Which state has the best highschool runners?

EzellGazelle wrote:

Ive wondered who has the history of being the state that produces the best athletes

Not sure what you mean when you say runners; however, based on a track & field analysis I did a couple years ago, it was CA, TX and then NJ. Obviously, NJ was the big surprise considering it is a relatively small state. I used T&F News data from the last 50 years. CA is always tops, some years, FL, IL, OH, CO, PA or NY will displace NJ and on rare occasions TX, but over time the top 3 T&F states are CA, TX and NJ. NJ kind of gets overlooked, but it is the state of all time greats like Marty Liquori, Joetta Clark, Renaldo Nehemiah, Carl & Carol Lewis and more recently, Ajee Wilson, Robby Andrews, Edward Cheserek, Keturah Orji and Sydney McLaughlin.

EzellGazelle wrote:

Ive wondered who has the history of being the state that produces the best athletes

It is in no way definitive, but if you just look at the 40 Boys and 40 girls from Footlocker Nationals, here is your answer on a per capita basis.

1. Montana (By more than double any other state)

2. Alaska

3. Connecticut (I was not aware this state is so strong)

4. Utah

5. Rhode Island

But note that, especially in the guys race, the Northeast sent some of the weaker runners to FL Nationals, So there were probably even more runners in the West that were stronger than the Northeast finalists, but did not make it to Nationals.

Obviously, there is also the NXN thing. Unfortunately the NXN site doesn't list states and I'm too lazy to figure it out, but if someone wants to go through the NXN regionals and pull out the top ten in each region, I will put them in too after removing repeats (IE the Montana girl runners, Hacker, etc) We'd also have to adjust for NY, which has their own regional.

I can tell you from looking at the numbers though that a State like Vermont or Wyoming, even if they only had 1 NXN qualifier, would skyrocket to the top and be just below Montana. Alaska would be up there also and may challenge Montana for top spot. I also suspect Utah (which sends much of their top talent to NXN) would be even higher.

In case people are wondering how close the numbers are, they aren't.

A State like CA only has about 1 FLN finalist per 3,800,000 people, and New York has about 1 FLN finalist per 5,000,000 people.

While Montana has about 1 per 330,000.

So, in other words, on a per capita basis, Someone from Montana is 10 times more likely to be a FLN finalist than someone from California.

One State that surprised me was Virginia, which was pushing to be in the top 5 despite having a decent population.

On a per capita basis Rhode Island must be at the top. Going off just this decade but for a small state but those guys produce some very solid kids year in and year out. Kid named Jack Salisbury ran a 4:08 last weekend and his school without him ran a 10:17 DMR not too shabby. They rarely produce exceptional runners but for their size that state always suprises me with their talent.

Speaking of Rhode Island that soph. Mike Marsella kid from UVA who broke 4 last week is from R.I. too.

Not at the top, but 5th. A person in Montana is 3 times more likely to be a 2014 FLN finalist than someone from Rhode Island.

Comparing FL finalists per capita is a poor way to determine what state has the best runners. You're measuring outliers per capita. Pointless. Mean running times in a large database are worth more. Or average time of runners at state meet in track events.

It will never be purely objective, but I think you have to look beyond the outliers.

Wouldn't it be nice if every state sent their top ten individuals to one national race? That would settle this in a very cool way. Kids would get to put on a jersey with their state's name on it!

Yes

xc dynamo wrote:

Wouldn't it be nice if every state sent their top ten individuals to one national race? That would settle this in a very cool way. Kids would get to put on a jersey with their state's name on it!

TrackCoach wrote:

EzellGazelle wrote:

Ive wondered who has the history of being the state that produces the best athletes

Not sure what you mean when you say runners; however, based on a track & field analysis I did a couple years ago, it was CA, TX and then NJ. Obviously, NJ was the big surprise considering it is a relatively small state. I used T&F News data from the last 50 years. CA is always tops, some years, FL, IL, OH, CO, PA or NY will displace NJ and on rare occasions TX, but over time the top 3 T&F states are CA, TX and NJ. NJ kind of gets overlooked, but it is the state of all time greats like Marty Liquori, Joetta Clark, Renaldo Nehemiah, Carl & Carol Lewis and more recently, Ajee Wilson, Robby Andrews, Edward Cheserek, Keturah Orji and Sydney McLaughlin.

You are wrong. Texas won this year and every year.

Another vote for Michigan, this year at least

The Dallas Morning News used to rank the top states for many years and Texas won pretty much every year. I saw another ranking this year and Texas was far ahead of Calif. who far surpassed every other state. If I recall this year Texas had like 17 of the top 20 4 x 100 and 4 x 200 times in the nation.

I'd have to agree with Michigan being the best. Wetzel a top miler in the country with a #5 this year. Brazier beating Wetzel indoor for a 4:09 indoor then to top it with a #4 all time in the 800m outdoor. And then to top it all off with. The michigan Gatorade athlete of the year fisher, with a 4:00 breaking mile and another footlocker championship win.

EzellGazelle wrote:

Ive wondered who has the history of being the state that produces the best athletes

Probably the most populated ones.

Polly P wrote:

The Dallas Morning News used to rank the top states for many years and Texas won pretty much every year. I saw another ranking this year and Texas was far ahead of Calif. who far surpassed every other state. If I recall this year Texas had like 17 of the top 20 4 x 100 and 4 x 200 times in the nation.

No bias there I'm sure.

Ant Man wrote:

Polly P wrote:

The Dallas Morning News used to rank the top states for many years and Texas won pretty much every year. I saw another ranking this year and Texas was far ahead of Calif. who far surpassed every other state. If I recall this year Texas had like 17 of the top 20 4 x 100 and 4 x 200 times in the nation.

No bias there I'm sure.

It was, as I recall, an objective ranking system where they took the top times and marks from every state and saw how they would do in a mythical national championship.

On a per capita basis this year it is clearly Michigan, 7 guys 4:10 or under in the 1600, with 3 more that chose to run the 3200 and would have gone under 4:10. Fisher Sub-4:00 mile, Wetzel 4:04 mile and Brazier whom ran 3 1:47's all alone, would have easily run a 4:05 mile, after running a 4:07 during indoor.

Drespect wrote:

I'd have to agree with Michigan being the best.

Read the question again!! It does not say which state has the fastest runners but the BEST! The answer would have to be that OHIO has the best.

Case Closed!!

MadMIrunner wrote:

On a per capita basis this year it is clearly Michigan, 7 guys 4:10 or under in the 1600, with 3 more that chose to run the 3200 and would have gone under 4:10. Fisher Sub-4:00 mile, Wetzel 4:04 mile and Brazier whom ran 3 1:47's all alone, would have easily run a 4:05 mile, after running a 4:07 during indoor.

Not even close.

Idaho had 3 guys under 4:10 this year. That's about half of what Michigan had. Michigan is 6 times the size of Idaho... you do the math.

Per capita, it is always going to come out that smaller population states, and most especially states in the Rocky Mountain region (NM, UT, CO, WY, MT, ID) are the strongest per capita.

Michigan is one of the 10 biggest states in the nation, and it isn't even uncommon that states half its size (Colorado) or even smaller (Connecticut, Oregon, Utah) are as good even on an unadjusted basis.