new HS boys mile leader


Main message board: for the discussion of topical track & field items only.

Re: new HS boys mile leader

Postby aaronk » Sat Mar 23, 2013 6:19 pm

lovetorun wrote:gh...I had no idea that you trained/ran with GerryLindgren and Rick Riley. Can we get more details on that i.e. what distances you raced and PR's?


When GH started with T&FN, I remember him being intro'd as a TJ'er!!
So I'm curious too!
Running with Lindgren and Riley is far from the TJ pit!! :wink:
aaronk
 
Posts: 3366
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 9:39 am

Re: new HS boys mile leader

Postby Tuariki » Sat Mar 23, 2013 9:02 pm

aaronk wrote:
lovetorun wrote:gh...I had no idea that you trained/ran with GerryLindgren and Rick Riley. Can we get more details on that i.e. what distances you raced and PR's?


When GH started with T&FN, I remember him being intro'd as a TJ'er!!
So I'm curious too!
Running with Lindgren and Riley is far from the TJ pit!! :wink:

I can vouch for the truth of GH's claims. It was probably similar to my running with John Ngeno. Mind you after 1/2 a mile I would lose sight of him as he headed off to the Snake River some 12 miles away from Pullman.
Tuariki
 
Posts: 1300
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 9:39 pm
Location: Rohe o Te Whanau a Apanui

Re: new HS boys mile leader

Postby BBTM media » Sun Mar 24, 2013 8:26 am

gh wrote:
BBTM media wrote:
Marlow wrote:
BBTM media wrote:No American boy has dreamed of breaking 4 minutes for 1600.

Wow, are you wrong! Since most state meets are 1600, almost all do. Would they also like to break 4 in the mile? Of course.


There is no context or history or Bannister/Ryun HS moment for breaking 4 minutes for 1600 - thank god.


Thank god nobody has every done it (and perhaps never will).


One HS boy has: Alan Webb ran 3:59.51 (official time) for 1600m en route to the Mile in beating Ryan Hall at Arcadia 2001; Webb clocked 4:01.81 for the Mile, the distance that mattered.
BBTM media
 
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 12:23 am

Re: new HS boys mile leader

Postby Conor Dary » Sun Mar 24, 2013 8:42 am

I believe the first high school kid to break 4 for the 1600 but not the mile was York's Don Sage, who ran 4:00.29 at Pre in 2000. At the school's gym they list his time as 3:58.9. Which is kind of silly, but there you go.
Conor Dary
 
Posts: 6297
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: कनोर दारी in Ronald MacDonald's Home Town, and once a Duck always a Duck.

Re: new HS boys mile leader

Postby Marlow » Sun Mar 24, 2013 10:52 am

BBTM media wrote:
Marlow wrote:
BBTM media wrote:No American boy has dreamed of breaking 4 minutes for 1600.

Wow, are you wrong! Since most state meets are 1600, almost all do. Would they also like to break 4 in the mile? Of course.

There is no context or history or Bannister/Ryun HS moment for breaking 4 minutes for 1600 - thank god.

Why would there be? It's a HS phenomenon of the last 20 years. That doesn't mean it's 'bad', unless you choose to think of it as such. I don't, nor do almost all HSers.
BBTM media wrote:Webb clocked 4:01.81 for the Mile, the distance that mattered.

To you and a buncha old farts. It's a brave new world out there. You should join it. :P
The mile is a wonderful race distance, but it bears zero relevance to HS track & field anymore (except in big Invitationals and such, which is just fine with me), and it never will again; that's just reality. Time to move on.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21135
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: new HS boys mile leader

Postby aaronk » Sun Mar 24, 2013 11:49 am

Marlow wrote:
BBTM media wrote:
Marlow wrote:
BBTM media wrote:No American boy has dreamed of breaking 4 minutes for 1600.

Wow, are you wrong! Since most state meets are 1600, almost all do. Would they also like to break 4 in the mile? Of course.

There is no context or history or Bannister/Ryun HS moment for breaking 4 minutes for 1600 - thank god.

Why would there be? It's a HS phenomenon of the last 20 years. That doesn't mean it's 'bad', unless you choose to think of it as such. I don't, nor do almost all HSers.
BBTM media wrote:Webb clocked 4:01.81 for the Mile, the distance that mattered.

To you and a buncha old farts. It's a brave new world out there. You should join it. :P
The mile is a wonderful race distance, but it bears zero relevance to HS track & field anymore (except in big Invitationals and such, which is just fine with me), and it never will again; that's just reality. Time to move on.


This may not be relevant, but.....

