Outdoor Outlook--High School


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

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby Dutra5 » Sun Apr 07, 2013 12:45 pm

aaronk wrote:
Dutra5 wrote:
EPelle wrote:
aaronk wrote:Arcadia is turning out to be a real loud DUD!!
Nothing of note to report!!

16 under 9.00, with one at 9.00; Ben Saarel (who'd run a 1.54/4.16/8.55 triple two weeks ago) over 4.01 miler Bernie Montoya and Blake Haney (4.09y/8.54 in grade-10 last year) in the 3.200m. Yep, sure were some no-namers in the boy's race.


Yeah...but those are boys.

!!


You are fucking SICK and IMMATURE to imply anything about my interest in girl's track and field!!
When I said Arcadia had been a "DUD", it WAS!!
That was BEFORE the boy's 3200!!
I did not KNOW of it then!!

However, all that said, I AM more interested in the girls this year!!


So then why the indignation? I'm apparently right.
Dutra5
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 8:51 am

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby EPelle » Sun Apr 07, 2013 1:10 pm

aaronk wrote:Just quick-scanned the Arcadia heat sheets.
This year's edition looks to be singularly LACKING in big names...meaning names recognizable on sight as being top 5 or so in their events.

The only field that has some "names" in it is the girl's 3200....one of the heats....with Sarah Baxter, Amy Eloise-Neale, and Katie Knight!!

The girl's mile has Neale in it.

Other than those, I didn't see any "major" names....girls or boys!!

Isn't Arcadia supposed to be a BIGGIE??
Not this year, it appears!!

Hopefully, I'll be happily surprised!!

If a 4.01 miler's not a big name in your record-breaking world, unsure what marks qualify. Montoya was the fastest prep indoor 2-miler in 2013 (8.54,63y). As far as that 3.200m was concerned - the one with no big names, Montoya was the top Arcadia returner, having placed 2nd to Zeinasellassie last season (8.47,75-8.48,25). Montoya didn't lose a prep 1.600m or mile in 2012, breaking 4.10 four times - twice at the metric distance, twice over the full mile (4.01,32y / 4.07,72 / 4.08,01y / 4.08,82), and ran one 4.10 mile (4.10,37y).

Haney had run tough as a grade-10 kid last year, placing 3rd at the California State Meet (4.11,85 [4.12,03 prelim]); 7th at Arcadia (8.54,65); and 2nd to Montoya over 1.600m at Mt. Sac two weeks later 4.07,72 to 4.10,48. His 4.09,43y mark recorded at adidas wound up leading all California milers in 2012.

Last night's boy's 3.200m winner, Ben Saarell, was a top-15 Footlocker placer who tripled something spectacular two weeks back. He flashed some of that speed last night, closing out the 8th lap in 55 seconds. People were going bonkers five seasons ago when German Fernandez ran an 8.53 3.200 as part of triple.

The boy's 100m featured Khalfani Muhammad, the double 2012 California state champion (100m/200m). He was pipped in a good 200m match-up against Californian Elijah Mitchell, who ran 21,19 last year.

There were a tonne of other fantastic 'names' lined up for their events at Arcadia. It's a shame you'd brand the meet as lacking star power prior to doing just a wee bit of research.

But then again . . .
EPelle
 
Posts: 21442
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby aaronk » Sun Apr 07, 2013 1:29 pm

I admit I'm NOT a fan of the 1600 and 3200!
And yes, that makes me a dinosaur....or whatever name might apply.
But until or unless they TOTALLY eliminate the one and two MILE distances, I will continue to see 1600 or 3200 times only in terms of what COULD BE their times at the mile and two mile distances.

That said, I am SUPER impressed by both the boys and girls 3200's at Arcadia!!
Great times...and deep fields!
Also that FANTASTIC last lap of 55.2!!

But as long as ANYONE continues holding MILE and TWO MILE races, I will continue honoring THOSE times.
Projected two mile times based on 3200 times is just that......a projection.

It's like running 26 miles of a marathon, stopping, then projecting what you would have run the final 385 yards in!!
aaronk
 
Posts: 3335
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 9:39 am

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby gktrack » Sun Apr 07, 2013 1:37 pm

Arcadia: I thought it was a great meet... and a treat to see a Florida team head west at the same time the FL relays were going on, and as a result, the girls sprint/relay matchup were fantastic.

