CrossFit Discussion Board

CrossFit Discussion Board (https://board.crossfit.com/index.php)
-   Exercises (https://board.crossfit.com/forumdisplay.php?f=5)
-   -   400m time guidelines (https://board.crossfit.com/showthread.php?t=30557)

Stephen Georgiou 04-17-2008 06:17 AM

400m time guidelines
 
Hi,

Just out of curiosity, what would be considered a respectable 400m time for a mortal male assuming you were going for a single all out lap (obviously im not referring to one of those 43sec world records held by the gods)?

is this about right?:

elite: sub 50 sec ?
excellent: 50-60 sec ?
good: 60-90sec ?
fair: ?
not so good: ?
poor: ?

etc

just after some opinions

Thanks

:run:

Grant Scalf 04-17-2008 07:08 AM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
I think you have it pretty close. My guess is something like...

Elite: <47
Advanced: <55
Intermediate: <1:05
Novice: <1:15
Untrained: <1:30

All times are for a male and total conjecture.

Aaron Moburg-Jones 04-17-2008 07:18 AM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
My unscientific take:

All times for non-professional runners

Elite:52
Excellent: 53-60
Good: 60-72
Fair: 73-83
Novice:83-95
Untrained 96-120

I was a very average track and crosscountry runner and ran 54-56, which is better than almost anyone who doesn't train as a runner could run. It was was by no means special and I doubt I could do it anymore. I think anyone who is not a track athlete (or trains specifically for the long sprints) that can break 60 has achieved something on par with a 2x bodyweight squat. But I could be TOTALLY wrong.

I'm curious what other people think because I usually underestimate how hard I think running is and overestimate how hard I think lifting is (I CANNOT do a 2x bodyweight squat and just achieved a 2x bodyweight deadlift).

Jackson Smith 04-17-2008 07:28 AM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
I take it these times are for a single 400m effort. What pace do you guys usually hold for interval workouts, i.e. 6 or 8x400m? I usually hold around 1:20, and my 5k time fluctuates between 18:45 and 19:30.

Scott Allen Hanson 04-17-2008 08:03 AM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
These times look reasonable except that I'd say that the average untrained person would have a very hard time finishing a 400 in under 2:00. I have novices (generally older adults) who have been CF'ing for several months who are challenged to break 2:00 for a 400 during a WOD, and I consider them to be way ahead of a similar, untrained individual.

John Seiler 04-17-2008 08:20 AM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
I agree with Scott. I think the posted times are pretty legit for recreational athletes (Aaron's numbers seemed best IMHO) particularly in the elite and excellent categories, but way out of whack for the untrained. For those of us who've been training for most of our lives and around similar people, the frame of reference is shockingly different than for the sedentary. There are many adult, non-diseased people out there who would be wiped after a 400m jog.

Carl Pawluk 04-17-2008 08:30 AM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
I'm with Scott.

I've only been doing 400's on a treadmill at the Y and my time is 2:15. I'm pretty sure I'd have a faster time on the track, but I'm not sure. That being said, I think putting 2:15 in the "untrained" category is a little much.

To me, the times in each category should be much more broad. I've been CFing for a couple of months and would say that I'm way above average as far as fitness goes and there's no way I could maintain sub 2 min. 400's.

Keep in mind, that there are hundreds if not thousands of CFers that train everyday and aren't fleet afoot. I don't think those people deserve a category titled "untrained". Not all CFers are 20 years old either.

Based on age, weight, etc. I would say that a sustained 2 min. 400 is satisfactory. I'm not saying that my times are satisfactory, because I've got a lot of room for improvement.

Try polling the forum on what exactly each of us are running 400's in. Maybe I'm slower than I thought, but I would bet there's a pretty wide range of times.

-Carl

Jacob McBride 04-17-2008 09:20 AM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
Senior year of high school I ran a 53.5. By next Fall I need to be running 50 or lower. A male [b]athlete[/b] that is untrained should be able to put in a 400 in less than 70 - 80 seconds. I guess an older male athlete would be around 2 minutes, but that's what I run an 800 in.

From a track athlete's perspective:

Elite < 45
Advanced < 50
Decent < 56
Poor <\ 70
Untrained > 70

<\ being less than or equal to

If running isn't something you're good at in any way, don't feel bad about a 2 minute 400, but [b]if you can run well[/b] and you consider yourself to be an athlete, then you should be sure to maintain a 400m that's under 60 - 65 seconds.

