Malcolm Gladwell’s Running Knowlege

Hasn't a high schooler broken 4 minutes like the last 5 years? Seems pretty routine at this point to me.

Gladwell is a known running enthusiast.

It may not be routine for high school runners to do it, but there have been a few and it happens with less fanfare. I just googled it -- in 2017 Reed Brown became the 10th, according to flowtrack. I don't remember Reed Brown's name and I check the boards pretty regularly.

I don't know about breaking 4 at the end of a 10k. The top guys might break 4 at the olympics off a slow pace -- they finish in the low 50s for the final lap. This post says Bekele ran sub 4 at the end of his 10k:

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=4782301

Also I think he checks the message boards...

Also, he ran a pretty decent mile in high school.

Oh, that may have been the final 1600 of his 5k rather than his 10k, not sure.

running commenter wrote:

Hasn't a high schooler broken 4 minutes like the last 5 years? Seems pretty routine at this point to me.

OK so if you went out on a date once per year for the last 5 years, you would say that you routinely date, apparently. High school runners who break 4 are rare.

He once published a theory of his that NHL hockey players became professionals because they were born earlier in they year and therefore received more coaching as kids (he thinks being a few months older = bigger and stronger than younger peers). Based on this, I’m certain that Gladwell is a grade-A idiot and would never read another word he wrote.

So if 10 high school students in history got laid would you say that high school students are routinely getting laid?

He knows how to write things that make him sound like an expert and get "smart" people to nod in assent without solid evidence. His "10,000 hours of practice" is the quintessence of this pseudo-paradigm. If you fool 99% of the people you have fooled everybody. He writes everything like it's a Ted talk.

I have never heard of a sub-4:00 split for 10000m, even for 1600, and that is in 45 years of following the sport closely. Perhaps Bekele did but it was overshadowed by an impressive last lap (Beijing?)

He is a good masters runner. He ran 5:11 for the 5th ave mile last year age 54.

Ziplocker wrote:

running commenter wrote:

Hasn't a high schooler broken 4 minutes like the last 5 years? Seems pretty routine at this point to me.

OK so if you went out on a date once per year for the last 5 years, you would say that you routinely date, apparently. High school runners who break 4 are rare.

If a nuclear bomb got dropped on your city once per year for the last 5 years, you would say that this rarely happens, apparently.

If you were to breathe once per year for the last 5 years, you would say that you routinely breathe, apparently.

Here's a few more bad comparisons for you wrote:

Ziplocker wrote:

OK so if you went out on a date once per year for the last 5 years, you would say that you routinely date, apparently. High school runners who break 4 are rare.

If a nuclear bomb got dropped on your city once per year for the last 5 years, you would say that this rarely happens, apparently.

If you were to breathe once per year for the last 5 years, you would say that you routinely breathe, apparently.

Yes. The nuclear bombing would not be routine if it happened 10 times in history. The breathing would be quite rare of course in the example you have provided.

I can't recall its name, but there's a phenomenon about this: You see media coverage of a topic you're very knowledgeable in and you know they're getting basic things wrong. (For example, that sub-4s happen within 10Ks.) But in areas where you don't have expert knowledge, you assume other parts of the same publication are more or less getting it right. For all we know, there are economists shaking their heads at the New Yorker's business and finance coverage, and then telling their friends, "Says here they now run sub-4 miles in 10Ks!"

Actually, this phenomenon sounds like the sort of thing Gladwell would write a book about!

Ziplocker wrote:

I just read Gladwell’s New Yorker piece on Roger Bannister. Does Gladwell know the sport well? Two assertions appear dubious to me. Gladwell writes that high schooler runners routinely break 4 minutes. Perhaps Gladwell and I use different definitions of the word routine. It appears to me to be more of a rare event than routine.

