Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

"How fast would Usain Bolt run the mile".

245

Comments

  • #32
    Jayop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,387 ✭✭✭✭Jayop


    ultrapercy wrote: »
    No he wouldn't that would be the absolute worst approach.

    Thought I was in AH

    Wasn't being serious.


  • #33
    Chivito550
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,697 ✭✭✭Chivito550


    El Caballo wrote: »
    What makes bolt such a legend would give him little chance at breaking 5 in mile imo, those fast twitch fibers. To be the fastest man in history, you've got to have ridiculously explosive muscles and while I don't doubt that sprinters can be aerobically fit to an high level, you're talking about an already genetic freak in a pure explosive event like the 100 and he would have to be a 90 odd percenter in an event completely removed from his genetic buildup, I don't see it happening. Micheal Johnson was on the endurance side of the sprint events and worked his a$$ off, didn't have the same explosive firepower of Bolt to run the 100 and could barely break 5, Bolt wouldn't get close to MJ in term of endurance.

    Not saying there isn't freaks of range out there, Ireland's Mark Caroll was one who has an official low 21 second 200m and a 2.10 marathon which is astonishing in my opinion but all Bolts strengths and freakishish would pay against him.

    Carroll ran low 21 for 200? I find that very hard to believe. Gillick hasn't even broke 21. Any link to this?


  • #34
    gramar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,045 ✭✭✭✭gramar


    Chivito550 wrote: »
    Carroll ran low 21 for 200? I find that very hard to believe. Gillick hasn't even broke 21. Any link to this?

    Not according to this he hasn't.
    http://www.all-athletics.com/en-us/athlete/45217


  • #35
    Mellor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,377 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    El Caballo wrote: »
    What makes bolt such a legend would give him little chance at breaking 5 in mile imo, those fast twitch fibers.
    Those fast twitch muscles mean he's never be elite in the mile, not that he wouldn't be able to finish.
    Elite is sub 4 minutes. Sub 5 mins is rather average. Saying he doesn't get under 5 minutes is insane into.

    I ran a mile event for charity a while ago in 5m27s.
    That was with no real training, a couple of 1600's on the treadmill. Ran less than 10km this year.
    There's no way thy Bolt doesn't blitz that time. Has he ran 800m?. That would be the best indicator of mile performance imo.


  • #36
    walshb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 58,425 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    robinph wrote: »

    In 6 months he'd be able to do it easily I think. But not now.

    Agreed. But I think he'd do it with less than 6 months prep. I think he's being sold a little short here.


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    Panrich
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,972 ✭✭✭Panrich


    walshb wrote: »
    Agreed. But I think he'd do it with less than 6 months prep. I think he's being sold a little short here.

    I'd say he'd run a mile to get away from having to do that though.


  • #38
    gramar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,045 ✭✭✭✭gramar


    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=100589704&postcount=2530

    The David Gillick interview about Parkrun is a bit of an eye opener. He raced 400m and said he didn't know what would happen at 410m.
    I'm suprised sprint athletes don't seem to do longer runs just for general aerobic fitness. If Bolt is the same and doesn't now run beyond 200m then a 5 minute mile might be more difficult than I would have thought for him.


  • #39
    Mellor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,377 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    gramar wrote: »
    I'm suprised sprint athletes don't seem to do longer runs just for general aerobic fitness.
    I'm not surprised tbh. Sprinting is more anaerobic, he's not going to invest time in general training that doesn't further than goal.
    If Bolt is the same and doesn't now run beyond 200m then a 5 minute mile might be more difficult than I would have thought for him.
    I still don't think it would be remotely difficult for him. His aerobic capacity will be nowhere near the same elite level as his anaerobic, but he doesn't need it to be remotely near that level. 5 mins is not that high a standard.
    If he increased his 400m pace from 45 to 75 seconds, he's complete a mile in 5. That would be sustainable imo.
    I'd say he's get around in 4:30 tbh.


  • #40
    Chivito550
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,697 ✭✭✭Chivito550


    gramar wrote: »
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=100589704&postcount=2530

    The David Gillick interview about Parkrun is a bit of an eye opener. He raced 400m and said he didn't know what would happen at 410m.
    I'm suprised sprint athletes don't seem to do longer runs just for general aerobic fitness. If Bolt is the same and doesn't now run beyond 200m then a 5 minute mile might be more difficult than I would have thought for him.

