HSer Ben Saarel runs 8:49 at 4,500 feet of elevation

sgh wrote:

FWIW: Brent Vaughn ran 9:06 in Denver and 8:45 at sea level

Brett Schoolmester ran 9:13 in Denver and 8:48 at sea level

Kevin Williams also ran around 9:06 in Denver and then 8:48c at sea level. There's a reason no prep has ever broken 4:10 or 9:00 a mile above sea level and 9:15-9:20 is a great run at that elevation. Saarel is not a mile above sea level, but his 8:49 is probably worth a sub-8:40.

Domestic Pro wrote:

The 3K is effected more at this altitude than any other distance

At the BYU invite. impressive

Damn. I've never seen so many fast HS times week after week. These guys don't let up.

I watched the race from the infield. He took the lead from 1200m on.

65 second first 400m.

66-67 next 6 laps.

58-59 last lap. (Pretty far off his usual 54-55)

He made it look easy.

Who knows what he has planned tomorrow, but I am sure he wants to pop off a big 800m before the season is over...

webby wrote:

Damn. I've never seen so many fast HS times week after week. These guys don't let up.

Ye, and we got 4 super studs right now in McGorty, Arroyo, Saarel, and Montoya. Not to mention Cheserek, though I haven't heard much from him recently.

8:49 is a sick time for a high school kid at altitude.

Any indication of why this kid is improving?

Is he doing high mileage?(Please don't answer PEDs.)

Do people see him as a 5k /10k guy?

Random villager wrote:

Any indication of why this kid is improving?

Is he doing high mileage?(Please don't answer PEDs.)

Do people see him as a 5k /10k guy?

Not PEDs.

My impression: He's very smart and very sane. He is consistent in his training and understands that consistency over time and gradually upping the volume and intensity > dramatic changes or flashy single workouts leading to injury.

He's a natural competitor who leaves the racing for the races.

Hard to say exactly what event(s) he will end up focusing on; he is currently competitive on the national scene from 800 on up; I do not know what his basic speed is, or even if he has really tried to develop that.

It was a 3200M - not a 2-mile. So add on about 5-6 seconds to get a 2-mile time and subtract 10-12 to get a sea-level 2-mile time and then it is worth about 8:42-44 at sea level for 2-miles. A very good run!

http://results.runnercard.com/Results/results.jsp?meetid=4599

Good conversion analysis.

Given the year is almost at a close for high schoolers this will rank as one of the best for HS efforts. Those of you who don't know altitude now matter if your born there or live there this is an incredible effort at altitude.

blamb61 wrote:

It was a 3200M - not a 2-mile. So add on about 5-6 seconds to get a 2-mile time

Are you kidding???

The accepted conversion is something like 3.2 seconds, at least for a time this fast.

ok- I was lazy and didn't do the math.

8:49/3200m = 529sec/3200m x 1m/3.28ft x 5280ft/mile = 266.11sec/mile = 4:26.11/mile = 8:52.22/2-mile

8:52-8:49 = 3-sec so your right it is 3-sec

8:49 + (3-sec) - (10 to 12-sec) = 8:40-8:42 for the 2-mile at seal level

blamb61 wrote:

ok- I was lazy and didn't do the math.

8:49/3200m = 529sec/3200m x 1m/3.28ft x 5280ft/mile = 266.11sec/mile = 4:26.11/mile = 8:52.22/2-mile

8:52-8:49 = 3-sec so your right it is 3-sec

8:49 + (3-sec) - (10 to 12-sec) = 8:40-8:42 for the 2-mile at seal level

LOLZ someone definitely wasn't an engineer. Why not just multiply the number of seconds by 1609.34/1600?

Well, another way to look at it. He ran 7 seconds faster than Puskedra did at the meet and 5 seconds faster than Puskedra ever ran at altitude. Puskedra ran 8:46 at sea level.

This gives him a range of 8:39-8:41. So the 8:40-8:42 that has already been estimated is basically inline with that.

Also, Conor Mantz ran 9:04 at Arcadia, 9:14 here. So if you subtract those 10 seconds from Saarel's time, you get 8:39, then add the 3, you again, get 8:42.

So, 8:39-8:42 from various points of reference.

joecrunner wrote:

Predicted 2 M Finish Times by Altitude

Elevation Time min/km min/mile

sea level 8:44.7 2:43.0 4:22.4

...

10000 ft (3048 m)8:55.5 2:46.4 4:27.8

Slowing down less than 11 seconds at 10,000 can't be right. Does the formula claim to reasonably predict times that high up?

The race is up on Flotrack:

http://www.flotrack.org/coverage/250603-2013-Outdoor-Track-and-Field-on-Flotrack/video/708204-Ben-Saarel-breaks-Luke-Puskedras-Utah-State-Record-in-849

go high or go home wrote:

Raptured wrote:

2 miles is too short to have a massive deficit from running at altitude. This result is probably about the same as his 8:45 at sea level. Also, keep in mind that BYU is considered to have one of the fastest tracks around.

I difference between altitude and sea level wouldn't be "massive" for 2 miles, but it's certainly more than 4 seconds.

I live at almost exactly 4500' in SLC. I haven't raced a hard 2 mile anywhere in a long time, but mile repeats here, for example, are at essentially the exact same pace that they would be at sea level, maybe 1 second slower. Any serious local runner would laugh at you if you tried to spot someone 10-12 seconds for a 2 mile here.

BSME MSEE with 20+ years experience. I didn't use your conversion number because I didn't remember that one smarty pants!