I'm sure US vault fans are a bit happier this year in general with some good performances thus far across the board... and the pipeline looks good with a H.S. soph, K. Merritt going 13-8 at this meet in the girl's PV.

And not only did you have Montoya's 4:01 coming in, but had J. Burcham, a 4:02 miler from last year. He finished in 8:59.28, but I don't know enough about him to judge where he stands in his goal of a sub-4 this year. Maybe we'll see him, and NJ's Malone and Cheseret at the Penn Relays in a few weeks?
gktrack
 
Posts: 1119
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 9:42 pm

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby aaronk » Sun Apr 07, 2013 1:47 pm

About Merritt, the PV girl.

She holds the frosh (9th grade) class record too....13-3 from 2012.
And she'd vaulted 13-6 earlier this year, so her 13-8 soph class record isn't TOO surprising!!
Hopefully, she'll keep improving....maybe to 14-0 or higher.....this year!
aaronk
 
Posts: 3335
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 9:39 am

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby aaronk » Sun Apr 07, 2013 2:33 pm

Re: Ben Saarel.

Checked my 2013 HS Track, and the only reference to him was a 9:01.46 3200 he ran outdoors last year.
Nothing else, either indoors or outdoors, at any other distance!

Also, HS Track lists him as having been a SENIOR (12th grade) in 2012.....as there are no "*"'s next to his name.
So I'm guessing this was just a mistake in the book....and that he was an 11th grader last year!!
aaronk
 
Posts: 3335
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 9:39 am

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby Dutra5 » Sun Apr 07, 2013 2:44 pm

aaronk wrote:Re: Ben Saarel.

Checked my 2013 HS Track, and the only reference to him was a 9:01.46 3200 he ran outdoors last year.
Nothing else, either indoors or outdoors, at any other distance!

Also, HS Track lists him as having been a SENIOR (12th grade) in 2012.....as there are no "*"'s next to his name.
So I'm guessing this was just a mistake in the book....and that he was an 11th grader last year!!


4th at Footlocker and won the Footlocker West Regional.
Dutra5
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 8:51 am

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby unclezadok » Sun Apr 07, 2013 4:27 pm

aaronk wrote:I admit I'm NOT a fan of the 1600 and 3200!
And yes, that makes me a dinosaur....or whatever name might apply.
But until or unless they TOTALLY eliminate the one and two MILE distances, I will continue to see 1600 or 3200 times only in terms of what COULD BE their times at the mile and two mile distances.


Dinosaur? Actually nobody likes the 1600 and 3200.
unclezadok
 
Posts: 1550
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 2:54 pm

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby DrJay » Sun Apr 07, 2013 8:16 pm

EPelle wrote:
aaronk wrote:Arcadia is turning out to be a real loud DUD!!
Nothing of note to report!!

16 under 9.00, with one at 9.00; Ben Saarel (who'd run a 1.54/4.16/8.55 triple two weeks ago) over 4.01 miler Bernie Montoya and Blake Haney (4.09y/8.54 in grade-10 last year) in the 3.200m. Yep, sure were some no-namers in the boy's race.


What kind of recovery did Saarel have between events in his triple?
DrJay
 
Posts: 5482
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Woodland Park, CO

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby EPelle » Sun Apr 07, 2013 11:04 pm

DrJay, I'm unsure. And, it appears that meet was contested over two days. His 3.200m (8.55,27) was a solo effort resulting in the second-fastest ever run in the state of Utah, coming just short of Luke Puskedra’s 8.54,40; both boys are the only two athletes to ever break the 9.00-flat barrier in the state of Utah.