I live 25 miles (sic!) from the Peace Arch--the Canadian border crossing at Blaine WA.
When I drove to Canada (many many times!), I would see, on the US side, on I-5, signs that read "Speed Limit--65 MPH".
As soon as I crossed the border, and I-5 became Canada 99, the signs would read "Speed Limit--100 KmPH".

Luckily, I was, and remain, a HUGE track fan, and KNOW that 100 Km translates to 62 MILES per hour!

Everyone KNOWS what a mile is, but not everyone knows that a mile is 1609.1 meters!!
If you're gonna make the complete change, then get rid of the mile....100%!
(I'm NOT advocating that! In fact, just the opposite!!)
aaronk
 
Posts: 3366
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 9:39 am

Re: new HS boys mile leader

Postby Marlow » Sun Mar 24, 2013 11:59 am

aaronk wrote:Everyone KNOWS what a mile is, but not everyone knows that a mile is 1609.1 meters!!If you're gonna make the complete change, then get rid of the mile....100%!

Free clue for the taking: no one is getting of the Mile as a racing distance, and no one is getting rid of the 1600 as THE HS distance equivalent. That ship has sailed and docked in another port . . . forever.

Don Quixote called. He wants his tilting lance back.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21135
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: new HS boys mile leader

Postby BBTM media » Sun Mar 24, 2013 3:00 pm

Marlow wrote:There is no context or history or Bannister/Ryun HS moment for breaking 4 minutes for 1600 - thank god.

Why would there be? It's a HS phenomenon of the last 20 years. That doesn't mean it's 'bad', unless you choose to think of it as such. I don't, nor do almost all HSers.
BBTM media wrote:Webb clocked 4:01.81 for the Mile, the distance that mattered.

To you and a buncha old farts. It's a brave new world out there. You should join it. :P
The mile is a wonderful race distance, but it bears zero relevance to HS track & field anymore (except in big Invitationals and such, which is just fine with me), and it never will again; that's just reality. Time to move on.[/quote]

The 1600 has had 30-plus years at the HS level with virtually no there, there, and it will NEVER have a Roger Bannister moment or even a minor historic moment that resonates. The fact that the 1600 doesn't exist outside of U.S. HS speaks volumes to its limited appeal and interest. Like a bad dog where the blame goes to the owner, the 1600 was a bad, lazy decision by state federations - bad for the kids, bad for the sport.

Regarding Bring Back the Mile supporters, they are NOT a much of "old farts"; in fact, approximately 50% of our Facebook followers are under 30 and the same for our Mile Maniacs who joined BBTM at http://www.bringbackthemile.com. In short, people of all ages like or love the Mile.
BBTM media
 
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 12:23 am

Re: new HS boys mile leader

Postby BBTM media » Sun Mar 24, 2013 3:08 pm

Marlow wrote:
aaronk wrote:Everyone KNOWS what a mile is, but not everyone knows that a mile is 1609.1 meters!!If you're gonna make the complete change, then get rid of the mile....100%!

Free clue for the taking: no one is getting of the Mile as a racing distance, and no one is getting rid of the 1600 as THE HS distance equivalent. That ship has sailed and docked in another port . . . forever.

Don Quixote called. He wants his tilting lance back.


And often ships do return to home port.

Below, another example of why the Mile still matters at the HS level. Think this event would have happened for the 1600? Enjoy the 2012 Franklin Central Showcase Boys Mile:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTNpbjqoyv4
BBTM media
 
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 12:23 am

Re: new HS boys mile leader

Postby Marlow » Sun Mar 24, 2013 3:23 pm

BBTM media wrote:1. The 1600 has had 30-plus years at the HS level with virtually no there, there, and it will NEVER have a Roger Bannister moment or even a minor historic moment that resonates.
2. The fact that the 1600 doesn't exist outside of U.S. HS speaks volumes to its limited appeal and interest. Like a bad dog where the blame goes to the owner, the 1600 was a bad, lazy decision by state federations - bad for the kids, bad for the sport.

1. Why should it? It's JUST a high school event. It's not meant to be any more than that.
2. Irrelevant. The USA has tons of things that other countries don't. Does that make them 'bad' too??!!

