Anyone else regret running D1 track?

Very much agreed. My biggest regret is choosing a big state school track scholarship instead of going to the best school I could get into.

However, I would not go to a D3 school, I would go to Princeton or Stanford if I could get in.

Running is over in a heartbeat, kids. The world is stratifying into elites and peasants--don't make peasant decisions.

The original poster was by any measure an unusually gifted student and athlete. His 3:40 1500 was done on 35 miles a week, at most. Given this, a D3 (Williams, Amherst, etc.) experience would have served him well. He would have had considerably more academic peers at a good D3 school than he did at his institution, and would have dominated the D3 ranks with a very manageable training commitment, making for a truly meaningful college experience. The point is that while an athletic scholarship may be appealing in the short run to both the ego and the checkbook, it may not be a wise long term choice, especially for an athlete who is as equally skilled (or more) in academic and intellectual arenas as he is in athletics. As for myself, while I obtained benefit from the Division 1 scholarship experience, it did delay my academic and career development by a few years. I ended up in the same place, so to speak, at the top of a top 10 ranked professional school, but I am not so sure that this kind of delay today would be nearly as easy to overcome. I think parents and their 18 year old charges should look very seriously as to how college athletics can fit into a path of career and intellectual development, recognizing that the pressures today to enter into fields of study with high employment utility is higher than it has ever been. Track and running may well lose out if subjected to logical decision making.

I take the opposing view. Because your running career is so short and you have the rest of your life to work, I wouldn't change anything, and in fact wish I had taken a redshirt year, (which was uncommon back then)

The values in being a serious athlete pursuing athletic goals has as much life value as being an A student as opposed to a B student.

tigrciti wrote:

The world is stratifying into elites and peasants--don't make peasant decisions.

Wait-so the world HASN'T been stratified into elites and peasants for the ENTIRETY OF HUMAN HISTORY?

No, there at some points in history, for example recently, was a middle class.

Never regretted running D1. Running is indeed over quickly, it's all the more reason to do your very best with the brief time you have.

Good luck with the econ thing.

This raises a point that is hard to see for accomplished runners - you will experience as much if not more success and gratification from other pursuits.

The OP had times and running opportunities that most DIII would give their balls for. In hindsight it all worked out - he ended up in a good grad program. However a focused grad program is not the same as an unstructured but rigorous liberal arts program. You do not have the freedom to consider various topics w/ extremely qualified professors, as you do at a pricey LA college.

In terms of outcomes, the OP won the lottery many times over. In terms of process, he has regrets. That is life.

This also reinforces the (unpopular) idea that all "serious" athletes should consider their lives after running, and believe that they will be as enthusiastic about these pursuits as they are now about running.

Another canuck - it is not about getting A's or B's, it is rather about personal and intellectual development. I was in an elite honors program in undergraduate school, admittedly let into the program because a scholarship athlete was a novelty. There wasn't a day that went by my last two years in college that I did not wish I could spend the same time and energy on academics as my honors program peers. As LaRouche intimates, I then discerned that I could experience more success and gratification from other pursuits than with track and field. I agree that athletics was beneficial in that I learned to deal effectively with competition, a real boon in professional school where I was at the top of the class with a relatively modest amount of work, but really, my high school experience as a state champion and winner of one of post season national meets would have sufficed just fine in terms of inculcating competitiveness. Moreover, while my teammates by and large were exceptional people (the school is very highly regarded academically), the demands of an athletic scholarship did frustrate my social and inter-personal skill development. Yes, I picked up those attributes along the way, but it was not easy, and I was well served by a advice from others that the running life is one that is susceptible to self-indulgence and a narrow minded sense of things.

By the way, the original poster truly is an outlier. He is a world renowned economist and investment manager, and given his prowess in his field, one could easily make the argument that the time he expended in Division 1 athletics was not the most efficacious given his skill set. Most of his athletic peers at the time would not have so readily fit this conclusion.

I regret it 100%, I had just about the most awful experience possible at a D1 school in R.I. Was injured for 4 years, made to feel like I was making up injuries to get out of training and depressed the entire time I was there. Wish I had a coach at that time tell me theres a bigger picture and running doesn't end when you've finished four years of "competing" in D1. Or in the least, give me an ounce of positive feedback as opposed to giving up on me and making me feel like I was a waste of their time. Running is a long term, mature sport and it requires patience from both the coach and athlete. I think there are very few athletes that have the maturity to handle D1 running and can swing running D1. There is a reason why majority of talented runners quit after four years of D1. Sad really, so much untapped talent that gets burned up and wasted by terrible coaches that neglect to encourage and believe in those athletes that are either injured or performing poorly.

EconomistExRunner wrote:

I was aware that despite my grades I put very little into school as I was running and traveling all the time. At a big school, a clever person could cut a lot of academic corners (even as a math major).

It sounds as if part of the problem was "I put very little into school." It is hard to believe that you were really 'running and traveling all the time.' Since you figured out that you could 'cut a lot academic corners,' perhaps that had more to do with what you eventually took out of college than how running impacted you. If you had wanted to, couldn't you have studied while traveling? I used to read on the bus or plane, and at meets. Just depends on what you choose to do.

As an economist, I'm sure you know all about opportunity costs - if you are a committed student, you can certainly study your heart out and also train hard. You probably cannot do other things - parties, or other extracurriculars. But no running program, even the most demanding, is going to use up so much of your time that you cannot study. Perhaps you would have had the same issues at a D3 school, or even if you had not done sports at all - there are certainly many many other activities swirling around college campuses even for those not involved with sports.

The difference at a D3 school, at least the one I attended, was that the coach knew we were students first. If you needed to practice on your own because of class conflicts, that was fine. We had a couple of athletes who practiced on their own for entire seasons due to class conflicts, and people missed meets because of job or med school interviews. We had a lot of home meets and rarely took trips over 4 hours.

People still ran fairly well (we had some 4:20s, 2:09 girls, 14:20s guys), but we all knew that running wasn't the reason we were at school.

OP,

Perspective may have answered this but my quick check didn't find it. I'm not sure what ..."my parents were long gone." means but how would you have paid for your excellent DIII school?

You went to a pretty good school.

I would not have run period. It is a sissy sport. Seriously, if you have the ability to make a high school team (soccer, bball football) and get playing time, do it, whether or not you are college material in those sports. Man up! Being a runner in college is no accomplishment, it is a joke at some of the caliber athletes are allowed to compete.

antirunner12 wrote:

I would not have run period. It is a sissy sport. Seriously, if you have the ability to make a high school team (soccer, bball football) and get playing time, do it, whether or not you are college material in those sports. Man up! Being a runner in college is no accomplishment, it is a joke at some of the caliber athletes are allowed to compete.

The school the OP ran at wasn't a joke, especially when he was there.

I was decent in high school (3rd place in both cross country and the 3200m my senior year). I could have gone to a DII school and been a better student, but I chose the bigger name DI school. I was a middle of the pack guy on my team, but I had a lot of fun and did well in school.

Fast forward 5 years.

Because of the name of the school on my diploma and my running experience there, I was able to get a really nice coaching gig that I absolutely love.

It all depends on which route you are going to go with your life, I guess.

zatopek3210 wrote:

No, there at some points in history, for example recently, was a middle class.

Any American college/university student has a hard time understanding wealth in the big picture. The American "middle class" is elite according to world standards.

The OP gives horrible advice. Do not listen to a word he says.