| Pages: | 1 | 2 | |
| piedmontcat |
| ||
|
It sure seems so to me! |
| you idiat |
| ||
|
3:40 And it won't be broken within my lifetime (within 60 years). |
| Mr. E-man |
| ||
|
3:55 will never have the same allure as sub-4. it's a question in basic economics. once you go sub 4 each second has less marginal utility, unless you get down close to your NR or the WR in which case I'm sure each tenth of a second is crucial. that's for entirely different reasons though. |
| runn |
| ||
|
From an athletic standpoint-yes. As far as mass appeal, it has to be something like 3:40 which is to us what 4:00 was to Bannister, et al |
| watchful eye |
| ||
|
3;48
|
| Not An Expert |
| ||
Care to elaborate on this? I think going from a 3:59 to a 3:57 guy is probably worth a lot more than going from, say, 4:09-4:07. Or are you saying that that threshold (going from 4:00.00 to 3:59.99) is so immensely valuable that it dwarfs any other improvement? |
| jean bouin |
| ||
|
Yes. On a track that's been built long by the same ratio, that's exactly what it is. But only you know...... |
| Intelligent Poster |
| ||
|
no, 4=4, not 3:55. there isn't a new anything, because thing's are what they are. what would it mean to be the 'new 4-minute mile'? the 4-minute mile has a constantly shifting meaning, unless we're going to just define it as being 4:00. for example: up until Bannister broke it, it was the unbreakable barrier, where no one had gone before. so if we're talking 1940's '4-minute mile', then 3:43.12 is the new 4-minute mile. on the other hand, once ten people had broken 4 minutes in the mile, you suddenly have to say that the 4-minute mile's meaning is that only ten people in the history of the world have run that fast, in which case the current number that holds the meaning of '4-minute mile' would be 3:47.53. or we can talk about its meaning right now, which is that it's a very good mark for whether or not you're an elite-level div.1 track athlete. in which case, let's say in ten years it takes 3:58 to be in the all-american conversation, then 3:58 would be the new 4:00. basically, it's utterly nonsensical to talk about something being a new version of something else; times don't evolve. we don't even know what '4:00' is unless it just means '4:00,' and so if we make it possible for something else to mean 4:00, like you're proposing, then there's nothing for the new thing to mean. if you define what you mean by the 'old 4-minute mile', perhaps we could discuss it. e.g. if you just want to say that it's what every miler wants to run, then perhaps 3:55 could move in. but any definition of what 4:00 means, other than 4:00, is utterly arbitrary and pointless. there is not, and can never be, a 'new 4-minute mile,' because a four minute mile simply is a four minute mile. I'm glad it "seems so" to you, but that probably means that you haven't spent much time actually thinking about it and are willing to just go on your instinctual recognition of "seeming." |
| Nope |
| ||
|
neither, sub 2 hour in the marathon is the new "4 minute mile" |
| piedmontcat |
| ||
|
3:55 appears to be a good measureable goal that allows a miler to have some success on not only the NCAA level, but also compete with those looking to qualify and seek medals at WC and Oly events (ie Willis @ BIG or Lagat @ Millrose this year). Regardless, maybe I should expound a bit on my celebrating the current crop of young milers that initiated the thought. When I proposed the question of 3:55 being the new 4-minute mile, I was referring to the rapidly increasing number of youngsters who were not only breaking 4 minutes, but seeking to also be competitive on the national and international levels. A few names that immediately come to mind are Ryan Gregson, German Fernandez, Will Leer, Dorian Ulrey, Mac Fleet, Leo Manzano, (I'm sure you can add other names to this short list). Actually, Dorian just ran 3:57 at a home meet this past weekend and wasn't even top 3 in his heat if I remember correctly! German solo'ed a 3:55 flat last year at his conference championships without a rabbit and after prelims. 15 years ago (my college days), the expectations were simply much, much lower. I'm not overlooking the glamor of breaking 4 minutes in the mile. Hell, I barely broke 4 minutes for the 1500! But when I see the interviews of these kids on Flotrack speaking about breaking 4 for the 1st time, I don't get the notion that THEY are impressed. The implications are almost always that they expected to run faster, maybe 3:55/3:56 rather than 3:58/3:59. The same can be said for the marathon. Breaking 2:15 (on a national level) was solid. I don't think LRC 2009 marathon rankings had one 2:15 marathoner on that list. Again, its more of an argument of the changing times (pun definitely intended) and a celebration of the young kids are continuously impressing old folks like myself. |
