800 meters is the most difficult race at all levels of competition, and is essentially a sprint

If you yanked an 800 meter runner off the track at 400 meters they wouldn't be that tired yet. A fast one goes through in about 50 or 51 seconds, they could run 46.5 or better if they were going all out. It doesn't get really hard until the last 200-250 meters. So they are extremely uncomfortable for about 35 seconds.

Now think of a longer race, same thing is true. Take a 10k runner that can run 28 flat. He's going through the 5k in about 14 flat. That same type of runner can probably run a 5k straight up in 13:25, they're not completely dead yet at 5k. But they ARE pretty much dead those last few laps. So they feel like they're about to explode for 3 MINUTES or more, and then they still try to kick and can dig deep over the last 200 meters just like the 800 meter runner does. Now think of a marathon like Kipchoge. He splits sub 61 at the half, he could run 58 low if he was going all out, so he's not completely spent yet at the half. But the last three MILES he is feeling torture. He's' feeling extreme discomfort for 14 MINUTES.

I think if run properly the longer the race, the more difficult and challenging race and takes the greater toll on the body. That's why you don't race anytime soon after a PR marathon, but after a PR 800 your'e ready to go in a week or less because it's not as hard on you.

Most people are just wimps and can't push through the discomfort for more than 30-60 seconds which is why they never truly maximize their potential in races longer than 800 meters or 1600 meters and they fall way off as the distance increases.

as an 800 runner, the 400h looks like hell.

As a former 800m runner, i hated 1500m from the bottom of my heart...800m trainings and races are haaard...but you get used to it...

Ok, I agree its a tough race but a few problems with your reasoning:

1.) "800 can never be tactical" is a lie because every year at NCAA's athletes qualify for the final 2-3 seconds slower than the time they got to nationals with. Also, there have been like 5-6 Olympic/World finals where I can remember them going out in 55. That's a pretty tactical race for 800m standards.

2.) "Should it be considered distance?". Yeah. Do you know any 400 runners who do 80+mile weeks? Its not a full out sprint and it requires way more aerobic strength than the 400.

3.) The fact that other races tend to be tactical in championships does not make it easier. In fact, it may make it harder. A 1:47 is tough to run. But imagine having to run a 1:47 on top of having already ran 700m at 63-65sec quarter pace (*cough 2004 Olympics*). Thats just as hard as running a fast 800 if not harder.

4.) "Not may double at high levels"... Lots of people double at high levels. Every olympics theres someone who doubles 800/1500. Every Olympic trials theres someone who doubles. Every NCAA championship theres someone who doubles. Doubling is not uncommon for 800 runners. If steeple chasers can double, 800 runners can double.

OP your post gives no actual reasons why its the hardest. You don't give any comparative stats like "you spend roughly xx amount of time with full lactic acid versus xx amount of time in a 5k". You don't mention anything about the amount of training that goes into 800 versus 10k. You dont mention anything about the mental strength it takes compared to other events. So like Miles says, its not that you're wrong but your reasoning is nonexsistant.

Here is why I think the 10k is harder:

- The mental side. Given the new world and olympic standards, I think its fair to assume that most races outside of champs will be run hard. So assuming all races are run at 100%, the 10k requires the most mental strength. Running at 92% of Vo2 for 27-30 minutes means that your legs will begin to feel heavy around 12-15 minutes in. You know the feeling you get about 500m into an 800? Now imagine that for 12-15 minutes.

- You have to worry way more about outside factors like wind or heat or humidity. The heat can only get you so much in 2:00, but in 30 it can really mess you up.

- The training. The amount to miles you have to do to be a great 10k runner is insane. Day in and day out, year after year. The amount of time and grind put into 10k training versus 800 training is not ever close.

Here is why i think 400H is harder:

- The 400 is brutal. You tie up, your knee lift suffers, and you are full freaking lactic for 150m or so. Thats tough. NOW, I want you to do basically the same thing but if you could also jump over a bunch of hurdles while doing it that'd be great. You have to have speed and strength like a 400/800 guy, but you also have to work flexibility AND you have to count your steps. Anyone out there counting steps for their 800?

Here is why I think Steeple Chase is harder:

- Its a combination of reasons why 10k is harder and why 400H is harder. You are running at practically vVO2 which means you are jumping over barriers while your legs are heavy and your breathing hard AF.

