"How fast would Usain Bolt run the mile".

BorneTobyWilde · 07-08-2016 09:06PM

Jacko of course
Space Olympics years away yet .

Wild Garlic · 07-08-2016 09:17PM

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Jacko of course
Space Olympics years away yet .

Jacko was only imitating the great Bill Bailey. (At moon walking)

Mellor · 07-08-2016 11:40PM

Chivito550 wrote: »

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.!

I'm also not a middle distance runner building a solid CV base. My point in relating to myself is that I don't think 5mins mile is the level where muscle fibres, body comp etc becomes the deciding factor.

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.

Strawman.
It's been pointed out repeatedly that people are talking about his potential with training. I think he could run sub 5 now, or with minimal training (if he's really never ran >400m, he'd need to figure out the pace etc). My 4:30 was referring to if he trained for it, and the subsequent comp changes.

Trey Hardy who came 2nd in London is Around Bolt's height and weight. He ran the 1500 in 4:40, which around a 5min mile.

Chivito550 · 07-08-2016 11:46PM

Mellor wrote: »

I'm also not a middle distance runner building a solid CV base. My point in relating to myself is that I don't think 5mins mile is the level where muscle fibres, body comp etc becomes the deciding factor.

Strawman.
It's been pointed out repeatedly that people are talking about his potential with training. I think he could run sub 5 now, or with minimal training (if he's really never ran >400m, he'd need to figure out the pace etc). My 4:30 was referring to if he trained for it, and the subsequent comp changes.

Trey Hardy who came 2nd in London is Around Bolt's height and weight. He ran the 1500 in 4:40, which around a 5min mile.

Nah not having any of that goalpost shifting. You never mentioned "with specific training", "change in body composition over time" etc.

And as KU said, who cares what he COULD run if he took up middle distance. That's not really what the initial question is about. It's about how fast could an explosive guy like Bolt run a mile right now.

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.

Mellor · 07-08-2016 11:52PM

Chivito550 wrote: »

Nah not having any of that goalpost shifting. You never mentioned "with specific training", "change in body composition over time" etc.

There was more than this, just a sample

gramar wrote: »

I think if he went training this morning and attempted a sub 5 minute mile he's struggle though I doubt he'd be too far off, maybe 5:10/5:20.
I'm sure though that with a few weeks specific training he'd manage it fairly easily.

walshb wrote: »

With no training I'd imagine he'd be close to 5 mins, maybe sub 5. With training he could be 4.40 or slightly less.

Mellor wrote: »

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

walshb wrote: »

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.

And as KU said, who cares what he COULD run if he took up middle distance. That's not really what the initial question is about. It's about how fast could an explosive guy like Bolt run a mile right now.

Who cares what he could runs now? He's not going to compete ever.
Both situations are pointless hypotheticals

Chivito550 · 08-08-2016 12:05AM

Mellor wrote: »

There was more than this, just a sample

Who cares what he could runs now? He's not going to compete ever.
Both situations are pointless hypotheticals

But contemplating what a world class 100m runner can run for a mile is a fun discussion. Contemplating what a former world class 100m runner, turned average club middle distance runner can run is not all that interesting. Same way Mo Farah's 100m was interesting. Got people talking. If he ditched the distance running and took up sprinting then it no longer is something worth discussing IMO.

laura_ac3 · 08-08-2016 07:34AM

If that's important to you maybe you should have specified the parameters of the discussion from the outset given that the article itself actually says:

"Weldon respectfully disagrees with his brother. “With training, I would think Bolt could break five minutes,” he told me."

Whether or not you agree that it's a boring concept others may not, as touched upon in the article itself.

gramar · 08-08-2016 07:51AM

Mellor wrote: »

There was more than this, just a sample

Who cares what he could runs now? He's not going to compete ever.
Both situations are pointless hypotheticals

Quote:
Originally Posted by gramar View Post
I think if he went training this morning and attempted a sub 5 minute mile he's struggle though I doubt he'd be too far off, maybe 5:10/5:20.
I'm sure though that with a few weeks specific training he'd manage it fairly easily.

When I said training I meant the normal training he does, not specific for a mile.
I think the debate is if he was out on the track and decided to run a mile just for the hell of it would he do it in 5 mins or less.

In fairness, I think at this stage it's about time he actually tried to do it just out of interest.

Chivito550 · 08-08-2016 08:37AM

laura_ac3 wrote: »

If that's important to you maybe you should have specified the parameters of the discussion from the outset given that the article itself actually says:

"Weldon respectfully disagrees with his brother. “With training, I would think Bolt could break five minutes,” he told me."