    Utter nonsense. He's saying that for dramatic effect. He has run a 4:30 mile. He would have done countless reps over 400m in distance. I'm certain he did fartlek runs too. 400m runners are super fit. I've seen guys who are only around 49-50 seconds still knock out 17 mins for 5k off 400m training.

    Maurice Greene supposedly ran 17 for 5K and he was a 100/200 specialist.

    I've run 4:52 for 1500 at the end of a decathlon (equivalent to 5:15 mile) and gone sub 20 5k off the back of 400m training. So why on earth wouldn't elite 400m runners be better!


  • #41
    Chivito550
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,697 ✭✭✭Chivito550


    Mellor wrote: »
    I'm not surprised tbh. Sprinting is more anaerobic, he's not going to invest time in general training that doesn't further than goal.


    I still don't think it would be remotely difficult for him. His aerobic capacity will be nowhere near the same elite level as his anaerobic, but he doesn't need it to be remotely near that level. 5 mins is not that high a standard.
    If he increased his 400m pace from 45 to 75 seconds, he's complete a mile in 5. That would be sustainable imo.
    I'd say he's get around in 4:30 tbh.

    No chance in hell Bolt runs 4:30.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    Mellor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,377 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    Chivito550 wrote: »
    No chance in hell Bolt runs 4:30.
    You've no evidence or logic to back that claim up, I'm not going to just take your word for it.


  • #43
    Chivito550
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,697 ✭✭✭Chivito550


    Mellor wrote: »
    You've no evidence or logic to back that claim up, I'm not going to just take your word for it.

    I have knowledge of how the sport works. I'd love to know what you are basing your prediction off.

    I also follow the decathlon, and the guys who are best at the first 9 events (power athletes) are the worst at the 1500. Many of them are way outside 4:30 for 1500, let alone a mile.


  • #44
    Mellor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,377 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    Chivito550 wrote: »
    I have knowledge of how the sport works. I'd love to know what you are basing your prediction off.
    What specific knowledge of the sport are you talking about?
    I imagine there are zero middle distance runners who do 5min miles. So there is no sample there.
    I just can't see how his pace would need to fall by so much in order to finish a mile. The article quoted a 2:10 800m, but I don'know where that came from.
    I also follow the decathlon, and the guys who are best at the first 9 events (power athletes) are the worst at the 1500. Many of them are way outside 4:30 for 1500, let alone a mile.
    Granted, I don't follow the decathlon. But Id guess that each of them would run a fresh 1500m race at least a few seconds faster.

    What do you think it takes to go sub 5min mile?


  • #45
    BeepBeep67
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,092 ✭✭✭BeepBeep67


    Chivito550 wrote: »
    I have knowledge of how the sport works. I'd love to know what you are basing your prediction off.

    I also follow the decathlon, and the guys who are best at the first 9 events (power athletes) are the worst at the 1500. Many of them are way outside 4:30 for 1500, let alone a mile.

    Top guys can go low 10's and sub 4:30 though, or is that just a few outliers like Eaton?


  • #46
    Chivito550
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,697 ✭✭✭Chivito550


    BeepBeep67 wrote: »
    Top guys can go low 10's and sub 4:30 though, or is that just a few outliers like Eaton?

    Eaton is a freak, the greatest all rounder in history and his 4:14 1500m is still not even 4:30 for a mile.


  • #47
    Chivito550
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,697 ✭✭✭Chivito550


    Mellor wrote: »
    What specific knowledge of the sport are you talking about?
    I imagine there are zero middle distance runners who do 5min miles. So there is no sample there.
    I just can't see how his pace would need to fall by so much in order to finish a mile. The article quoted a 2:10 800m, but I don'know where that came from.


    Granted, I don't follow the decathlon. But Id guess that each of them would run a fresh 1500m race at least a few seconds faster.

    What do you think it takes to go sub 5min mile?

    How closely do you honestly follow the sport?

    Bolt is a fast twitch fibre machine. An explosive animal. It's what makes him such a phenomen over 100 and 200. He does not have the body composition to run a 4:30 mile off the back of sprint training. To suggest so is ludicrous. There's a massive difference between 4:30 and 5:00.