Martin Schap 04-17-2008 10:14 AM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
I don't think putting 2 minutes as untrained is unfair. It's just a category. If you don't like being in that category work hard and move up. Plenty of people who have not trained in a long time could run an 8 minute mile. When I was injured and hadn't run (or done virtually anything else) in several months I gutted out a 10-something 1.5 miles, which was something like a 7 minute mile. According to my training habits at the time I was untrained, but according to the standards in this thread I would have fallen into beginner or something. Taking it one step further, I was the fastest candidate out of the pool, so maybe I was elite? It's all just words. Keep improving.

Arturo Garcia 04-17-2008 10:53 AM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
I have never been on a track. I have, however, tried "sprinting" a couple of times recently, and my goodness, I'm spent after a distance that doesn't seem to be much more than 100 meters, if that. It takes me like 17 seconds.. I'm slow too. I honestly doubt I can keep up a "high" speed (high for me, not compared to others) for 400 meters, probably not even 200 meters... I have a new respect to those who can do 400 meters so fast. I need to start practising longer runs, but still in a range where I can maintain a "high" speed. I hate jogging. :)

David Knutzen 04-17-2008 10:55 AM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
Geez, I suppose I need to get on those 400m runs!

I'm not a great runner, but I've been working hard on it lately. I'm up to a 10:10 1.5 mile, but my 400m is still around 1:15-1:20 or so. I'm honestly surprised that "decent" speed is generally considered to be at or below 60 seconds. Thanks for the perspective.

Harry Stine 04-17-2008 12:08 PM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
Just curious how everyone is thinking. For those who posted times, are you talking about a 400 just once or a 400 as part of a METCON or track athlete's intervals workout?

Patrick Haskell 04-17-2008 12:40 PM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
I guess older Crossfit metrics didn't look at speed like you racer-types do:

Elite: 1:04
Advanced: 1:19
Intermediate: 1:34
Beginner: 2:04
I guess untrained is >=2:05

from (w/f/s) [URL="http://www.crossfitseattle.com/Skill%20Levels%201-IV%20spreadsheet.pdf"]the old crossfit North fitness standards[/URL]

Maybe with Michael Collins' coaching, we'll raise our standards to get closer to NCAA Div. 1 times, which look like:

Men's indoor (American) record: ~44.5 seconds
2007-2008 NCAA championship times: 46.02-47.86 seconds with one straggler at 49+ seconds

Woman's indoor (American) record: 50.64 seconds
2008 NCAA times: 51.95-54.4 seconds

Outdoor times (from 2007 at least) were a couple seconds slower.

Based on this, I'd say that Aaron's times are appropriate for the generic track athlete (high school level), but for the rest of us schlubs who are trying to build and gauge our fitness over a "broad range of time and modal domains," the ranges for the intermediate (fair) and beginner (novice) levels may be a bit narrow. I'd say anyone with a 1:30 400m time qualifies as a fair runner in the broader sense and if you break 2:00, you've at least shown enough not to be lumped with the untrained masses.

Jacob McBride 04-17-2008 01:12 PM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
if you're doing multiple 400s, then obvioulsy the time will go up. At one point me and my 4x400m relay team (when I was a junior in high school) set the school record and went to the State Open meet. Practice for that was that we all had to run 6 400s in under 60 seconds (though by the end we were just barely able to do that). So if you're doing around 6 of them, expect your times to go up 7 - 10 seconds (which is a LOT of time in a 400).

Jacob McBride 04-17-2008 01:15 PM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
[QUOTE=David Knutzen;293774]I'm honestly surprised that "decent" speed is generally considered to be at or below 60 seconds. Thanks for the perspective.[/QUOTE]
well when I say from a track athlete's perspective, I mean people who run 400s in a race. Like... my senior year we kicked someone off the 4x400m relay because he was running 58 - 60 second 400s, which, in a track setting, is really really bad, haha. Now I'm in college and my 53.5 is really pretty bad (Division 1), so 400 times are pretty relative really.

Kirez Reynolds 04-17-2008 03:06 PM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
Patrick, I think the CrossFit Seattle 4-levels skills sheets are right on.

Jacob, I wasn't a great runner in high school. I ran a 4:50 mile and a 10:30 2-mile. But your times are absurd. You cannot judge this from the POV of a competitive 400m specialist, duh. That's like saying that intermediate level bench press should be 300 lbs, beginner should be 225 lbs.

Eg., the advanced, level 3 (Level 4 = elite) running metric is a 2:50 or less 800 meter.

Grant Scalf 04-17-2008 09:06 PM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
[QUOTE=Kirez Reynolds;293967]Jacob, I wasn't a great runner in high school. I ran a 4:50 mile and a 10:30 2-mile. [/QUOTE]

Uhhhh, am I missing something here? Those are pretty stellar times in HS.