Meet results: http://ut.milesplit.com/meets/136422/results/238647
EPelle
 
Posts: 21442
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby gktrack » Mon Apr 08, 2013 10:38 am

Any sighting yet of Michael Cherry outdoors this season, anyone know what's up? From what I can tell, he hasn't ran outdoors yet for Oscar Smith HS, I couldn't even find him on a relay leg. Still plenty time left in the season though, just curious to see what he can do in the open 200/400 outdoors after his great 300 indoor performance.
gktrack
 
Posts: 1119
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 9:42 pm

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby Dutra5 » Mon Apr 08, 2013 12:32 pm

gktrack wrote:Any sighting yet of Michael Cherry outdoors this season, anyone know what's up? From what I can tell, he hasn't ran outdoors yet for Oscar Smith HS, I couldn't even find him on a relay leg. Still plenty time left in the season though, just curious to see what he can do in the open 200/400 outdoors after his great 300 indoor performance.


According to the school's athletic calendar, the school's track team had one early season meet which appeared to be low key and another meet cancelled. So he may not have competed at any great level outdoors yet.
Dutra5
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 8:51 am

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby Blues » Mon Apr 08, 2013 4:54 pm

Dutra5 wrote:
gktrack wrote:Any sighting yet of Michael Cherry outdoors this season, anyone know what's up? From what I can tell, he hasn't ran outdoors yet for Oscar Smith HS, I couldn't even find him on a relay leg. Still plenty time left in the season though, just curious to see what he can do in the open 200/400 outdoors after his great 300 indoor performance.


According to the school's athletic calendar, the school's track team had one early season meet which appeared to be low key and another meet cancelled. So he may not have competed at any great level outdoors yet.


He's had a slight hamstring strain recently too. If all goes well he's planning to open up with an 800m in his school's meet this Wednesday and see how the leg feels.
Blues
 
Posts: 1088
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:58 am

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby gktrack » Mon Apr 08, 2013 5:26 pm

Thanks Blues for the M. Cherry update/post... hope he heals well after his long indoor season. BTW, he's no slouch in the 800. At the Junior Olympics last year, he ran 1:54.17 in the 800 heats, but didn't run in the final. Heck, he even opened last year's outdoor season with a 1600 in 5:37.
http://www.usatf.org/events/2012/USATFJuniorOlympicTFChampionships/results/P555.asp
gktrack
 
Posts: 1119
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 9:42 pm

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby 26mi235 » Mon Apr 08, 2013 10:29 pm

unclezadok wrote:
aaronk wrote:I admit I'm NOT a fan of the 1600 and 3200!
And yes, that makes me a dinosaur....or whatever name might apply.
But until or unless they TOTALLY eliminate the one and two MILE distances, I will continue to see 1600 or 3200 times only in terms of what COULD BE their times at the mile and two mile distances.


Dinosaur? Actually nobody likes the 1600 and 3200.


Not true. The 1600 and the 3200 are just fine for high school dual meets. When you have invites, with lots of knowledgeable officials, the greater complication of the mile/two-mile on a 400 track is easily handled, but let the majority of tiny/dual meets do the simpler distance.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16313
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby aaronk » Tue Apr 09, 2013 3:27 am

26mi235 wrote:
unclezadok wrote:
aaronk wrote:I admit I'm NOT a fan of the 1600 and 3200!
And yes, that makes me a dinosaur....or whatever name might apply.
But until or unless they TOTALLY eliminate the one and two MILE distances, I will continue to see 1600 or 3200 times only in terms of what COULD BE their times at the mile and two mile distances.


Dinosaur? Actually nobody likes the 1600 and 3200.


Not true. The 1600 and the 3200 are just fine for high school dual meets. When you have invites, with lots of knowledgeable officials, the greater complication of the mile/two-mile on a 400 track is easily handled, but let the majority of tiny/dual meets do the simpler distance.


Here's a temporary solution to the mile/2 mile vs 1600/3200 "battle"

Since the United States and the rest of the world are more familiar with the 1500 and 3000 meter distances.....than they are with the 1600/3200.....why not at least do this:

Run the 1600 and 3200 as is, for reasons that you state.
But time the runners at the 1500 meter and 3000 meter posts of those longer races.
It would be easy, since for the 3000, all you'd need do is have a timer at the 200 meter post of the 400 meter track.....and for the 1500, have a timer at the 3rd 4X100 relay exchange post....or the 300 meter point of the 400 meter track!!

You would still have the final times at 1600 and 3200 meter distances.
But you would ALSO have, for the majority of the people who are more familiar with the 1500 and 3000, official times at THOSE distances.