  • #48
    Mellor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,377 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    Chivito550 wrote: »
    How closely do you honestly follow the sport?

    Bolt is a fast twitch fibre machine. An explosive animal. It's what makes him such a phenomen over 100 and 200. He does not have the body composition to run a 4:30 mile off the back of sprint training. To suggest so is ludicrous. There's a massive difference between 4:30 and 5:00.
    I think it's ludicrous to say he'd never run sub 5 tbh. I don't consider a 5min mile to be in any way only attainable by geneticly gifted. I reckon I could do it myself with any sort of training.
    I never said he'd run he 4:30 off the back of sprint training either. Not sure where you got that. Being a fast twitch machine means he'll never be elite over a mile. There's a world of difference between 4:30 and sub 3:50


  • #49
    gramar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,045 ✭✭✭✭gramar


    Mellor wrote: »
    I think it's ludicrous to say he'd never run sub 5 tbh. I don't consider a 5min mile to be in any way only attainable by geneticly gifted. I reckon I could do it myself with any sort of training.
    I never said he'd run he 4:30 off the back of sprint training either. Not sure where you got that. Being a fast twitch machine means he'll never be elite over a mile. There's a world of difference between 4:30 and sub 3:50

    I don't think anyone is saying he'd never do it but if he's doing no middle distance training whatsover and only preparing the 100m and 200m then without specific training he'd find it very difficult to just get up off his arse and do a mile in less than 5min.


  • #50
    Chivito550
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,697 ✭✭✭Chivito550


    Mellor wrote: »
    I think it's ludicrous to say he'd never run sub 5 tbh. I don't consider a 5min mile to be in any way only attainable by geneticly gifted. I reckon I could do it myself with any sort of training.
    I never said he'd run he 4:30 off the back of sprint training either. Not sure where you got that. Being a fast twitch machine means he'll never be elite over a mile. There's a world of difference between 4:30 and sub 3:50

    I never said he wouldn't run sub 5. I said he wouldn't run 4:30, the stupid claim you made, which shows fundamental lack of knowledge of not just sprinting, but also middle distance running.

    Watch this video of Carl Lewis blowing up to a 2:16 800m on superstars. Not even 4:30 mile pace for half the distance.

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DTlrdczjjOA

    Irrelevant what you think you could run yourself. I'd hazard a guess you are not a sprinter busting your ass in the gym building explosive power.

    It's Olympic season on AR!


  • #51
    walshb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 58,425 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    As Mellor said, he never made a 4.30 or sub 5 claim off sprint training. Sub 5 off some proper training is very achievable. I'd think 4.40 or so a possibility with effective preparation.


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    Chivito550
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,697 ✭✭✭Chivito550


    walshb wrote: »
    As Mellor said, he never made a 4.30 or sun 5 claim off sprint training. Sub 5 off some proper training is very achievable. I'd think 4.40 or so a possibility with effective preparation.

    Well if he changed his body composition over a few years then yes. But that's a pointless debate entirely. People are questioning can "Usain Bolt - The Sprinter" run sub 5. Possibly. 4:30 not a hope.


  • #53
    walshb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 58,425 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Chivito550 wrote: »
    Well if he changed his body composition over a few years then yes. But that's a pointless debate entirely. People are questioning can "Usain Bolt - The Sprinter" run sub 5. Possibly. 4:30 not a hope.

    5 mins is hardly great. I don't think body composition is all that relevant. Good prep and 5 or sub 5 seems very realistic.


  • #54
    Chivito550
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,697 ✭✭✭Chivito550


    walshb wrote: »
    5 mins is hardly great. I don't think body composition is all that relevant. Good prep and 5 or sub 5 seems very realistic.

    Look at that video above of your hero running 2:16 for 800m. It would be an even bigger car crash over a mile.


  • #55
    KielyUnusual
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,900 ✭✭✭KielyUnusual


    walshb wrote: »
    5 mins is hardly great. I don't think body composition is all that relevant. Good prep and 5 or sub 5 seems very realistic.

    The fact that Bolt is an extraordinary athlete at 100m/200m, does not mean it's an insult to say that he wouldn't break 5 minutes for the mile. If he ran it today, with no specific training, yada, yada, yada.