Final note. How many states are seriously engaged in switching back to the mile? :roll: Pipe dreams are just that. The funny part is that I don't really care if we switch back or not; I just know how nonsensical it would be, just to fulfill all the BBTM nostalgists. It would ONLY make sense if we also go back to the 220, 440, 880, etc . . . and revert all the tracks back to yards. Yeah, that's gonna happen too . . .
Marlow
 
Posts: 21135
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: new HS boys mile leader

Postby BBTM media » Sun Mar 24, 2013 5:53 pm

Marlow wrote: Final note. How many states are seriously engaged in switching back to the mile? :roll: Pipe dreams are just that. The funny part is that I don't really care if we switch back or not; I just know how nonsensical it would be, just to fulfill all the BBTM nostalgists. It would ONLY make sense if we also go back to the 220, 440, 880, etc . . . and revert all the tracks back to yards. Yeah, that's gonna happen too . . .


You are missing the essence of BBTM: the promotion of the Mile, its history and the athletes - elevate & celebrate, and by extension, promotion of the sport. Because the mile (lower case) is so deeply embedded in American culture and the continued resonance of Roger Bannister's first sub-4 minute Mile (and other top Milers such as Jim Ryun) and the sub-4 standard, no other T&F event - sorry - has the cache/brand of the Mile, at least in this country.
BBTM media
 
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 12:23 am

Re: new HS boys mile leader

Postby aaronk » Sun Mar 24, 2013 7:20 pm

BBTM media wrote:
Marlow wrote: Final note. How many states are seriously engaged in switching back to the mile? :roll: Pipe dreams are just that. The funny part is that I don't really care if we switch back or not; I just know how nonsensical it would be, just to fulfill all the BBTM nostalgists. It would ONLY make sense if we also go back to the 220, 440, 880, etc . . . and revert all the tracks back to yards. Yeah, that's gonna happen too . . .


You are missing the essence of BBTM: the promotion of the Mile, its history and the athletes - elevate & celebrate, and by extension, promotion of the sport. Because the mile (lower case) is so deeply embedded in American culture and the continued resonance of Roger Bannister's first sub-4 minute Mile (and other top Milers such as Jim Ryun) and the sub-4 standard, no other T&F event - sorry - has the cache/brand of the Mile, at least in this country.


Ask Galen Rupp--3:50.92--how "relevant" the mile still is.
Ask Mary Cain (4:32.78 and 4:28.25) how relevant it is.
Ask anyone who ran the esteemed Wanamaker MILE!!
Ask the headline writers on the sports pages how often they put "1600 meters" in their headlines.

And, if we're going to have the ONE mile, then we should have the TWO mile as well.
Same questions as above pertain.

Ask Tirunesh Dibaba--9:13.17--about running a 3200 meter race.
Again, ask Mary Cain (9:38.68).

One small caveat.
If we're to go TOTALLY metric, then I suggest the following:

Have EVEN-numbered metric distances.
1000, 2000 (to replace the 1500/mile/1600), 4000 (to replace the 3000, 3200, 2 mile, AND the 5000).
Or, if you want "odd" distances, but sticking with the 200-400 meters track sizes, have 1200, 2400, 4800, and 9600 meter races (the latter replacing the 10000!).

Am I joking?
aaronk
 
Posts: 3366
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 9:39 am

Re: new HS boys mile leader

Postby Bruce Kritzler » Sun Mar 24, 2013 8:43 pm

Arroyo finished 104th in junior race (25:50, winner 21:04) at World XC.
Bruce Kritzler
 
Posts: 3130
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: new HS boys mile leader

Postby Tuariki » Sun Mar 24, 2013 10:58 pm

aaronk wrote:
BBTM media wrote:
Marlow wrote: Final note. How many states are seriously engaged in switching back to the mile? :roll: Pipe dreams are just that. The funny part is that I don't really care if we switch back or not; I just know how nonsensical it would be, just to fulfill all the BBTM nostalgists. It would ONLY make sense if we also go back to the 220, 440, 880, etc . . . and revert all the tracks back to yards. Yeah, that's gonna happen too . . .


You are missing the essence of BBTM: the promotion of the Mile, its history and the athletes - elevate & celebrate, and by extension, promotion of the sport. Because the mile (lower case) is so deeply embedded in American culture and the continued resonance of Roger Bannister's first sub-4 minute Mile (and other top Milers such as Jim Ryun) and the sub-4 standard, no other T&F event - sorry - has the cache/brand of the Mile, at least in this country.


Ask Galen Rupp--3:50.92--how "relevant" the mile still is.
Ask Mary Cain (4:32.78 and 4:28.25) how relevant it is.
Ask anyone who ran the esteemed Wanamaker MILE!!
Ask the headline writers on the sports pages how often they put "1600 meters" in their headlines.

And, if we're going to have the ONE mile, then we should have the TWO mile as well.
Same questions as above pertain.

Ask Tirunesh Dibaba--9:13.17--about running a 3200 meter race.
Again, ask Mary Cain (9:38.68).