Whether or not you agree that it's a boring concept others may not, as touched upon in the article itself.

Just echoeing what KU said above.

Mellor · 08-08-2016 08:46AM

gramar wrote: »

When I said training I meant the normal training he does, not specific for a mile.

That's what I understood you meant in the first sentence. In the second sentence, you said "specific training". By that I took you meaning to be mile distance specific training.

I'm sure though that with a few weeks specific training he'd manage it fairly easily.

Chivito550 wrote:

But contemplating what a world class 100m runner can run for a mile is a fun discussion. Contemplating what a former world class 100m runner, turned average club middle distance runner can run is not all that interesting. Same way Mo Farah's 100m was interesting. Got people talking. If he ditched the distance running and took up sprinting then it no longer is something worth discussing IMO.

To each their own, what you find interesting others might not, and visa versa. I'd be more interested in potential that what he could do today. But that's maybe reflective of my own training and goals.

Chivito550 · 08-08-2016 08:50AM

Mellor wrote: »

But that's maybe reflective of my own training and goals.

All 10km of it, with the odd treadmill and charity run?

laura_ac3 · 08-08-2016 08:51AM

Chivito550 wrote: »

Just echoeing what KU said above.

Yes, but you started the thread and referenced the article. Hence my point to you that if that's the discussion you wanted to have maybe you should have set those parameters, given that the article touches on different things.

I found KU's points really interesting, they actually added to the discussion and offered reasoning behind his opinions.

Chivito550 · 08-08-2016 08:53AM

laura_ac3 wrote: »

Yes, but you started the thread and referenced the article. Hence my point to you that if that's the discussion you wanted to have maybe you should have set those parameters, given that the article touches on different things.

I found KU's points really interesting, they actually added to the discussion and offered reasoning behind his opinions.

His comments did add to the discussion, very much unlike yours.

laura_ac3 · 08-08-2016 09:10AM

Chivito550 wrote: »

laura_ac3 wrote: »

Yes, but you started the thread and referenced the article. Hence my point to you that if that's the discussion you wanted to have maybe you should have set those parameters, given that the article touches on different things.

I found KU's points really interesting, they actually added to the discussion and offered reasoning behind his opinions.

His comments did add to the discussion, very much unlike yours.

Well my first was referencing the article to highlight how some may find merit in different aspects of the conversation. The reason i found KU's so interesting was due to the insight it offered to support his opinion and amounted to more than simply stating "you're wrong", unlike others.

You're right however in that at this stage I'm offering nothing further to the discussion so I'll leave you all to it.

Mellor · 08-08-2016 09:22AM

Chivito550 wrote: »

All 10km of it, with the odd treadmill and charity run?

You realize that there's other types of training running, right?

Chivito550 · 08-08-2016 09:23AM

laura_ac3 wrote: »

Well my first was referencing the article to highlight how some may find merit in different aspects of the conversation. The reason i found KU's so interesting was due to the insight it offered to support his opinion and amounted to more than simply stating "you're wrong", unlike others.

You're right however in that at this stage I'm offering nothing further to the discussion so I'll leave you all to it.

Be interesting to hear your thoughts on what you think Bolt could run for a mile.

Chivito550 · 08-08-2016 09:24AM

Mellor wrote: »

You realize that there's other types of training running, right?

A joke, clearly. Needed more winky faces it seems.

Mellor · 08-08-2016 09:32AM

Chivito550 wrote: »

Mellor wrote: »

You realize that there's other types of training running, right?

A joke, clearly. Needed more winky faces it seems.

Sure, a joke. I did see the smiley faces.
The snide undertone was there too.

You might as well post your own mile time, just so I know how much more elite you are.

;)

Chivito550 · 08-08-2016 09:36AM

Mellor wrote: »

Sure, a joke. I did see the smiley faces.
The snide undertone was there too.

You might as well post your own mile time, just so I know how much more elite you are. ;)

If you want to interpret it like that then that's up to you entirely.

Like yourself, I'm not a miler.

gramar · 08-08-2016 10:34AM

Mellor wrote: »

That's what I understood you meant in the first sentence. In the second sentence, you said "specific training". By that I took you meaning to be mile distance specific training.

To each their own, what you find interesting others might not, and visa versa. I'd be more interested in potential that what he could do today. But that's maybe reflective of my own training and goals.

I'm sure though that with a few weeks specific training he'd manage it fairly easily.

As I said I'd think he'd need a few weeks. I'd say after 3/4 weeks of proper training for a mile I reckon he should be able to do it in 5 mins or a little less.

