The best HS milers EVER? fail to break 4...

That was the most stacked race I've ever seen in high school, and we didn't get a single sub 4 or even 4:01. They're all crazy fast times anyways but come on, we should have had at least 1 person crack the 4:00 mark.

AGREEEEEEED

The conditions did seem a bit less than optimal by the time the boys mile started with the slight wind and rain, but yeah one would think at least one of them could pull it off considering how deep the field is.

The girls 2 mile was the most exciting race there in my opinion, Brie Oakley's time was the fastest ever in a HS only field and a London Culbreath ran the fastest all time for a freshman.

somebody with a fork wrote:

Worley wins at Brooks PR meet with a 4:02.

4 second meet record in 4:02 should say something though...

It always really windy and it even started raining today

Gotta bee wrote:

somebody with a fork wrote:

Worley wins at Brooks PR meet with a 4:02.

4 second meet record in 4:02 should say something though...

It always really windy and it even started raining today

The conditions were not looking optimal, but they put in a good solid effort and the time was awesome. You could see the strain on Teare in particular, and Worley had his game face on but you could tell he struggled to kick through the final straightaway. I'm disappointed no one broke 4, especially since Reed Brown didn't race this. Overall I think it was a great race, but not the one it had the potential to be.

Isn't this kind of like expecting record times at other championship meets?

If you really want fast times they need to meet at something that isn't the default High School national championships. Winning this meet against the best I imagine is high up on importance. It would be curious to ask these guys would you rather win in a fast time or lose but break 4:00

And get this: Nobody broke 3:50 for the 1,500 in the 2016 Olympic final.

What were they even trying to accomplish there? After all, it's not like anybody should care about winning the race. It's all about the final time.

Now do it again until you get it right, slackers!

It does not matter where they finish in the race. Get after the time. No college coach is going to say, "your 4:01 pr is nice, but you were only third in the race, so I think I'll find the next prospect."

The rabbit did a perfect job, but the pack didn't stay on his shoulder. That's what made the difference. He went through in 1:59, they went through in 2:01.

Im kinda curious wrote:

Isn't this kind of like expecting record times at other championship meets?

If you really want fast times they need to meet at something that isn't the default High School national championships. Winning this meet against the best I imagine is high up on importance. It would be curious to ask these guys would you rather win in a fast time or lose but break 4:00

Nah, if ya watch the interviews on YouTube (milesplit us) pretty sure Teare said nobody is worried about place for this particular meet, only the 4min barrier

Is that it for the year? The best HS crop ever and only one breaks 4min...

Worley is Super Hero shaped - huge shoulders, tiny head on a short neck, really long legs. Flying-Carpenter-Ant-Man? Every time I see him I think that I have to spray the perimeter of my house.

I didnt see the race, but Flotrack said the rabbit went 58, 2:00 which means he went 58-62. If no one went with him that would probably explain him slowing down the second lap, but if not a 4 second positive split from the 1st to 2nd lap isn't great.

Honestly, the conditions just weren't the best. I think with better conditions, these guys might have attacked the pace a little more, but no one wants to lead in a rainy windy race.

7 guys did get a PR in that mile race. However, the big 3 didn't and #4 (Clinger) did not go as fast as we thought he could (even though he did PR). So it's not as if the whole field didn't do well, just the important guys didn't.

Sweet Nell Fenwick wrote:

And get this: Nobody broke 3:50 for the 1,500 in the 2016 Olympic final.

What were they even trying to accomplish there? After all, it's not like anybody should care about winning the race. It's all about the final time.

Now do it again until you get it right, slackers!

First off, this wasn't a championship race so place doesn't have any significance. Like the person above me said, no college coach or shoe company will say "hey you ran a 4:02 in high school and that's nice and all, but no scholarship/contract for you since you got 3rd : "

They were all chasing sub-4 or at LEAST a PR. Yeah it'd be neat to get a golden shoe or a medal but no one in the field would think to try and go for a yearly award as opposed to a place in HS track and field's hall of fame (sub-4 club)

So if we make the call right now, is Worley or Brown #1 for the season?

Okay fair enough. I was thinking more along the lines of you take 3 or 4 of the top 5 milers put them in a race and I'm sure they don't wan't to get beat by the others. But if they didn't go with the pacer and the pacer was on pace it is one of two things. The pace was too fast for the conditions /day. No one wanted to risk going with the pacer and blowing up. It is hard to balance racing for a PR and at some level not wanting to get beat.

Finally, who said this had anything to do with college coaches and scholarships? All the top guys either have scholarships or will be getting them next year. This about bringing the best into a race and I'm a sure at some level they dont' want to get beat. Point in fact that they didn't stick with the pacer.

Whuddamaddawityoo wrote:

So if we make the call right now, is Worley or Brown #1 for the season?

This pains me because I am a Reed Brown fanboy but I would probably say Worley. He beat Reed at the state meet with a crazy double in his 1:48 800m, he took pros and collegians down at the Texas relays (also Reed!), and he beat every other 4:00 miler at Brooks today. To take down Cooper Teare, who had a phenomenal season winning at Arcadia and coming so close to breaking 4, in the fashion that he did on the home stretch, was very impressive. This doesn't even cover his conquests in Casey Clinger, DJ Principe, Patrick Parker, and other excellent runners he took the scalps of.

Toomanyspikes wrote:

Whuddamaddawityoo wrote:

So if we make the call right now, is Worley or Brown #1 for the season?

This pains me because I am a Reed Brown fanboy but I would probably say Worley. He beat Reed at the state meet with a crazy double in his 1:48 800m, he took pros and collegians down at the Texas relays (also Reed!), and he beat every other 4:00 miler at Brooks today. To take down Cooper Teare, who had a phenomenal season winning at Arcadia and coming so close to breaking 4, in the fashion that he did on the home stretch, was very impressive. This doesn't even cover his conquests in Casey Clinger, DJ Principe, Patrick Parker, and other excellent runners he took the scalps of.

There's something really funny about Reed's running. He's a Footlocker champ and sub-4 guy, so just based on that you'd think there'd be no way anyone else in the class was better. But he consistently lost. Every big race. To several different runners. Except for the two races that mattered most--breaking 4 and Footlocker. Whether he peaks super well or lightning struck twice, I have no idea, but damn, quite a resume for the 2nd best high school runner in Texas and best high schooler in the country.