That would PARTIALLY solve the "dilemma" caused by PROJECTING 1600 and 3200 meter times INTO 1 and 2 mile times!!

In lieu of those FULL mile and 2 mile times, I would much rather have a longer list of 1500 and 3000 meter times....than having PROJECTIONS of what they "would" run at 1 and 2 miles, based on some scientific formula!!
The 1500 and 3000 times would be ACTUAL times, NOT projections!!
(And for 1600/3200 "purists", you can continue to have those times too!! (But STOP projecting 1 and 2 mile times from the shorter distances!!!)

And the list of fast 1500 and 3000 meter times for HS runners would be radically revised!!!
aaronk
 
Posts: 3335
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 9:39 am

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby Marlow » Tue Apr 09, 2013 3:58 am

aaronk wrote:Here's a temporary solution to the mile/2 mile vs 1600/3200 "battle"
Since the United States and the rest of the world are more familiar with the 1500 and 3000 meter distances.....than they are with the 1600/3200.....why not at least do this:
Run the 1600 and 3200 as is, for reasons that you state.
But time the runners at the 1500 meter and 3000 meter posts of those longer races.

Your understanding of a high school meet is fundamentally flawed. The average meet we're in has 50 boy 'milers' who run between a 4:50 and an 8:00 1600. Then 50 girls between 6:00 and 9:00 minutes. What's to be gained by timing their 1500s?

Big invitationals with exceptional runners often have the mile and it is appropriate there. But even there, timing the 1500 is a huge pain that very, very few meet directors would even consider.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21078
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby 26mi235 » Tue Apr 09, 2013 7:44 am

Timing the 1500m mark is just this side of irrelevant. Certainly, the only reason someone times the 400 in an 800 race, the 800 in a 1500 or 1600 or mile, etc., is to get how fast the pace is. If they get a 'en-route' 1500 are we supposed to translate it into a mile by scaling by 1.08 (no) and 1.07x is also wrong because it is only a measure of how fast the finish was compared to other parts of the race. And, worst of all, it is not the RACE - it does not matter at all what the 1500m time was.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16313
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby EPelle » Tue Apr 09, 2013 8:09 am

Metric distances, notwithstanding, I was surprised that there were a bunch of no-namers on the invitational boy's 3.200m heat sheet at Arcadia, when, in fact, there was a documented 4.01-miler and a 4.02-miler in the field. Not being a fan of metric argument shouldn't have made any difference, because one doesn't overlook preps boasting those kinds of mile times. Especially preps who achieved those times a year earlier. In grade-11. Before turning 18.

aaronk, you're quite obsessed with records and all-time lists. Great you have historical perspective of how folks stack up. But if they aren't competing at the level of some of those outstanding past performers, you seem to cast events and those competing in them off as worthless. This journey commenced with the Olympics.

Just an observation.
EPelle
 
Posts: 21442
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby aaronk » Tue Apr 09, 2013 10:33 am

EPelle wrote:Metric distances, notwithstanding, I was surprised that there were a bunch of no-namers on the invitational boy's 3.200m heat sheet at Arcadia, when, in fact, there was a documented 4.01-miler and a 4.02-miler in the field. Not being a fan of metric argument shouldn't have made any difference, because one doesn't overlook preps boasting those kinds of mile times. Especially preps who achieved those times a year earlier. In grade-11. Before turning 18.

aaronk, you're quite obsessed with records and all-time lists. Great you have historical perspective of how folks stack up. But if they aren't competing at the level of some of those outstanding past performers, you seem to cast events and those competing in them off as worthless. This journey commenced with the Olympics.

Just an observation.


Mea culpa!
I DID miss seeing those 4:01 and 4:02 "milers".
Nobody's perfect!

And yes, I DO concentrate on the "elites of the elite" when it comes to performances.
I've told people before that I have a self-compiled T&F Record Book of over 500 pages.
It includes Top 24 performers lists for HS, Coll, US, and World for all events.

If I had $1,000,000 or so, and a staff of 20, I might expand my lists to the top 500 or 1000 in each event.
But I don't.
So, for MY narrow purposes, I focus on times, heights, and distances that would make my Top 24.