Jacob McBride 04-17-2008 09:25 PM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
[QUOTE=Kirez Reynolds;293967]Patrick, I think the CrossFit Seattle 4-levels skills sheets are right on.

Jacob, I wasn't a great runner in high school. I ran a 4:50 mile and a 10:30 2-mile. But your times are absurd. You cannot judge this from the POV of a competitive 400m specialist, duh. That's like saying that intermediate level bench press should be 300 lbs, beginner should be 225 lbs.

Eg., the advanced, level 3 (Level 4 = elite) running metric is a 2:50 or less 800 meter.[/QUOTE]

eh... I wasn't a even a [b]good[/b] runner in high school, and I was in high school last year. My best mile was 5 minutes and my best 2 mile was 11:15. So I'm slower than you are. Not to mention I've said in all of my posts (or at least, I think I did), that the times I was talking about were strictly from a track perspective. I never said that it was for everyone. Who am I to say what's good for everyone when my entire life right now is focused on running a 400 in under 50 and an 800 in under 1:55? And I consider my high school times (53.5 and 2:04) to be terrible. I think I even said that for someone who's not a runner, a 2:00 untrained 400 would be fine.

EDIT: And for anyone who wants to improve at sprinting:
[url]http://board.crossfit.com/showthread.php?t=30515[/url]
(w/f/s)
combine that with endurance/cardio runs (5 - 8 miles), ladders (50m, 100m, 150m, 200m, 150m, 100m, 50m), fartleks (sprint, jog, walk, jog, sprint, etc...), and just keep yourself active. You do all that and getting under 60 seconds in a 400 for a male athlete of the right age and build is going to be easy.

Wes Palmer 04-18-2008 12:36 AM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
Good find Patrick. My wife ran her 4-400s in a little under 2 minutes each and she is far from untrained.

Wes Palmer 04-18-2008 12:38 AM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
Remember we strive to be faster than any power lifter and stronger than any runner.

Aileen Reid 04-18-2008 02:13 AM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
I've run for years and done intervals likewise. At my best I never did less than about 1:40. And that was while I was running 40 km a week! I'm just slow but I'm not untrained. My RHR is in the 40's.

I had someone tell me on another messageboard that it was pointless me doing speedwork when I could only run 6 min kms. I was not amused. Some of us can't help it. I enjoy my runs and I'm far fitter than most people.

Kirez Reynolds 04-18-2008 05:10 AM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
[QUOTE=Grant Scalf;294243]Uhhhh, am I missing something here? Those are pretty stellar times in HS.[/QUOTE]

Thanks, but my point is -- Not compared to what people were suggesting should be our standards for running 400 meters. I think a 4:50 mile is equivalent to about a 65-second 400m. According to Jacob, that would be low intermediate! Which is absurd. A 65-second 400m should be right at the borderline of advanced, i.e. low advanced, but clearly above intermediate.

Carl Pawluk 04-18-2008 06:25 AM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
That's just it.

Grant, Jacob, and Stephen,

Your enthusiasm is awesome and your running ability is certainly elite in my eyes, but if you think that someone that can't run a 60 sec. 400 isn't athletic because of that, that's just silly. When I was in high school in the early 90's, I was one of the fastest 100 m runners in the school. After 100, that was about it. I was captain of the swimming team, captain of the tennis team, and a linebacker on the football team. I'm not elite at anything unfortunatly, but I would say that I'm an athlete. There's far more to being "Crossfit" than the track.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm guessing that there are "elite" runners around here that can't swim 100 m in less than 1:20. In high school, a time like that would cause a lifeguard to jump in and rescue you.

Like Kerez said, if you can't bench 350, are you weak? Probably not.

This is an interesting thread, I'll try to start some kind of pole and see what us "untrained" folks are capable of.

Brandon Oto 04-18-2008 07:09 AM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
There are at least three competing standards here.

1. Those of a specialist (track athlete)
2. Those of a generalist (CrossFitter)
3. Those of a non-athlete (average Joe)

The confusion is arising because you guys are all thinking at different points on this spectrum.

Timothy Roehr 04-18-2008 09:47 AM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
[QUOTE=Grant Scalf;294243]Uhhhh, am I missing something here? Those are pretty stellar times in HS.[/QUOTE]
Actually, those are good high school times, but not stellar. Neither of those times would have earned a letter on my high school track team. I ran 4:07 in the mile and 9:32 in the two mile and was 5th on my own team.

Jacob McBride 04-18-2008 09:55 AM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
[QUOTE=Carl Pawluk;294401]That's just it.

