Colorado Mines Track Conversion

Not a D2 rocket scientist, a D1 rocket scientist actually. Check this thread in a week when I prove the conversion is unfair !

It's been a week. You got proof?

Hagen converted to 4:03 on their track but ran a 8:27 3k at Texas Tech which is at 3100ft (basically sea level for the Mines guys). Even after conversion that's only 8:21 or something.

Marcel laguera ran a converted 4:08 at Albuquerque then a week later converts to 4:04 on the Mines track.

Dylan Day hasnt got close to his converted 4:05 on the Mines track despite racing at Albuquerque and GVSU (Sea level)

The track conversions are bogus. Thankfully they're changing the conversion next year.

Your example is from a statistical sample of 3, 1 who has seen the best success running cross country (winning on a muddy course in 2018), the second being a freshman who has raced 7 times since the turn of the year, and the third who seems looking at previous results may be a 10k runner. All three of these ran a fast mile once, and may have struggled at other meets.

If you would like to make an actual thought on whether or not these times at altitude translate to fast sea level times you can easily do a statistical model and answer the question.

(I'll outline the problem so you can use your statistical model of chose to answer)

You would need to create a population of runners who have both run the same event at altitude and at sea level. You need to control for all other variables either with some sort of smoothing equation to justify differences in fitness between the races. Also for the results to be valid the racing conditions need to same for both races (at altitude and at sea level). So you need to find data points where the runners ran in a small field size, a rabbit pacing perfectly for qualifying times, the runners sleeping in their own bed (or being very comfortable in their sleeping environment), being cheered on by a home crowd, and finally having meet directors making choices to maximize the chance the runners run a fast time.

What I'm getting at is that answering this question is almost impossible without a controlled experiment with a large sample of runners. Which won't happen. Please stop taking a small subset of a population as a rule. Make an actual statement, show some data, learn some data science, it may get you job.

I did make a statement, my statement is the track conversion is bogus. Marcelo having his best race on a muddy XC course actually helps my point rather than hindering it. i don't know who the freshman is you're referring to is as Hagen and Day are JRs at the least. Hagen being a 10k guy again proves my point. What this, and Marcelo having his best race on a muddy XC course, portrays in my opinion is that this track does not replicate a true mile as speed clearly isn't needed in any form to run a fast converted mile. If you're strong enough aerobically to hold 65's and close in a 64/63 you convert to a 4:03/4:04 which is completely bogus. At the end of the day we'll see at nationals if my statement is right or wrong because Day and Workman are in to nationals and so far Hagen does not have a 3k/5k qualifier so unless that changes he will be in the meet too!

What about the other guys who ran well at texas? They should send some sea level guys up to this track to test it out. Calling all NAU guys!

RMACJOE wrote:

Hagen converted to 4:03 on their track but ran a 8:27 3k at Texas Tech which is at 3100ft (basically sea level for the Mines guys). Even after conversion that's only 8:21 or something.

Marcel laguera ran a converted 4:08 at Albuquerque then a week later converts to 4:04 on the Mines track.

Dylan Day hasnt got close to his converted 4:05 on the Mines track despite racing at Albuquerque and GVSU (Sea level)

The track conversions are bogus. Thankfully they're changing the conversion next year.

Nice to see you are cherry picking a handful of individuals. The altitude conversions need to be there because kids from these schools do most of their racing at altitude. Not every race is going to be perfect and all runners have up and down meets. Sure they run better on their home track (like most runners), but quite honestly a lot of these guys have gone on to run solid times at Texas Tech, at Albuquerque and at Husky. Laguera, who you list, has the fastest time in the nation at 5000 at Husky ,so obviously the altitude conversions are not that far off. Look at Taylor Stack. He ran an 8:36 at Adams State (converted to 8:05) and ran an 8:06 at Husky. Look at Carson Bix, he ran 8:45 at Adams State (converted to 8:14) and ran 8:03 at Husky. Look at Ko 4:17.8 at Mines (converted 4:06.31) ran 8:09 at Texas Tech (converted to 8:04). Look at Jordan Specht, ran 4:27 at Adams State, runs a 4:09 at GVSU. Look at Charlie Sweeney, ran 15:12 at Western State (converted to 14:14), ran 14:05 at Husky. One could go on and on. The truth is a lot of the guys you have mentioned were in the top 25 at XC nationals. It is not an aberration for them to be among the top 25 runners on the track as well. If you feel altitude conversions are too generous, then you should petition your coach to run at altitude.

Man, you really see the difference between D1 and D2 by looking at the DMR times. My high school (with a 54 second 400 split) ran 10:01. Give us a respectable 400 split and we might make D2 nationals.

How about you consider the individuals in D2? Relays don't really show much because most teams aren't going to use four guys for a handful of points when they are more effective individually. The DMR is rarely even run at most meets. It would be like using a top level hep / dec athlete to compete in just the hep / dec instead of individual events where they can score points.

The USTFCCCA also publishes squad event rankings lists which probably show a better indication of overall performances than a DMR.

What year was that? Because the fastest this year on Dyestat is 10:17. While I will agree that D2 is a step below D1, it is far better than the vast majority of high schoolers (other than a few rare exceptions who will be on D1 squads next year). The depth of competition at D1 nowadays is amazing. There are 30 guys sub 4:00 in the mile. The top D2 guys would rank 65th in the mile, 44th in the 3k and 29th in the 5k. And while there are a few exceptional high school athletes in the mile and 3000, the majority of high schoolers would be soundly beaten by even D2 competition.

Currently in d2 14:53 and14:54 gets converted down to 14:11 and 14:12 and into nationals. I think everyone can see 42 seconds in a 5k is unfair.

Come race with them. Anyone is welcome to give it a shot at high altitude. Year after year after year people cry about altitude conversions yet the RMAC historically dominates D2 in xc and the distance races.

Here's on for you:

2020 D2 men's 5000m indoor list:

6 Sweeney, Charlie SO-2 Western Colorado 14:05.93 2020 Husky Classic (College) Feb 14, 2020 300m track

2020 RMAC Indoor Championships, Colorado Springs, CO 6291 200m flat track

6 Charlie Sweeney 15:01.54

So Charlie Sweeney of Western State ran 14:05.93 at sea-level in Washington two weeks ago on their 300+m track and then was 6th in RMAC meet in Colorado Springs two weeks later (in a race won in 14:44) in 15:01 on a 200 flat track. That's 55 seconds difference.

Which way do you want it?

Taylor Stack won the race in 14:44 which will convert to around 14:00. And he basically had a pacer for 4.5k.

Stack's 5k pr? 13:58.

bump

About half a dozen years ago, a couple b-tier kenyans ran a 1500 at like 8500' and the brojos made a big deal about how the ncaa charts indicated that they were worth something like 4 seconds faster than el g's wr. In my recollection, neither ever came close to sniffing a sub 3:30 at sea level. That should tell you all you need to know about these conversions. They aren't based on meaningful data, and they are hilariously outside of reality, particularly for shorter distances. I live at 5000' and wish I could claim these altitude conversions, but they're completely fictional.

I think the mines boys just proved you wrong…