Funny, but isn't it true that T&FN does pretty much the same??
Except for a few instances---winners in events at Div 2 and 3 of the NCAA, NAIA and JUCO, etc----marks printed in T&FN, and the athletes making those marks, are ones that set records, or enter the Top 10 or 20 All Time (whether US, Coll, HS, or World).

Even the Annual issue goes just 40 deep!!

I'm not alone here!!

Give me that million bucks and that staff of 20....and I'll tell you when "X" athlete becomes the 958th best performer in "Y" event!! :)
aaronk
 
Posts: 3335
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 9:39 am

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby aaronk » Tue Apr 09, 2013 10:47 am

Marlow wrote:
aaronk wrote:Here's a temporary solution to the mile/2 mile vs 1600/3200 "battle"
Since the United States and the rest of the world are more familiar with the 1500 and 3000 meter distances.....than they are with the 1600/3200.....why not at least do this:
Run the 1600 and 3200 as is, for reasons that you state.
But time the runners at the 1500 meter and 3000 meter posts of those longer races.

Your understanding of a high school meet is fundamentally flawed. The average meet we're in has 50 boy 'milers' who run between a 4:50 and an 8:00 1600. Then 50 girls between 6:00 and 9:00 minutes. What's to be gained by timing their 1500s?

Big invitationals with exceptional runners often have the mile and it is appropriate there. But even there, timing the 1500 is a huge pain that very, very few meet directors would even consider.


It's been a few years since I've attended a high school meet.
The last one was when Becca Friday and a couple of others were in their senior years at Bellingham high schools.....maybe 4 or 5 or more years ago!!

Wow!!
You have boys who run 8 minute miles (1600's), and girls who run 9 minutes??
Times (pun NOT intended, but it works!! :D ) sure have changed since I ran in HS.
That was 1962.
I admit I finished dead LAST in a couple of my mile races!! :oops:
Know what my times were.....in LAST place??
Can't remember exactly, but they were UNDER 5:30!!

I'm glad these boys and girls get to participate in HS track meets.
But wouldn't it be better if you held all-comers meets where these slower guys and gals could get to race against people in their own speed bracket?
aaronk
 
Posts: 3335
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 9:39 am

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby no one » Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:43 am

EPelle wrote:both boys are the only two athletes to ever break the 9.00-flat barrier in the state of Utah.


that was an impressive '3200' and the last lap was quite impressive as well. As far as Utah's sub 9:00 club (and I wouldn't expect anybody would notice this), the guy who was the last 'sub niner' in this race was a Utah kid "Jake Heslington" from Timpanogos (8:59.73) Additionally, the guy who went out in the lead for ~ 3 laps or so, may have drawn some criticism for naivete but he went past 1600 in 4:31/2 and ended up @ 9:04.x, as a 10th grader. So a fairly evenly paced race for him.

Things look good, I think, for distance people moving ahead to next levels. But a reasonable question to ask would be what happened to last years stellar group? Frankly I haven't followed them ...
no one
 
Posts: 1611
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby aaronk » Tue Apr 09, 2013 7:15 pm

26mi235 wrote:Timing the 1500m mark is just this side of irrelevant. Certainly, the only reason someone times the 400 in an 800 race, the 800 in a 1500 or 1600 or mile, etc., is to get how fast the pace is. If they get a 'en-route' 1500 are we supposed to translate it into a mile by scaling by 1.08 (no) and 1.07x is also wrong because it is only a measure of how fast the finish was compared to other parts of the race. And, worst of all, it is not the RACE - it does not matter at all what the 1500m time was.


"And, worst of all, it is not the RACE--it does not matter at all what the 1500 time was."

Oh really?
Well, tell that to Alan Webb, who currently holds both indoor and outdoor one mile records for high schoolers!
Because he ALSO holds both indoor and outdoor records for the high school 1500.
Why??
Because the meet directors in VA and OR timed him enroute to the mile finish!!



Same goes for Mary Cain indoors this year!!
She was timed enroute in both of her HSR miles, and thus has both the one mile AND 1500 records!!
(Ditto for her being timed enroute at 3000 on the way to her two mile finish!! Another HSR!!)