Grant, Jacob, and Stephen,

Your enthusiasm is awesome and your running ability is certainly elite in my eyes, but if you think that someone that can't run a 60 sec. 400 isn't athletic because of that, that's just silly. When I was in high school in the early 90's, I was one of the fastest 100 m runners in the school. After 100, that was about it. I was captain of the swimming team, captain of the tennis team, and a linebacker on the football team. I'm not elite at anything unfortunatly, but I would say that I'm an athlete. There's far more to being "Crossfit" than the track.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm guessing that there are "elite" runners around here that can't swim 100 m in less than 1:20. In high school, a time like that would cause a lifeguard to jump in and rescue you.

Like Kerez said, if you can't bench 350, are you weak? Probably not.

This is an interesting thread, I'll try to start some kind of pole and see what us "untrained" folks are capable of.[/QUOTE]


god damn. Alright, I'll say it again since STILL no one has taken notice to the fact that I've already made it clear in all of my posts in this thread that the times I posted are for a runner, a [b]track[/b] athlete. If you ran the 100m dash, you might not have the endurance to run a good 400, but I'll bet you could still run it in under 60 seconds (at the time that you were a 100m runner)

[QUOTE=Timothy Roehr;294499]Actually, those are good high school times, but not stellar. Neither of those times would have earned a letter on my high school track team. I ran 4:07 in the mile and 9:32 in the two mile and was 5th on my own team.[/QUOTE]

Now THOSE are good times. You obviously go to a school with a good track team, though. To be 5th on your team with a 4:07 mile in high school, you have to be on one of the best teams in the country (emphasis on one of). That or your school just excelled in long distance. But yeah, for track, a 5 minute mile and an 11 minute 2 mile... those are just bad; that's why I started running the 400 and the 800. There was no hope for me in distance.

Carl Pawluk 04-18-2008 11:27 AM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
Sorry, it wasn't clear to me.

Disregard.:)

Jose Michael Robledo 04-18-2008 12:21 PM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
When I wrestled in high school I was in the greatest shape of my life. One day I decided to race my Older brother on the track (he was a non-athlete smoker). He left me so far behind it was rediculous. Speed is genetic. Of course we can improve with training , but our genetics dictate our maximum.

Grant Scalf 04-18-2008 01:07 PM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
I think Brandon touched on it in his post, but there needs to be a qualifier in the times we post. Much like Rippetoe, Kilgore, et al did for their charts on squat, deadlift, bench press, and press. They use weights and sex for their qualifiers. I think one or two qualifiers would help clear up any confusion here as well.

Kirez Reynolds 04-18-2008 02:34 PM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
[QUOTE=Timothy Roehr;294499]Actually, those are good high school times, but not stellar. Neither of those times would have earned a letter on my high school track team. I ran 4:07 in the mile and 9:32 in the two mile and was 5th on my own team.[/QUOTE]

That sounds exactly right -- thank you for providing some real numbers (but I think you also went to a really competitive high school).

Did you go to school in Arizona? I was at Agua Fria Union High (think Goodyear / Avondale / Luke AFB, 135th Ave & I-10) ---- and Brophy High School, of course, were the leaders who showed times like yours. I could win occasional cross-country races against the various other podunk schools. Run XC against Brophy, I'd be lucky to finish in the top 25... behind their JV guys. :-)

Stephen Georgiou 04-18-2008 04:40 PM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
[QUOTE=Brandon Oto;294425]There are at least three competing standards here.

1. Those of a specialist (track athlete)
2. Those of a generalist (CrossFitter)
3. Those of a non-athlete (average Joe)

The confusion is arising because you guys are all thinking at different points on this spectrum.[/QUOTE]


Everyone's comments have been very helpful for me personally, but perhaps I started this thread off badly by categorizing elite, good, poor etc...these kinds of subjective categories depend entirely upon one's own bias.

How about we broaden it to the following (vague summary of what everyone has aleady stated):

specialist (track athlete): <60
generalist (crossfitter): 61-120 sec
non-athelete (average joe): >121sec

obviously these are now very broad categories, each of which can be further categorized.

Is this better?

Carl Pawluk 04-18-2008 06:00 PM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
Amazing!!

I love the open-mindedness of Crossfitters. Awesome. Stephen, now we're getting somewhere!

Aileen Reid 04-18-2008 06:34 PM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
I can be quite sensitive about this issue. When I was at school, school sports were set things, most of which I was hopeless at. Getting an "E" for phys Ed at school sort of makes you think you're hopeless. I've done more sport since leaving school and particularly weights and running. If I had to say anything it would be that I'm gifted at weights but not at running. But it doesn't mean I stop running. Because its hard for me I suppose its training effect for me might be greater than for a gifted person????? Who knows. But it keeps me fit, makes me feel good and that's really what counts in my book. For things like running the good thing is you only have to compete with yourself. Keep comparing yourself with others and you can end up pretty demoralised. I don't think that's what its about.