I think if he got up off his hole this morning and tried to run a mile in 5 mins or less he wouldn't do it.

walshb · 08-08-2016 12:23PM

Chivito, relating to the Lewis video over 800. I would bet a lot more on a prepared Bolt beating a prepared Lewis over any distance. Lewis is more a speedster/greyhound type sprinter. I'd hazard an educated guess that Bolt would be better suited to aerobic activity.

Either way I think your dismissal claims come across a little pompous and arrogant. That's how it reads to me. You didn't even really consider that some educated athletics people have a view that Bolt could go sub 5 with little training, and lower with specific training.

Chivito550 · 08-08-2016 12:36PM

walshb wrote: »

Chivito, relating to the Lewis video over 800. I would bet a lot more on a prepared Bolt beating a prepared Lewis over any distance. Lewis is more a speedster/greyhound type sprinter. I'd hazard an educated guess that Bolt would be better suited to aerobic activity.

Either way I think your dismissal claims come across a little pompous and arrogant. That's how it reads to me. You didn't even really consider that some educated athletics people have a view that Bolt could go sub 5 with little training, and lower with specific training.

I actually never once said he couldn't run sub 5. Putting words into my mouth. Personally, I'd say he's 40/60 to run it right now in peak sprinting shape. What I said is that he wouldn't run 4:30. Seems like people here have lost the art of reading!

Chivito550 · 08-08-2016 12:51PM

https://mobile.twitter.com/craig100m/status/760411232968904704

walshb · 08-08-2016 12:51PM

Chivito550 wrote: »

I actually never once said he couldn't run sub 5. Putting words into my mouth. Personally, I'd say he's 40/60 to run it right now in peak sprinting shape. What I said is that he wouldn't run 4:30. Seems like people here have lost the art of reading!

Okey doke, so sub 5 is something you would have no issue with people thinking possible. Is 4.40 too low with preparation.

Chivito550 · 08-08-2016 12:55PM

walshb wrote: »

Okey doke, so sub 5 is something you would have no issue with people thinking possible. Is 4.40 too low with preparation.

Sub 5 is not a crazy prediction. I reckon he'd fall outside though. Around 5:05 or a tad more. An 800 would tell more as to what sort of drop off he has from 400 (which is already a significant drop off from 200). Not sure when that 2:10 that is quoted was run but if that's as fast as he can run 800 then zero chance. I'd guess he'd be quicker than that though.

walshb · 08-08-2016 12:58PM

Chivito, you posted:

"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."

That to me is a little pompous.

I certainly was not arguing against anything. I simply said that sub 5 was possible, and maybe 4.40 possible with real preparation.

Chivito550 · 08-08-2016 01:06PM

walshb wrote: »

Chivito, you posted:

"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."

That to me is a little pompous.

I certainly was not arguing against anything. I simply said that sub 5 was possible, and maybe 4.40 possible with real preparation.

I was referring to the notion that he'd easily get sub 5, and more than likely 4:30.

walshb · 08-08-2016 01:17PM

Chivito550 wrote: »

I was referring to the notion that he'd easily get sub 5, and more than likely 4:30.

Okey doke. Being pompous for that is ok...:)

Mellor · 08-08-2016 01:19PM

Chivito550 wrote: »

Personally, I'd say he's 40/60 to run it right now in peak sprinting shape. What I said is that he wouldn't run 4:30. Seems like people here have lost the art of reading!

You said he's 40/60 to run it right now in top sprint condition. 40% it's a decent chance tbf. What sort of improvement you think he could with a few weeks specific training, 10 seconds, 20 seconds, more?

Chivito550 · 08-08-2016 01:29PM

Mellor wrote: »

You said he's 40/60 to run it right now in top sprint condition. 40% it's a decent chance tbf. What sort of improvement you think he could with a few weeks specific training, 10 seconds, 20 seconds, more?

40/60 is hedging my bets to be honest as we don't have enough info to go on. If the 2:10 800m is a current time or a time performed from 2007 onwards, then I would say 0:100 that he would break 5.

Michael Johnson only barely broke 5, and he is much faster over 400 than Bolt.

Off a few weeks training? A bit. Not much though. Likely improvements would come from pacing. He won't get much aerobically fitter in a few weeks.

These guys aren't built for distance. Ashton Eaton is the GOAT all rounder and he's only operating at about 4:35 mileing. Bolt as a specialised 100/200 guy would be nowhere near him.

400m guys on the other hand are different. Every elite endurance based 400 runner should be comfortably under 5. The speed based 400 guys might be a bit different.

"How fast would Usain Bolt run the mile".

Comments