While it may not be important to time an 8 or 9 minute miler enroute at 1500, it DOES matter when you're talking of the Webb's and Cain's of this world!!

And like I said, to everybody OUTSIDE the world of American high school track, the 1500 and 3000 make total sense, while the 1600 and 3200 are meaningless!

ADD:
Oh yes, almost forgot!!
This past winter, Edward Cheserek broke Gerry Lindgren's indoor two mile record of 8:40.0 with his 8:39.15.
And because the meet director at the NB meet timed him ENROUTE at 3000 meters, Cheserek got Lindgren's 3000 mark also!!
aaronk
 
Posts: 3335
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 9:39 am

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby 26mi235 » Tue Apr 09, 2013 7:24 pm

aaronk wrote:
26mi235 wrote:Timing the 1500m mark is just this side of irrelevant. Certainly, the only reason someone times the 400 in an 800 race, the 800 in a 1500 or 1600 or mile, etc., is to get how fast the pace is. If they get a 'en-route' 1500 are we supposed to translate it into a mile by scaling by 1.08 (no) and 1.07x is also wrong because it is only a measure of how fast the finish was compared to other parts of the race. And, worst of all, it is not the RACE - it does not matter at all what the 1500m time was.


"And, worst of all, it is not the RACE--it does not matter at all what the 1500 time was."

Oh really?
Well, tell that to Alan Webb, who currently holds both indoor and outdoor one mile records for high schoolers!
Because he ALSO holds both indoor and outdoor records for the high school 1500.
Why??


You think he cares a hoot for the 1500 meter mark compared to the mile time? No, he is not out there collecting en-route times that might be better than some high school runner was timed in. You completely lose focus on what is important in the sport and clutter things up with trivia - statistics are important, but they are important because they tell us something. That Webb ran a 1500m time that is mediocre compared to his mile time in that race when considered as a 1500m is trivia, not something that has any informational content on his capabilities and accomplishments.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16313
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby nztrackfan » Tue Apr 09, 2013 7:54 pm

That Webb ran a 1500m time that is mediocre compared to his mile time in that race when considered as a 1500m is trivia, not something that has any informational content on his capabilities and accomplishments.

On the contrary I would suggest that for an international audience the 1500m is more widely raced and therefore more relevant than the 1609.3m event. Sure the 4 minute mile still has that historically based prestige but is not as widely practised and therefore doesn't quite have that same relevance, nor depth of performance.
nztrackfan
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby 26mi235 » Tue Apr 09, 2013 10:56 pm

nztrackfan wrote:
That Webb ran a 1500m time that is mediocre compared to his mile time in that race when considered as a 1500m is trivia, not something that has any informational content on his capabilities and accomplishments.

On the contrary I would suggest that for an international audience the 1500m is more widely raced and therefore more relevant than the 1609.3m event.


The relative import of a 1500 and a mile is unimportant in this context. A 1500 split that is intrinsically several seconds slower than a comparable mile is really of little interest. If Someone runs a 3:50 mile, about the same quality as a 3:30 150, are we to be really interested in the 1500 time of 3:34 done en route? Not in my opinion - a 3:30 is much different than a 3:34, and hyping the latter because it happens to be the 'best' within a subset but by much less than the mile is best of an at-least-comparable subset it to lose track of what is really of interest, especially in junior athletes, where what we are looking at is the likelihood of them doing great things as 'seniors', and the slower 1500m mark not only provides none of that information, it is outright misleading.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16313
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby aaronk » Wed Apr 10, 2013 3:24 am

[quote=

The relative import of a 1500 and a mile is unimportant in this context. A 1500 split that is intrinsically several seconds slower than a comparable mile is really of little interest. If Someone runs a 3:50 mile, about the same quality as a 3:30 150, are we to be really interested in the 1500 time of 3:34 done en route? Not in my opinion - a 3:30 is much different than a 3:34, and hyping the latter because it happens to be the 'best' within a subset but by much less than the mile is best of an at-least-comparable subset it to lose track of what is really of interest, especially in junior athletes, where what we are looking at is the likelihood of them doing great things as 'seniors', and the slower 1500m mark not only provides none of that information, it is outright misleading.[/quote]



1. I believe the 1600 and 3200 are TOTALLY USELESS in a world in which the 1 and 2 mile still exist!! (Ask people like Rupp, Farah, Cain, and Lagat whether THEY care about the 1 and 2 mile!!)