Veronica Davis 04-18-2008 06:53 PM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
[QUOTE=Stephen Georgiou;294732]

How about we broaden it to the following (vague summary of what everyone has aleady stated):

specialist (track athlete): <60
generalist (crossfitter): 61-120 sec
non-athelete (average joe): >121sec

obviously these are now very broad categories, each of which can be further categorized.

Is this better?[/QUOTE]

That sounds about right to me. For the workouts like Nancy I'm at about 100 sec for a 400m. I'm sure that if I only had to do one 400m and nothing else I could shave at least 10 seconds off.

Stephen Georgiou 04-19-2008 04:12 AM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
[QUOTE=Aileen Reid;294780]I can be quite sensitive about this issue. When I was at school, school sports were set things, most of which I was hopeless at. Getting an "E" for phys Ed at school sort of makes you think you're hopeless. I've done more sport since leaving school and particularly weights and running. If I had to say anything it would be that I'm gifted at weights but not at running. But it doesn't mean I stop running. Because its hard for me I suppose its training effect for me might be greater than for a gifted person????? Who knows. But it keeps me fit, makes me feel good and that's really what counts in my book. For things like running the good thing is you only have to compete with yourself. Keep comparing yourself with others and you can end up pretty demoralised. I don't think that's what its about.[/QUOTE]

you are absolutely correct, and i didnt intend for it to turn into the equivalent of a school grading report.

what i was after was a context within which i could place my own current abilities.

eg if i were currently running 400 in 2min30secs. Im only in competition with myself, and my immediate short(er) term aim is to shave off 10secs. But I know that ultimately, i should be aiming towards knocking off a minute in the long term, because thats what my peers (peers being an important factor) are able to achieve.

miguel flores 04-19-2008 07:43 AM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
Elite: 1:04
Advanced: 1:19
Intermediate: 1:34
Beginner: 2:04
I guess untrained is >=2:05


When it comes to Crossfitters these times are very suitable for measuring performances.

Of course when comparing to track times they pale in comparison. But its a good thing this isnt a track website huh =)

So lets stay away from confusing anyone by comparing standout track times-( in comparison to crossfit) The Crossfit North times are very, how do you say, accurate I guess. When trying to find a good benchmark for 400m times.

Robert D Taylor Jr 04-19-2008 08:06 AM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
All in for those CF North running standards, I am a running enthusiast, and faster than anyone at my unit (not an impressive acheivement) and when I'm healthy, my runs never got better than mid level intermediate, which puts me mid pack at races etc.

Wes Palmer 04-19-2008 03:23 PM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
[QUOTE=miguel flores;295006]Elite: 1:04
Advanced: 1:19
Intermediate: 1:34
Beginner: 2:04
I guess untrained is >=2:05


When it comes to Crossfitters these times are very suitable for measuring performances.

Of course when comparing to track times they pale in comparison. But its a good thing this isnt a track website huh =)

So lets stay away from confusing anyone by comparing standout track times-( in comparison to crossfit) The Crossfit North times are very, how do you say, accurate I guess. When trying to find a good benchmark for 400m times.[/QUOTE]

[SIZE="4"][COLOR="Blue"]Is this men and women?[/COLOR][/SIZE]

S.S. 04-19-2008 04:30 PM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
[QUOTE=Wes Palmer;295190][SIZE="4"][COLOR="Blue"]Is this men and women?[/COLOR][/SIZE][/QUOTE]

The rubric makes no distinction between men and women for this event, although it does for the rows. I'm not entirely sure why. But even a mediocre NCAA female athlete should be able to achieve 64 seconds on the 400m, which translates into an advanced time.

Lincoln Brigham 04-19-2008 07:33 PM

Re: 400m time guidelines
 
I ran track in high school, but when it came time for sprints Coach would put away his stop watch and get out the calendar. If I said I was slow my high school teammates would tell you I was bragging; I could not break 12 seconds for the 100 yard dash. I ran the 440 yard dash in just under 60 seconds (barely) and the half-mile in 2:11. Last year at age 47 at mile-high elevation I was running 400m intervals at the track at a sub 90-second pace - not sure what I could do in a single all out sprint.

I think some folks are underestimating how much of a hateful suck-fest the 400m sprint is supposed to be when done right. Or they are running them in parking lots, with tight corners. The bottom line is that I think the Crossfit North standards are pretty conservative.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:14 AM.


CrossFit is a registered trademark of CrossFit Inc.