King991 wrote:
Ritz would have run close to 8 flat or better on a banked track in HS, with help. He crushed Webb in XC who ran 8:45 on a crappy flat track , the following indoors, beating Nate Brannen who was a sub 4 HS guy. By 14 seconds
This was 20, 20 years ago. he(Ritz) had zero set up races except chasing a 5K mark at Penn one year. His Michigan State record where guys 2 and 3 are in the 14:50's high , of 14:10 2 will stand for a very long time. It is most likely the most dominant HS XC mark on a time tested course of all time.
He never ran at the Armory in HS , if Webb had run his two mile at the Armory he would have run 8:42 again , flat to banked, and no help, 20 years ago. So do that math, again, no Pros in that race. So do the math on that, to 3K . NO pacers. He could have chased anything at that point.
He certainly could have run today's NP marks, anyone who thinks otherwise is also challenged or they never saw him in person, His 8:45 on that Md. flat track which was not even remotely fast, was insane. Again 20+ years ago.
In my own Opinion:
Since most , most of these marks, occur in really well set up races, opinion, and I saw both Webb and Ritz in person multiple times in HS . I believe that Ritz with pacing surely would have run under 8:00, Webb as well. Webb ran 1:47.7x to 8:45 yards Indoors. None of these guys were ever beating him, that just is. And it was , did I say? 20! Years ago.
Just my opinion, it's just the math.
Guys should be running faster 20 years later, that counts for everyone, and they, The NP guys are all time good guys. No doubt, especially the miler, who surely can run 7:56 or better.
The guy who always deserves credit in any discussion is a young German Fernandez on the track, 8:34 yards with no help at all, in Hot Greensboro, in HS which surely converts lower than 8 flat and then his 3:55 and 7:47 frosh 18year old year.
I was at the meet where Webb ran 8:45 2M. In my all time talent rankings, Webb has always been my number 1. Hobbs may have challenged that for me recently with how little training he did to reach 3:34 as a HS senior.
Webb, in 3:53 shape, was an 8:25 dude; but 1) the mile is more prestigious so Webb chased that record and 2) Webb was competing for a spot on the World Championship team so he had to focus on actual races instead of a time trial tour.
Ritz, though, was not an 8:01 3000m dude at any point in his HS career except for maybe the same day he ran 13:44 in June of his senior year.
The nostalgia won’t allow us to admit that people are faster. NP has 4 kids faster than Ritz at 3k. I can admit that.
But the nuanced conversation to have is does faster equal better? I remember in the 90s, we had years where not a single HS runner broke 9 3200, and by the late 90s, we had 3-4 people and the national lead was like 8:57. Human evolution doesn’t happen that quickly as to where one generation displays 0 talent and 2 decades later, we have a previously once in a generation talent every year.
The game has changed now. With advent of sites like Dyestat, Milesplit, Runnerspace, LetsRun, TrackShark, etc the information flow has spurred a running revolution. Kids & coaches know how to train, they know who their competitors are, they chat with their competitors about training etc.
The average 4:20 kid in 2000 would be a 4:12 kid today.
Another way to think about faster vs better is to consider the case of Roger Bannister.
“ Bannister started his running career at Oxford in the autumn of 1946 at the age of 17. He had never worn running spikes previously or run on a track. His training was light, even compared to the standards of the day, but he showed promise in running a mile in 1947 in 4:24.6 on only three weekly half-hour training sessions.”
It would be ignorant to say that every person who has run faster than Roger is better, but it would anti factual to not acknowledge that they are faster — reasons/circumstances not withstanding.