Gladwell also makes a statement to the effect that “decent” elite 10000m runners are breaking 4 minutes within a 10000m race. Has this ever happened? It may have, but it is rather misleading to assert that decent 10000m runners are breaking 4 minutes for the mile in a 10000m race. I have nothing against Gladwell but this appears to be sloppy journalism.

You must be really fun at social gatherings

Hardloper wrote:

Ziplocker wrote:

I just read Gladwell’s New Yorker piece on Roger Bannister. Does Gladwell know the sport well? Two assertions appear dubious to me. Gladwell writes that high schooler runners routinely break 4 minutes. Perhaps Gladwell and I use different definitions of the word routine. It appears to me to be more of a rare event than routine.

Gladwell also makes a statement to the effect that “decent” elite 10000m runners are breaking 4 minutes within a 10000m race. Has this ever happened? It may have, but it is rather misleading to assert that decent 10000m runners are breaking 4 minutes for the mile in a 10000m race. I have nothing against Gladwell but this appears to be sloppy journalism.

You must be really fun at social gatherings

I actually am when I want to be, but having said that, one might infer from your comment that you prefer dull-witted simpletons who take at face value some of the assertions you make which are of dubious veracity or palpably false.

Brian Gates wrote:

He once published a theory of his that NHL hockey players became professionals because they were born earlier in they year and therefore received more coaching as kids (he thinks being a few months older = bigger and stronger than younger peers). Based on this, I’m certain that Gladwell is a grade-A idiot and would never read another word he wrote.

To be fair, he wasn't pulling a theory out of thin air. He was reporting a peer-reviewed paper that found a statically significant relationship between birth month and likelihood of reaching the NHL. If it wasn't a surprising result, he wouldn't have bothered reporting it. Writing someone off as a "grade-A idiot" for finding an interesting result is the academic version of assuming that whoever wins a race must be doping.

Ziplocker wrote:

Hardloper wrote:

You must be really fun at social gatherings

I actually am when I want to be, but having said that, one might infer from your comment that you prefer dull-witted simpletons who take at face value some of the assertions you make which are of dubious veracity or palpably false.

No, you're the classic "well actually" guy who interrupts a friend's interesting story to nitpick trivial semantics

Hardloper wrote:

Ziplocker wrote:

I actually am when I want to be, but having said that, one might infer from your comment that you prefer dull-witted simpletons who take at face value some of the assertions you make which are of dubious veracity or palpably false.

No, you're the classic "well actually" guy who interrupts a friend's interesting story to nitpick trivial semantics

Trivial semantics? You are the classic idiot who apparently just believes erroneous pablum due to a deficiency in cognition. I will always correct falsehoods when I opt to. Educate yourself.

Hardloper wrote:

Ziplocker wrote:

I actually am when I want to be, but having said that, one might infer from your comment that you prefer dull-witted simpletons who take at face value some of the assertions you make which are of dubious veracity or palpably false.

No, you're the classic "well actually" guy who interrupts a friend's interesting story to nitpick trivial semantics

Disagree. Gladwell is writing about Bannister only because he was the first to break 4:00. Gladwell then makes basic factual errors about how common sub-4:00 is now.

Here's a few more bad comparisons for you wrote:

Ziplocker wrote:

OK so if you went out on a date once per year for the last 5 years, you would say that you routinely date, apparently. High school runners who break 4 are rare.

If a nuclear bomb got dropped on your city once per year for the last 5 years, you would say that this rarely happens, apparently.

If you were to breathe once per year for the last 5 years, you would say that you routinely breathe, apparently.

If a flower grows only once a year, I would say it routinely grows every year.

running commenter wrote:

Here's a few more bad comparisons for you wrote:

If a nuclear bomb got dropped on your city once per year for the last 5 years, you would say that this rarely happens, apparently.

If you were to breathe once per year for the last 5 years, you would say that you routinely breathe, apparently.

If a flower grows only once a year, I would say it routinely grows every year.

Right, just as if you had an interesting thought once per year, you would say you routinely have interesting thoughts.