2. T&FN's conversion factors (between 1600/mile and 3200/2 mile) are false and misleading! While scientifically formulated, they are just predictions, and nothing more. Runners who END their 3200 meter races AT 3200 meters do NOT run 2 miles!! There is NO WAY to get a 100% CERTAIN prediction of what would happen in the next 18 meters!! (Ask Gail Devers about what happened to HER during the final TEN meters or so of HER Barcelona OG 100H final!!)

3. The current girl's HS list can be used as a great example! The listing for what are MOSTLY 3200 meter times is given the title "two miles"!! In place of ACTUAL 2 mile times, with the exception of the FEW which ARE actual 2 mile times, the times listed are only PREDICTIONS of what the runner "ran" over that final 18 meters!! Wesley Frazier ran a 3200 recently in 9:57.70. It's on the HS TWO MILE list as 10:01.17. DID Frazier run two miles in 10:01.17?? NO!!! She not only wasn't TIMED at two miles, she didn't even RUN two miles!!!

4. The 1500 enroute times (and 3000 enroute times in a 3200/2 mile) provide the athlete and the general public with a REAL indication of what the runner actually RAN than does a PROJECTED time GIVEN to them....without actually having RUN the complete distance (of 1 and 2 miles).

5. While one's enroute times (at 1500 and 3000) are likely slower than what they COULD do at those shorter distances, they are still what they HAVE run...in actual fact!! (Again, ask Webb or Cain if they care if they got one record (for their mile's) or TWO (for the mile AND 1500). Or ask Ryun or Lindgren, or Jennings, if they care that their 1500 marks were broken!!)

6. If Cain had NOT been timed at the 1500 and 3000 points in her races, we would see the following: HSR in the 1500/mile......4:18.9 and 4:28.25. Or HSR in the 3K/2 mile (indoors).....9:17.4 and 9:38.68. So it takes just 9.35 secs to run that final 109 meters? Or just 21.28 to run 218 meters?? Wow!! :roll:
aaronk
 
Posts: 3335
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 9:39 am

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby lonewolf » Wed Apr 10, 2013 7:46 am

I blundered onto a site listing Oklahoma HS State Champions by school class. The state went metric (in running distances) circa 1982 but still retains yard records. Curiously, both the mile and two mile records are faster than the 1600 and 3200 records.
I wonder if that is true in other states.
lonewolf
 
Posts: 8813
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Indian Territory

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby 26mi235 » Wed Apr 10, 2013 8:16 am

aaronk wrote:2. T&FN's conversion factors (between 1600/mile and 3200/2 mile) are false and misleading! While scientifically formulated, they are just predictions, and nothing more.


They are projections, not predictions. As projections they are very accurate and since there is measurement error on the officially-timed distance, those might also be characterized as projections as well. Again, what matters is the 'information content' of the mark, and the converted 1600/mile conversion provides that information.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16313
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby gktrack » Wed Apr 10, 2013 6:34 pm

Blues wrote:
Dutra5 wrote:
gktrack wrote:Any sighting yet of Michael Cherry outdoors this season, anyone know what's up? From what I can tell, he hasn't ran outdoors yet for Oscar Smith HS, I couldn't even find him on a relay leg. Still plenty time left in the season though, just curious to see what he can do in the open 200/400 outdoors after his great 300 indoor performance.


According to the school's athletic calendar, the school's track team had one early season meet which appeared to be low key and another meet cancelled. So he may not have competed at any great level outdoors yet.


He's had a slight hamstring strain recently too. If all goes well he's planning to open up with an 800m in his school's meet this Wednesday and see how the leg feels.

Good call Blues... looks like he opened his outdoor season with an 800 win in 1:59 today (4/10) and ran the 4x4... good to see him back in action.
gktrack
 
Posts: 1119
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 9:42 pm

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby Dutra5 » Sat Apr 13, 2013 11:51 am

New leader at 400m..I think.

