This website gives Harvard 100 points and UW 78. 100 x 3 = 300 and 78 x 8 = 624. UW has the more impressive feat by a mile (excuse the pun).
-
23
-
intelligenceandspeed wrote:
Imagine being the top academic school in the country and also putting three guys under four minutes. This definitely tops Washington's feat in my books.
Sounds like a good DMR
They also have a 400m runner who ran 47.33 a few minutes ago
20 -
Nnbbhh wrote:
intelligenceandspeed wrote:
Imagine being the top academic school in the country and also putting three guys under four minutes. This definitely tops Washington's feat in my books.
Sounds like a good DMR
They also have a 400m runner who ran 47.33 a few minutes ago
They definitely will be competing for a podium at Indoors.
10 -
intelligenceandspeed wrote:
Imagine being the top academic school in the country and also putting three guys under four minutes. This definitely tops Washington's feat in my books.
And they have professors that CRIP WALK!!
20 -
lol what? wrote:
so you went to Dartmouth or Columbia. Leaning towards Dartmouth since Columbia typically has been viewed as more prestigious until their rankings abuse was made known.
Good grief. No. I didn’t. And again, it doesn’t matter. It’s apples and oranges. UW obviously has lower standards but has numerous schools it’s competing against for recruits. Harvard is really only recruiting against Stanford and maybe for kids who really value academic prestige and want a great running program. There’s no conversion factor or basis for comparison. They are different. 8 for UW and 3 for Harvard are both great.
21 -
intelligenceandspeed wrote:
Imagine being the top academic school in the country and also putting three guys under four minutes. This definitely tops Washington's feat in my books.
It's been reported that Gibby has the distance guys doing weighted lifts after reps during workouts. They don't have the most talented recruits but they are doing unorthodox methods that are bringing in success.
51 -
Actually no wrote:
lol what? wrote:
so you went to Dartmouth or Columbia. Leaning towards Dartmouth since Columbia typically has been viewed as more prestigious until their rankings abuse was made known.
Good grief. No. I didn’t. And again, it doesn’t matter. It’s apples and oranges. UW obviously has lower standards but has numerous schools it’s competing against for recruits. Harvard is really only recruiting against Stanford and maybe for kids who really value academic prestige and want a great running program. There’s no conversion factor or basis for comparison. They are different. 8 for UW and 3 for Harvard are both great.
I'm probably thinking he didn't go to an Ivy at all. Probably somewhere like Michigan or Vanderbilt but just didn't have enough for the top of the top.
13 -
He gets recruits with insane talent who also care about academics. While the fastest tend to be international, this year's class has a 14:40 XC 5k guy and a 3:39 1500m runner.
10 -
yeah that's probably true. if he went to college in Cambridge, he'd say that outright, and he'd do the same if he went to Yale or Princeton.
13 -
There will be a 30 for 30 made about this team.
10 -
Actually no wrote:
problem is wrote:
the problem w your logic is harvard can only recruit from a sliver of the athlete pool that UW can, bc the min academic standards to go to harvard (even for elite athletes) is still so high
They aren’t THAT high. (Personal experience. Went to Ivy as recruit and I had no business based on test scores and grades being there.) I’m not saying the alternative is appropriate either. I’m saying let’s not compare.
they are that high.. recruited athletes at harvard still had a 1397 avg SAT score in 2021. .
whereas the overall student body at UW averaged 1340
both programs are excellent choices if you are a good runner but UW simply is drawing from a larger pool of potential athletes, due to less stringent academic standards.51 -
Sub 4 is the new 4:10
63 -
Actually no wrote:
lol what? wrote:
so you went to Dartmouth or Columbia. Leaning towards Dartmouth since Columbia typically has been viewed as more prestigious until their rankings abuse was made known.
Good grief. No. I didn’t. And again, it doesn’t matter. It’s apples and oranges. UW obviously has lower standards but has numerous schools it’s competing against for recruits. Harvard is really only recruiting against Stanford and maybe for kids who really value academic prestige and want a great running program. There’s no conversion factor or basis for comparison. They are different. 8 for UW and 3 for Harvard are both great.
this is a good point. Altho the pool of sub ~4:10 1400+ SAT students is pretty small, there aren't as many "elite" colleges to choose from. Stanford, maybe MIT? think u could throw the Rice/Dukes of the world in too but maybe not
00 -
In my book, sub 4 is equivalent to what sub 4:04 was 10 years ago.
41 -
It's larger than you'd think. Keep in mind that most sub 4:10 milers are from upper-middle class families, and the perennial XC/track powerhouses are typically good suburban schools. That's a combination for good test scores.
MIT doesn't relax academic requirements for athletes, and they can only give you a 40-50% chance of acceptance. I had a 4.0/36/high 1500s and was told by the coach that it'd be a toss-up. Also, you have to be very STEM/academics focused - due to the workload, it's common that people are consistently lacking sleep which can detract from running. On the other hand, Stanford doesn't really look at high 8:5x guys nowadays.
20 -
Let’s keep this simple. If you were on the Savannah, would you rather have 8 extremely fast individuals trying to outrun a lion or 3? That’s what I thought. Darwin always has the final say.
10 -
Evolution wrote:
Let’s keep this simple. If you were on the Savannah, would you rather have 8 extremely fast individuals trying to outrun a lion or 3? That’s what I thought. Darwin always has the final say.
You have to look at this in a modern context. In today's society, if you were looking for a mate, would you rather have a slightly slower Harvard graduate to reproduce with or someone with lower intelligence but faster? I think I would have to go with the boys in Cambridge here.
42 -
lol what? wrote:
to elaborate a little on my prior post, here's what I've seen in my experience working at a 'prestigious' trading company:
tier 1 - you can get interviews with a sparse resume, and having a strong resume will catapult you to the front. in general, for HF jobs based off what I've heard from friends (I'm in trading so CMU and Berkeley are high tier 2), these schools are the top 3 Ivies, Stanford, and MIT. special acknowledgements should be given to some of Penn's (Wharton's) dual degree programs.
tier 2 - almost as good as tier 1. There's virtually no difference except at maybe ~10 companies, but that difference is slight even at those companies. these schools are Penn, Duke, Chicago, Caltech, Hopkins, and Columbia*.
tier 3 - this has a wider range and is where you start getting into the "resume not looked at" when you're towards the bottom of this tier. The best schools in this range are Cornell (especially CS / Dyson), Dartmouth, Brown (definitely the worst Ivy, but still a good school), WashU
high tier 4 / low tier 3 - Rice, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame, Georgetown
mid tier 4 - except if you're in CS/math or in Ross at Michigan, good luck. these are CMU, Berkeley, and Michigan. CMU and Berkeley excel at CS but are pretty weak everywhere else, while Michigan has decent placement into BB banks, but it's much worse per capita, especially if you don't fulfill ≥1 quota.
low tier 4 - Emory, UCLA, NYU except Stern (location + alumni can't be beat and it's well-known), UVA
Anything else: except if you're a disabled minority lesbian, you're not getting it
I don't know if a disabled minority lesbian could run a 3:52 mile though. Think about that one.
11 -
00
-
Albert Camus didn't go to Harvard idiot!!
10
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.