| Rocky W. |
| ||
|
Old timers on this board are slow to catch on that a 3:59 mile (or 1500 equivalent) is not as impressive as it once was. Remember when Webb was barely breaking 4 last year and people were praising his fast times, yet it was obvious to many of us that something wasn't right. 3:59 just isn't that impressive or competitive anymore. The OP has a point. |
| ()o() |
| ||
|
For the everyday Joe who thinks NFL RBs run 4 flat for 40 and could win OG gold the 4 minmie is a time/distance relationship they understand, it tells them FAST!!!. As fans we understand that 4:00 is an intermediary goal these days but it still is an historic benchmark in the sport. |
| pomona + willamette = success |
| ||
very important and good point. |
| areusure? |
| ||
|
I think yes. I believe what the OP meant was that everybody knew the 4min guy and he usually won...Now if thats all you have then your certaintly not winning NCAAs. But 3:55 college kids are far and few between like the 4min guys used to be. |
| 5:00 minute miler |
| ||
|
Sub 4:00 will always be a huge milestone for any miler, but that will not win very many high quality races. When was the last time a World Championship or Olympic Championship was won in 3:55 to 4:00? To even auto for a D1 NCAA Championship, you must run sub 4. Things have progressed, runners have gotten faster, more time being deciated to training, and the evolution of training as well. Again, Sub 4:00 will always be an awesome accomplishment, but in the grand scheme of the mile. Its not what it used to be. Maybe that new standard is sub 3:50 just because far fewer people have hit that standard at this point in history. Its all relative to the time period. |
| Steve Scott ghost |
| ||
|
Let's see how many of these sub 4 guys can do this on an outdoor track or go sub 3:41 in the 1500m also outdoors. |
| Intelligent Poster |
| ||
When? When was it that being a sub-4:00 guy meant you were going to win big meets? 1960? The WR in the mile and 1500 are both over a decade old, and the WR has been under 3:50 since 1975. If your argument is that 3:55 is now as impressive as 4:00 was in the 1950s, then your argument holds true since Coe and Ovett for certain. The world of distance running is different than when Jim Ryun was racing? Yes; great point; you want a cookie? 12:50 is also the new 13:00, and 13:10 is the new 13:20, and 27:00 is the new 27:30, and 2:04 is the new 2:05 is the new 2:06 is the new 2:07. 9.8 is the new 9.9, is the new 10. You could have written this same thread in 1985 and it would have been exactly as accurate. Your point boils down to: as WR get faster, the whole field gets faster, and the threshold of being a world elite gets faster. That's fine. If you were simply identifying the threshold of eliteness, then you'd be correct. You want a list? 9.8, 19.8, 43.8, 1:43.8, 3:52.8, 12:55.8, 26:50.8... But what you're doing isn't to identify the threshold for eliteness; you're actually saying that the cultural/sporting meaning of a particular threshold has shifted. That's nonsensical. |
| The Rocket. |
| ||
|
Big Marks to be broken (which may happen in the next 100 years) in order of when I expect them to go down: 19.00 200m 9.50 100m 12:00 3 mile 1:40 800m 3:40 mile 2:00:00 marathon 26:00 10km 40.00 400m These are the new 4 minute mile. |
| 5:00 minute miler |
| ||
|
Good defense, but it is all relative based on the current world record and the number of people who have hit would exceed that standard. I think right know the new 4:00 would be to break the current world record. Maybe because only so few people have even come close to it and yet it is just out of reach for so many. |
| 5:00 minute miler |
| ||
|
correction made: Good defense, but it is all relative based on the current world record and the number of people who have hit or exceed that standard. I think right now the new 4:00 would be to break the current world record because so few people have even come close to it and yet it is just out of reach for so many. |
| Pages: | 1 | 2 | |