RuKiddingMe!! wrote:
well....show's running a sub 4 in perfect conditions in high school is not easy...props to those who have!
What perfect conditions? It was described as very windy out by Webb and others.
RuKiddingMe!! wrote:
well....show's running a sub 4 in perfect conditions in high school is not easy...props to those who have!
What perfect conditions? It was described as very windy out by Webb and others.
The 4:01 was good and impressive, but I thought the post-race interview was even more impressive. For a senior in high school the kid is composed, knowledgeable, humble, and never once looked to make excuses. Very impressive. I'm a Montoya fan now.
Here's the interview just in case:
yesstiles wrote:
Lindgren only raced 2-miles on 11-lap to a mile indoor wooden tracks or on dirt tracks.
You really don't think Lindgren would have run 8:30 on one of today's modern tracks?
Lindgren also in high school doubled a 13:17 3-mile and a 4:01 mile on a dirt track in the same meet.
Lindgen also beat two current Olympic Champions and WR Holders in a star-studded hilly XC race while in high school.
I'd just like to point out to you that as far as the 2-mile situation goes, you're giving this a "shoulda-coulda-woulda" perspective.
What you're doing is essentially the same as what Ventolin does for many runners when he claims that they were in Sub-12:35 shape, or could have dropped 10 seconds off their 1500m time if they had run it on a "Mondo track with rabbits"
Could he have? Maybe.
Could I also say that if Verzbicas raced more than 4 official 1-mile races and 5 official 2-mile races over his entire high school career, he could've improved his time as well? Of course.
It's not what the runner COULD have done. It's what the runner DID do.
Now, on another note, even if you try and say that "times don't matter because they were disadvantaged by poor tracks!", I can also say that Gerry Lindgren's victories over the "olympic champions" don't matter because back then, the talent pool and competition for running was terribly poor.
We all know that professionals weren't allowed to compete in the olympics. That alone would greatly narrow the number of talented individuals who would want to run competitively to begin with.
Take a look at the Kenyans and Ethiopians now!
Last year, Koech said that it was a problem that no young Kenyans wanted to compete in the Steeplechase because they were taking to the roads to make money. As a result, the talent pool in the steeplechase takes a hit.
The same thing is true for running as a whole in the 1960s era. The fact that you can't make money doing it really limits the number of people who would bother continuing to develop themselves after high school. It was a hobby. Not a career. So Lindgren wasn't really beating the best in the world because he was absolutely extraordinary. He could simply have been beating them because they sucked.
Bac wrote:
yesstiles wrote:Lindgren only raced 2-miles on 11-lap to a mile indoor wooden tracks or on dirt tracks.
You really don't think Lindgren would have run 8:30 on one of today's modern tracks?
Lindgren also in high school doubled a 13:17 3-mile and a 4:01 mile on a dirt track in the same meet.
Lindgen also beat two current Olympic Champions and WR Holders in a star-studded hilly XC race while in high school.
I'd just like to point out to you that as far as the 2-mile situation goes, you're giving this a "shoulda-coulda-woulda" perspective.
What you're doing is essentially the same as what Ventolin does for many runners when he claims that they were in Sub-12:35 shape, or could have dropped 10 seconds off their 1500m time if they had run it on a "Mondo track with rabbits"
Could he have? Maybe.
Could I also say that if Verzbicas raced more than 4 official 1-mile races and 5 official 2-mile races over his entire high school career, he could've improved his time as well? Of course.
It's not what the runner COULD have done. It's what the runner DID do.
Now, on another note, even if you try and say that "times don't matter because they were disadvantaged by poor tracks!", I can also say that Gerry Lindgren's victories over the "olympic champions" don't matter because back then, the talent pool and competition for running was terribly poor.
We all know that professionals weren't allowed to compete in the olympics. That alone would greatly narrow the number of talented individuals who would want to run competitively to begin with.
Take a look at the Kenyans and Ethiopians now!
Last year, Koech said that it was a problem that no young Kenyans wanted to compete in the Steeplechase because they were taking to the roads to make money. As a result, the talent pool in the steeplechase takes a hit.
The same thing is true for running as a whole in the 1960s era. The fact that you can't make money doing it really limits the number of people who would bother continuing to develop themselves after high school. It was a hobby. Not a career. So Lindgren wasn't really beating the best in the world because he was absolutely extraordinary. He could simply have been beating them because they sucked.
But you're missing several key points.
1) Lindgren arose during a period when all the American and World Records were being smashed. The years just prior to Lindgren were not impressive, but Lindgren helped usher in a new era. The competition was incredible at his time. His Olympic 10,000 race for example had more Olympic medal winners past and future in it than any other Olympic distance race in history. He broke 13 for 3-miles at age 20, and no one did it again for years except for Ron Clarke and Kip Keino, arguably two of the greatest in history. No American broke 13 for eight years after he did it, not until Pre. Lindgren was the closest an American has ever come to a 3-mile/5K WR, only 0.6 seconds away.