One small caveat.
If we're to go TOTALLY metric, then I suggest the following:

Have EVEN-numbered metric distances.
1000, 2000 (to replace the 1500/mile/1600), 4000 (to replace the 3000, 3200, 2 mile, AND the 5000).
Or, if you want "odd" distances, but sticking with the 200-400 meters track sizes, have 1200, 2400, 4800, and 9600 meter races (the latter replacing the 10000!).

Am I joking?

Aaronk, I don't know if you are joking or not.

However, what I do know is that the mile is irrelevant and has been for quite some time. When 4:00 was still a quality target it still retained a degree of relevance. New Zealand has a mile tradition as good as anybody's. However, no one gives a toss about the mile because why would you waste your time and effort and energy to run a great mile time which gets you no where but might cost you a 3:35 qualifying time for the world champs. I am sure if Nick Willis was give an option of getting a sub 3:50 or a sub 3:30 he will take the sub 3:30 any day as to most of the world it means a hell of a lot more.

And your small caveat. The world has already gone metric, decades ago.

The continued resonance of Roger Bannister? You are in dreamland. I would guess more than 99% of the US population, just like NZ, will have no idea who Roger Bannister is.
Tuariki
 
Posts: 1300
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 9:39 pm
Location: Rohe o Te Whanau a Apanui

Re: new HS boys mile leader

Postby BBTM media » Mon Mar 25, 2013 7:54 am

Tuariki wrote:And your small caveat. The world has already gone metric, decades ago.

The continued resonance of Roger Bannister? You are in dreamland. I would guess more than 99% of the US population, just like NZ, will have no idea who Roger Bannister is.


Nothing against the metric system (or the 1500) - base 10 is wonderful, but the Mile does have a unique place in the sport and beyond.

Do a search of "Roger Bannister" and you will see his continued resonance and the first sub-4 minute Mile.

99%? We'll take that bet.
BBTM media
 
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2012 12:23 am

Re: new HS boys mile leader

Postby kevinsdad » Mon Mar 25, 2013 10:16 am

Tuariki wrote: I am sure if Nick Willis was give an option of getting a sub 3:50 or a sub 3:30 he will take the sub 3:30 any day as to most of the world it means a hell of a lot more.


I'm sure he would take the 3:30, since it's worth about 3:46.8 for the mile. I"d bet money he'd take the sub 3:50 if you used the correct conversion (sub 3:50 vs. sub 3:33).
kevinsdad
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: new HS boys mile leader

Postby aaronk » Mon Mar 25, 2013 10:44 am

The mile (and the two mile) ain't dead, as witnessed by this past indoor season--Rupp's 3:50, Lagat's 8:09, Cain's 4:28, Dibaba's 9:13, etc etc.

But maybe what's needed for the mile is a little jolt in the arm.

It's been awhile since we've had a "barrier breaker" at these distances.
As the 800 gets closer to breaking 1:40, we should expect there might be someone who challenges the 3:40 mile barrier.

While the 8:00 and 9:00 barriers for the 2 mile, men and women, have been broken, they've only been done once each.
Next "barriers" would be 7:50 and 8:50.

How about the 4:20 barrier for collegiate and high school women?
And 4:10 for the world's female elite?

Hey, there's SOME talk of a sub-2:00 marathon!
What about the first WOMEN'S sub-4:00 mile??
aaronk
 
Posts: 3366
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 9:39 am

Re: new HS boys mile leader

Postby gh » Mon Mar 25, 2013 10:52 am

getting excited about legal women's sub-4:00 1500s will do quite nicely for now.
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: new HS boys mile leader

Postby mal » Mon Mar 25, 2013 11:07 am

gh wrote:getting excited about legal women's sub-4:00 1500s will do quite nicely for now.


Thumbs up.

You need an up down option on this board.
mal
 
Posts: 970
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: new HS boys mile leader

Postby runforlife » Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:16 pm

Marlow wrote: It's a brave new world out there. You should join it. :P
The mile is a wonderful race distance, but it bears zero relevance to HS track & field anymore Time to move on.

Agreed!!
runforlife
 
Posts: 387
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Drake Relays: finish line - row 1

Re: new HS boys mile leader

Postby gh » Wed Apr 10, 2013 6:34 am

Bruce Kritzler wrote:Arroyo finished 104th in junior race (25:50, winner 21:04) at World XC.


And he was mis-IDed in the TN sums. Note that he actually represented Puerto Rico (as Andrés, not Andres), so he's not U.S.-eligible.
gh
 
Posts: 46335
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Previous

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 10 guests