- More mileage and things to think about. You have to be more aerobically fit than an 800 guy which means longer practices. plus more flexible and able to clear barriers so hurdle drills on top of that.

- The water pit. As if clearing hurdles wasnt already a challenge, now you have to launch yourself far enough to clear a water pit 7x.

- Rounds. In most championships you have to run rounds of the steeple. You have to do the same thing in an 800, except the steeple is 3.5x longer than the 800. It takes more energy, put more strain on your legs, and is therefor more difficult to recover from between rounds.

Or it is for people who aren't fast enough for sprints, and aren't mentally tough enough for distance... like me.

And I always thought it was the 800m dash

Tactically, the 800 is the most challenging distance. You essentially need to run a perfect race. In 1500+, you have time to find your way out of a box, adjust pace after opening too fast/slow etc. In an 800, one tactical error will most likely be the difference between a good or a bad race.

Wrong, the thon is.

Class is Dismissed wrote:

Tactically, the 800 is the most challenging distance. You essentially need to run a perfect race. In 1500+, you have time to find your way out of a box, adjust pace after opening too fast/slow etc. In an 800, one tactical error will most likely be the difference between a good or a bad race.

Not only that, but "you only have so many moves in the 800" as my coach told me and, I believe, as either Johnny Gray or Mark Everett told him. It's true. You need to plan, and sometimes adjust that plan on the fly, as to when you are going to move and how you are going to move. BUT you'd better not move too much or your race will go out the window.

Minimi wrote:

As a former 800m runner, i hated 1500m from the bottom of my heart...800m trainings and races are haaard...but you get used to it...

Same here, and I was sub 1:47. Wasn't too thrilled with the 400 either and I could spin some fast relay legs (regularly mid 46 to mid 47). Couldn't quite gauge that 1 lapper too well. But yeah, you get used to the 800, with that (to me) feeling of almost claustrophobia as I would go into the final turn. You get used to whatever your event is.

The 800 is the pinnacle of track and running . Speed , power , endurance . the other end of the spectrum is ultras , where you bring food in a fanny pack and look for places to poop.

The best evidence the 400m, 800m and 400mH are the toughest races: No one turns 25 years old and then decides to move up to three races stated. Runners move to 1500m as they get older. Runners move up to 3000m/3000mSC as they get older. Runners move up to 5000m as they get older. Runners move up to 10000m as they get older. Runners move up to Marathon as they get older. No elite 400m runner, turns 25 and then decides to move up to 800m. No elite 1500m runner turns 25 then decides to move down to 800m. I just stated all the evidence needed to prove 400m to 800m are the toughest events.

800 can be very tactical. Watch Borzakovsky in his prime, including 2004 Olympics final.

It depends on what type of runner you are cause the 800 is where speed and endurance are on a level playing field.

In my view there are two types of 800 runners the 400 sprinters stepping up and the 1500 endurancers stepping down. I think for a 400 sprinter stepping up it is a the most difficult race, however, for a 1500er stepping down its not as bad. As mentioned the 400er is use to suffering for 10-15 seconds but the 1500er is use to suffering for 1-2 minutes. So the 30-45 seconds of suffering in the 800 is either really long or not that long in comparison.

They all suck it's just varying forms of suck. To say an 800m race is harder than a half marathon is a tad bit naive. It's just a different type of hurt.

I ran the 400, 400H, 800, 1500, 3000SC, and 5000 in college. By far the most painful was the steeple. Your legs are pretty much shot about a mile in and you still have about a mile to go. Abu Ghraib is less torture.

The 1000 is a nasty one as well. You run an 800 and then try not to collapse for 200 meters more.

HOOWIE wrote:

They all suck it's just varying forms of suck. To say an 800m race is harder than a half marathon is a tad bit naive. It's just a different type of hurt.

true. as a masters runner, the thought of an all out 800m almost panics me.

but something as dreadful as a mountain run, in which i once participated (almost 6.7 miles, almost 4800 ft altitude difference, only steep uphill in humid, hot weather conditions, always in the red heartbeat zone), i want never experience again. the last half-hour or so was a sheer endless feeling of complete organic failure that lasted long after the finish.

My opinion is the 10K is the hardest race. How Bekele ran 4:14 per mile for 6.2 is beyond comprehension.