07 as well

YMMV wrote:

Might be a 2:07-08 there...

+1

Try and hit the first lap in 61-62.

I agree with the 2:07 prediction, perhaps 2:06, at this point, in terms of current ability.

Congrats to your athlete and you! It seems you've done a great job coaching, and she has executed well.

1979 wrote:

YMMV wrote:

Might be a 2:07-08 there...

+1

Try and hit the first lap in 61-62.

I agree with that, one time she split 2:09 going out in 59 which was a little quick. She never went in 61-62 in a big race with competition. She’s has a great kick and those races winning was more important than time and the other girls would always go out around 64-65.

31-31.5 (62.5)-32-32.5 (64.5)=2:07

That would be the supposedly ideal 2 second positive split for the 800m and if going out in 59 was too much, but still got her a time that would have been a pr, she could live with 31-31.5.

I think of 2:05/4:40 as more or less equivalent, and her 66 close in the 1600 makes me think that 4:49 is soft for her and she will drop ten seconds or more next year. Her 400 speed currently seems a bit slow for the 800m to be her best event and the 10:31 shows she has good endurance for her age. I think she'll make her mark at the mile, but certainly she has the potential to score at NCAAs in the next few years at around 2:02-2:04.

Possibly 2:07-2:08, but fwiw, my former high school has a girl right now who last year had very similar times. She ran 2:10.1 at the state meet going out in 66 and closing in 63, and that remained her PR for exactly one whole year. Despite having multiple opportunities in between in which she got out in low-60s (including a couple with competition) she couldn't seem to drop her time. Sometimes negative splits are not as big a disadvantage as people think, and if you have a really good day I don't think it makes a big difference at all. Of course, this weekend that same girl ran 2:06, 55, and 2:05 in a 24-hour period, so with a bit more development I think a negative split 2:09 indicates a lot of ability for the future, if not necessarily right now.

zxcvzvxc wrote:

31-31.5 (62.5)-32-32.5 (64.5)=2:07

That would be the supposedly ideal 2 second positive split for the 800m and if going out in 59 was too much, but still got her a time that would have been a pr, she could live with 31-31.5.

I think of 2:05/4:40 as more or less equivalent, and her 66 close in the 1600 makes me think that 4:49 is soft for her and she will drop ten seconds or more next year. Her 400 speed currently seems a bit slow for the 800m to be her best event and the 10:31 shows she has good endurance for her age. I think she'll make her mark at the mile, but certainly she has the potential to score at NCAAs in the next few years at around 2:02-2:04.

Thanks for all the replies so far!

Agreed, I think you are close to right on with what we think. She only ran 1 400 this year where she was going hard the whole time and that had no competition, so I do think she can probably fairly soon get to a low 56 open or 55. In 4x4s she split 56 low a handful of time and also come through in 25 but then had no one to chase after that.

I agree seems like 1500 might be her best event and I think with her endurance probably will be a serious XC athlete as well which not too many of the NCAA 800 scorers are varsity XC contenders. But not my call anymore, I get to sit back and watch and enjoy the show!

I would think 2:06 seems reasonable. Probably a 4:44 or so in the 1600 too.