    Personally, I would bet on him not doing it. First of all, he'd probably pace it horribly. With a pacer, I'd give him a better chance. Secondly, he probably hasn't run near a mile in his lifetime. Thirdly, I suggest some people are underestimating the achievement here. Its a mediocre time for a well trained club athlete training specifically for it. Its not a mediocre time generally.

    If you look at the opposite half. Mo Farah is a man who has ran a 100m and a 1500m flat out. His 1500m time is truly world class at 3.29 ( pretty sure this is right) but he's 100m time is 12.98. The two are completely different events. One is all about power, speed endurance and aerobic capacity. The other is all about strength and aerobic capacity. He'd easily split faster than 12.98 in the last 100m of a 10,000m but he doesn't have the explosive power required to get up to top speed quickly and his top end speed is just not as high.

    Adding 30s to a 400m time and assuming he could do 4 of them easy is far too simplistic a viewpoint and shows lack of knowledge for how speed drops off as you increase in distance and the abilities required to do both.


  • #56
    Chivito550
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,697 ✭✭✭Chivito550


    KielyUnusual wrote: »
    The fact that Bolt is an extraordinary athlete at 100m/200m, does not mean it's an insult to say that he wouldn't break 5 minutes for the mile. If he ran it today, with no specific training, yada, yada, yada.

    Personally, I would bet on him not doing it. First of all, he'd probably pace it horribly. With a pacer, I'd give him a better chance. Secondly, he probably hasn't run near a mile in his lifetime. Thirdly, I suggest some people are underestimating the achievement here. Its a mediocre time for a well trained club athlete training specifically for it. Its not a mediocre time generally.

    If you look at the opposite half. Mo Farah is a man who has ran a 100m and a 1500m flat out. His 1500m time is truly world class at 3.29 ( pretty sure this is right) but he's 100m time is 12.98. The two are completely different events. One is all about power, speed endurance and aerobic capacity. The other is all about strength and aerobic capacity. He'd easily split faster than 12.98 in the last 100m of a 10,000m but he doesn't have the explosive power required to get up to top speed quickly and his top end speed is just not as high.

    Adding 30s to a 400m time and assuming he could do 4 of them easy is far too simplistic a viewpoint and shows lack of knowledge for how speed drops off as you increase in distance and the abilities required to do both.

    Nail on the head. The people who are arguing against this common sense viewpoint don't appear to be runners. They don't really understand.


  • #57
    walshb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 58,425 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Chivito550 wrote: »
    Nail on the head. The people who are arguing against this common sense viewpoint don't appear to be runners. They don't really understand.

    The article itself has some views that he could go sub 5. Unless you are saying that sub 5 is impossible, then I think with preparation it's very possible. Or maybe you are saying 4.30 is impossible?

    Anyway, the article offers several opinions. Mine is of the sub 5 variety with preparation.


  • #58
    KielyUnusual
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,900 ✭✭✭KielyUnusual


    walshb wrote: »
    The article itself has some views that he could go sub 5. Unless you are saying that sub 5 is impossible, then I think with preparation it's very possible. Or maybe you are saying 4.30 is impossible?

    Anyway, the article offers several opinions. Mine is of the sub 5 variety with preparation.

    I'm not saying he couldn't. If I had to put a bet on it, I'd wager that he doesn't.

    With training, all bets are out the window. I'm not even going to argue that. Too many variables. Length of training, maintaining injury free doing long distance running with his body type, changing his body type to a more middle distance appropriate one.

    I think the essence of the question is would Usain Bolt run a sub 5 minute mile now. Its an interesting debate on the relative skills required for each discipline and the crossover between different disciplines. The other question is how would Usain Bolt respond to middle distance type training. To me, that is less interesting, possibly even quite dull.


  • #59
    walshb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 58,425 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Ok. I thought the article was with and without training. Without I would say no.


  • #60
    BorneTobyWilde
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,550 ✭✭✭✭BorneTobyWilde


    Would love to see a moonwalk 100m
    How fast could he do that
    Would be a great event


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    walshb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 58,425 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    BorneTobyWilde wrote: »
    Would love to see a moonwalk 100m
    How fast could he do that
    Would be a great event

    Jacko style or Buzz Aldrin style?


Advertisement