Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A sub 1:40, you do the math

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • A sub 1:40, you do the math

    Just to follow on from another post, where they were debating if anyone could break 1:40 for 800m.Most posters agreed that it would take someone with 44 flat speed, but there is more too it than that.

    Even with 44 flat speed, you would still need to be able to run sub 3:32 for the 1500 to have a chance to break 1:40.

    I've done the math

    Example; two thrids of 400 PR plus one thrid of 1500 PR

    Coe; 46.87 (.666666) 31.25
    3:29.77 (.333333) 69.63
    Total 101.18 or 1:41.18 (1:41.72 WR)

    1:40; 44.00 (.666666) 29.34
    3:31.9 (.333333) 70.64
    Total 99.98 or 1:39.98 NWR

    Sub 1:40 not likely just yet.

  • #2
    Re: A sub 1:40, you do the math

    What are Kipketer's 4 and 15 PRs?

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: A sub 1:40, you do the math

      For what it's worth, not "all" the posters suggested that [merely] 44 flat speed was necessary. Mathematics aside, a sub 100-second 800 is a huge challenge and won't be done soon or easily.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: A sub 1:40, you do the math

        Coe said that he felt that at his very peak, when he ran 1:41, he felt he was capable of 1:40.5 if he had someone right there with him. Kipketer was probably capable also. He had guys with him a lot longer in his record runs than did Coe. The lactate tolerance alone is something to ponder. But it might not take 44 speed. 45 speed is probably enough. The aerobic component of 800 running is quite often not given the attention it should be given. Borzo the bozo looks like he has tons of talent, but isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer, and sometimes I wonder if his training is what it should be. The advice he's been given so far sure hasn't been. For awhile, especially when he dropped to 1:42, it looked like 1:40 point was definitely there. Now, who knows?

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: A sub 1:40, you do the math

          Borzo the
          >bozo looks like he has tons of talent, but isn't the sharpest knife in the
          >drawer, and sometimes I wonder if his training is what it should be. The
          >advice he's been given so far sure hasn't been. For awhile, especially when he
          >dropped to 1:42, it looked like 1:40 point was definitely there. Now, who
          >knows?

          On Borzo, I have only seen him a few times (running on TV that is) he seams to be talented and has a good kick, which may mean he his pretty fast, do you have further any info as to why he may not be sharp and where he is going wrong in training. Is it because he comes from so far back, should he go out a little harder to be closer to the front and not have to work his way through??

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: A sub 1:40, you do the math

            When Johnny Gray ran his PR there was a group in the 42's. If there's a group in the 41's then 40 will go. So basically we need a 1 second improvement (well duh, the WR is 41.1, silly) in the core group. This sounds obvious and easy (to me), but it will probably be towards the end of the decade before all this falls into place.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: A sub 1:40, you do the math

              Since Kipketer ran his WR by himself, for the most part, it might be interesting to see what happens with a couple of guys that fast having a Coe-Ovett type rivalry.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: A sub 1:40, you do the math

                Other examples of my formula 400t x 2/3 plus 1500t x 1/3 projecting 800m PR


                J.Barbosa 45.9 217.04 102.9466667 (103.08PR)
                S.Cram 49.01 209.67 102.5633333 (102.9PR)
                P.Elliott 48.2 212.69 103.03 (102.97PR)
                N.Kiprotich 45.8 218.76 103.4533333 (103.31PR
                I.VanDamme 46.4 218.26 103.6866667(103.86PR)
                W.Wulbeck 47.83 213.74 103.1333333 (103.65PR)
                M.Mutola 51.37 241.6 114.78 (115.19PR)

                I am sure there are many more that we could add, but you get the gist of what I am saying. They are all pretty close to the real 800 PR. It's harder obtain PR's for all event (4, 8 and 15)in this day and age, as not many 800 guys run the 1500, like the guys back in the 70/80's did.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: A sub 1:40, you do the math

                  Justin, I like your formula, for me it worked out to within 0.8 sec. of my PR. How did you come up with this? I like how it implicates potential and balance, i.e., a runner with a very quick 400, but mediocre 1500, will find greater potential improvement on the 1500 side, and vice-versa.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: A sub 1:40, you do the math

                    Kipketer was rabbited by David Kiptoo through 600m in his WR. I'm watching the tape right now.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: A sub 1:40, you do the math

                      Formula predicts within a second of my PR, as well. Thanks for posting that.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: A sub 1:40, you do the math

                        i did post alink earlier,where it showed that if kip had run his WR at even splits,he would have likely gone sub - 1:40

                        http://www.iaaf.org/community/forums/Li ... icID=15400

                        (it's listed further down the thread)

                        BTW justin,i'm intrigued as to how you came up with your formula

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: A sub 1:40, you do the math

                          >What are Kipketer's 4 and 15 PRs?


                          Kipketer's PRs for the 400m & 1500m are 46.85s (1994)and 3m:42.80s (1993) respectively.
                          He also has a 3m:59.57s mile to his credit from Stockholm in 1993.

                          There's loads on info. about the 800m and 'it's athletes' at this site;
                          http://www.800m.cjb.net/

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: A sub 1:40, you do the math

                            Other examples of my formula 400t x 2/3 plus 1500t x 1/3 projecting 800m PR


                            J.Barbosa 45.9 217.04 102.9466667 (103.08PR)
                            S.Cram 49.01 209.67 102.5633333 (102.9PR)
                            P.Elliott 48.2 212.69 103.03 (102.97PR)
                            N.Kiprotich 45.8 218.76 103.4533333 (103.31PR
                            I.VanDamme 46.4 218.26 103.6866667(103.86PR)
                            W.Wulbeck 47.83 213.74 103.1333333 (103.65PR)
                            M.Mutola 51.37 241.6 114.78 (115.19PR)<<

                            Cram ran a 1:42 despite having never broken 49 seconds for 400 meters???

                            That seems rather hard to buy...

                            By this formula, btw, Aouita's 400 PR should be 51.06...Which strikes me as horseshit, given that he ran a 1:43...

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: A sub 1:40, you do the math

                              The formula is not an exact science. It's just something that came out of trial and error. But it should be noted that Aouita did run 12:58 (5000) and would gain more from the aerobic side than the others. It works for most 800 m runners. I'll get working on one that takes the 5 km guys into account. There are not many Aouita's out there, so there is always an exception to the rule (like anything in life). He did say that he did more speed work leading into 88. Cram was noted for not having much speed. This was evident in the way in which he raced. He always liked to build it up from a long way out.

                              OK so the formula has a few floors. Lucky for you, that you didn't have to pay for it.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X