Reggie Glover of Orlando Dr. Phillips at 46.46

later ran 21.17

won the 400m by 3 secs
Dutra5
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 8:51 am

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby gktrack » Sat Apr 13, 2013 12:21 pm

Dutra5 wrote:New leader at 400m..I think.

Reggie Glover of Orlando Dr. Phillips at 46.46

later ran 21.17

won the 400m by 3 secs

Are they running districts yet in FL, or was this at an invitational/other? Good to see the preps are inching closer to 45.xx sec territory.

Add: Answered my own question... here's the video...
http://www.runnerspace.com/video.php?video_id=85266-Boys-400m-Reggie-Glover-46-46-Brian-Jaeger-Elite-Classic-2013
Last edited by gktrack on Sat Apr 13, 2013 12:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
gktrack
 
Posts: 1119
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 9:42 pm

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby Dutra5 » Sat Apr 13, 2013 12:26 pm

gktrack wrote:
Dutra5 wrote:New leader at 400m..I think.

Reggie Glover of Orlando Dr. Phillips at 46.46

later ran 21.17

won the 400m by 3 secs

Are they running districts yet in FL, or was this at an invitational/other? Good to see the preps are inching closer to 45.xx sec territory.


We're about midway through districts with Dr. Phillips district meet next Friday.

This was at the Brian Jaeger Invite. Andres Arroyo is running the 3200m soon.
Dutra5
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 8:51 am

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby Dutra5 » Sat Apr 13, 2013 12:28 pm

Arroyo ran 8:51 and won by about 45 secs.

It is/was about 85 degrees today as well.
Dutra5
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 8:51 am

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby gktrack » Sat Apr 13, 2013 1:12 pm

Dutra5 wrote:Arroyo ran 8:51 and won by about 45 secs.

It is/was about 85 degrees today as well.

Did L. Whitfield run the 100m there? - I noticed he was on the entry list.

Also... from TX Dist 17-4A a few days ago, a decent double for A. Davis 10.44/21.09 (NWI)
gktrack
 
Posts: 1119
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 9:42 pm

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby Dutra5 » Sat Apr 13, 2013 1:24 pm

gktrack wrote:
Dutra5 wrote:Arroyo ran 8:51 and won by about 45 secs.

It is/was about 85 degrees today as well.

Did L. Whitfield run the 100m there? - I noticed he was on the entry list.

Also... from TX Dist 17-4A a few days ago, a decent double for A. Davis 10.44/21.09 (NWI)


Jones' district meet was today so they didn't run at the Jaeger meet. Whitfield finished second in both the 100 and 200 to his teammate in rather pedestrian times for him. I don't know whether he was letting his teammate have a couple of district titles or he's nursing an injury.
Dutra5
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 8:51 am

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby Dutra5 » Sat Apr 13, 2013 1:27 pm

Glover also won the 100m today.

So 10.60/21.17/46.46
Dutra5
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 8:51 am

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby gktrack » Sat Apr 13, 2013 1:34 pm

Dutra5 wrote:Glover also won the 100m today.

So 10.60/21.17/46.46

Impressive triple... do you happen to know what was the order of his events?
gktrack
 
Posts: 1119
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 9:42 pm

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby Dutra5 » Sat Apr 13, 2013 2:00 pm

gktrack wrote:
Dutra5 wrote:Glover also won the 100m today.

So 10.60/21.17/46.46

Impressive triple... do you happen to know what was the order of his events?


100/400/200

Don't know the timeframe.
Dutra5
 
Posts: 1265
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 8:51 am

Re: Outdoor Outlook--High School

Postby aaronk » Sat Apr 13, 2013 2:01 pm

Dutra5 wrote:Glover also won the 100m today.

So 10.60/21.17/46.46


This one-day triple becomes even more impressive when you note his previous bests:

According to Athletic.net, his bests WERE....

10.95 (2012)
21.28 (Mar 16, 2013)
47.44 (2011)

Not to mention that he's also run his first 800 this year....a 2:10.19 on March 6!!
aaronk
 
Posts: 3335
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 9:39 am

PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Athleticsimaging, Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 8 guests