2) There really is no shoulda/coulda regarding for say, Lindgren's 2-mile times. There simply were not tartan surfaces for him to race on. It's not like he had the chance but the stars didn't align even though his fitness showed he was capable. He simply only had the opportunities of running on wooden or dirt tracks in his prime. And actually for the 2-mile, it was not really even an event back then except for indoor. He NEVER even ran an outdoor 2-mile in HS. The event wasn't presented to him.
domestic pro wrote:
Agree, Lindgren was an absolute monster. He did things you aren't supposed to. He had an advantage, though, in that he is a huge outlier mentally. His neural networks are not at all normal. You might say he is touched.
Relative to the best in the world at that time, he was in a different league than the current crop of US HS athletes. Webb's 3:53 in HS is the closest we've seen to something being comparable, but that was a one-off performance in a single event.
If kids nowadays ran as much as Lindgren did, there would be a few more doing comparable things to him in HS, but, of course, 99.99+% would break mentally and physically. Gerry seemed to have already been "broken" mentally, and therefore maybe wasn't able to physically break.
Take Saarel, for example. If he was banging out 140 mile weeks as an average, and throwing in some 200 mile weeks, AND STAYED HEALTHY, he would likely be 5 pounds lighter and his aerobic capacity would be several percent higher. Suddenly he's world class in everything from the 1500 up to the 10,000.
People have trouble wrapping their minds around something so simple, but Gerry's mind exploded out into space like a supernova, at which point there is no mind to be wrapped around anything and suddenly "impossible is nothing."
Nice post!
It is true, Lindgren was able to tap into a mentality that wasn't normal. He was also a remarkable talent durability wise. How else does a high-schooler run 30 miles a day including intervals for weeks at a time and not crack physically or mentally?
Another thing to take note of was where Lindgren was mentally his senior year. Prior to his senior year of high school he had never raced a non-HS race. All of a sudden his senior track season he's in world class races with Olympic medalists and in every one HE TAKES THE LEAD FROM THE GUN. And he pushes the pace at every chance. He is running to win against the best in the world. He is not hanging on, he is making the race happen. That's astounding to consider.
uhuybhhjfjsj wrote:
G2K wrote:Montoya wasn't a Ryun, Liquori or Danielson type.
He certainly didn't have the raw talent of Webb, and he definitely did not have the strength of Verzbicas.
Looks close if not better:
Danielson:
1:53.2 880y (converts to about 1:52.5 800m), 3:59.4 mile, 8:55.4 2M
Montoya:
Junior: 1:52.49 800m, 4:01.32 mile, 8:48.25 3200m (converts to about 8:51.45 2M)
Senior: 1:50.19 800m, 4:01.79 mile, 8:47.07 3200m (converts to about 8:50.27 2M)
Saarel:
1:51.14 800m, 4:02.72 mile, 8:45.74 3200m (converts to about 8:48.94 2M)
Seems to me both Saarel and Montoya could have been able to go sub-4 based on their 800m and 3200m but just didn't.
Using the reverse of your logic maybe Danielson could have gone faster at 800 and 2 miles but just didn't.
Rambo97x312 wrote:
No absolutely agree. Lukas Verzbicas is the greatest distance prep athlete of all time for sure.
He was over-aged, likely around 21-22 as a senior.
He also had no impressive 800 credentials.
Left track to compete in a whites-only sport.
LV doesn't impress me at all.
Makh Daddy wrote:
Rambo97x312 wrote:No absolutely agree. Lukas Verzbicas is the greatest distance prep athlete of all time for sure.
He was over-aged, likely around 21-22 as a senior.
He also had no impressive 800 credentials.
Left track to compete in a whites-only sport.
LV doesn't impress me at all.
you're an idiot. Lukas was born January 6th 1993, meaning he was 17 in his last footlocker, and 18 for his senior track season. he just turned 20 this year.
And I bet you believe those "17 year old" Ethiopians running 12:50 in the 5,000 aren't age cheats either. Get a clue - LV scammed the high school system.
PropsDue wrote:
The 4:01 was good and impressive, but I thought the post-race interview was even more impressive. For a senior in high school the kid is composed, knowledgeable, humble, and never once looked to make excuses. Very impressive. I'm a Montoya fan now.
Here's the interview just in case:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRQVbkBgoo4
Good but he needs to learn to look at the camera
A Seminole wrote:
PropsDue wrote:The 4:01 was good and impressive, but I thought the post-race interview was even more impressive. For a senior in high school the kid is composed, knowledgeable, humble, and never once looked to make excuses. Very impressive. I'm a Montoya fan now.
Here's the interview just in case:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRQVbkBgoo4Good but he needs to learn to look at the camera
what? no one else looks in the camera when they're being interviewed, so why does he need to?
I thought it interesting that the time was faster than 4:03 but slower than 4:00.
Makh Daddy wrote:
And I bet you believe those "17 year old" Ethiopians running 12:50 in the 5,000 aren't age cheats either. Get a clue - LV scammed the high school system.
The ex-Soviet Union ("your papers please") isn't Ethiopia where you can have a populace and government not documenting in detail exactly when, where, and to whom every baby is born.