Well...motion blur depends not simply on some arbitrary shutter speed, but on how large the image is (the degree of magnification); what speed the motion actually is; and what direction the motion is occurring in in relation to the lens axis.
For example, if motion is far,far away, it can be stopped with a slowish shutter speed. Cars on a bridge 3/4 mile distant will be rendered very,very tiny; low magnification, so a slowish speed will effectively stop the motion. Even though the cars might be crossing the bridge at 55 MPH, if the camera is 3/4 mile away, the cars will appear for all intents, "frozen" at 1/50 second with an 80mm. IF however, the camera is 15 feet from the interstate, the cars will NOT be stopped with the same slow speed that was adequate at 3/4 mile distance. You might very well need 1/2000 second.
Motion in relation to the lens axis: movement "across" the field of view needs a briefer (faster speed) exposure than if the motion is coming directly AT or AWAY FROM the camera position. Angled motion, somewhere in between.
Speed of the motion...the hands and feet of a runner, or the drum sticks, are moving the fastest in a shot of a man running, or playing the drums; the shoulders will be effectively stopped at say, 1/125 second--but the hands or drumsticks might very well need a speed 4 to 5x faster...again, "depending". When a drumstick hits the skin..the hand and might be stopped for a brief time...a guitarist's strumming the strings will have his hand stop, briefly, at very frequent, brief intervals.
Basically...from 15-20 feet away with an 80mm, you're going to probably need to shoot for "timing". I have no idea how you're shooting, but mirror slap/crowd jostling you/shutter vibration and motion blur are probablyh both going to co-exist in some measure at the slower end of the speed spectrum. I'd shoot ISO 400 film.