Indoor Sub 4 Miles not True Sub 4

Real Sub 4 Miler wrote:

Someone post the outdoor 1500m and mile times of last year's freshly minted indoor sub 4 milers. Then we will have some data to work with.

I contend that a sub 4 mile on modern indoor tracks, due to the moderate pace and manageable number of laps, is a sweet spot of indoor track. Thus, making it the rare event that is faster indoors.

the data would STILL be meaningless. i could easily counter with the top ten milers of all-time and the disparity of their marks between indoors and outdoors (and without looking, i'll bet that ALL ten have faster outdoor marks; i'd be willing to bet top 20 as well, and maybe 99 out of the top 100--guess whom the noted exception would be?). the truth is, neither list would prove nor disprove your point.

that said, the only meager "data" i have to go on is personal experience, as well as anecdotal evidence from other milers. simply put, i've never heard a sub-4 miler say indoors was easier than outdoors. granted, this is not hard science, but neither is this "sweet spot" you refer to...

Outdoors: no time qualifiers so races are mostly tactical + unfavorable spring weather conditions = slower 1500 times than predicted from mile indoors. Unless you are Wheating or A.J. and do Europe in the summer. Seems to me those two ran a bit faster outdoors than their indoor times....

I dont care if it's on pavement, sand, indoors, underwater, outdoors, or on a trampoline.

As long as the course isn't downhill, if you go 1609.344 meters in under 4min, you are a sub4 miler. Period.

Exactly my point. It's easier indoors because you don't have to contend with unfavorable weather conditions. Outdoor 1500/mile races tend to be tactical affairs because it's bloody hard to front run when you are outdoors battling the wind.

fuser wrote:

The math is only true if runners actually ran centered right on the inside line the whole way. I'm sure if you looked at videos, their center of mass is generally at least 20cm (8 inches) into the lane (and they often will be in lane 2 for a lot of the race if it's crowded), so in that case the extra laps don't help...

My point was not that one would literally run at 20cm the whole way. What you are supposed to be understanding is that on an indoor track the OPPORTUNITY for running shorter than the nominal one mile distance is doubled compared to an outdoor track by running anywhere inside of the 30cm mark on the turns.

the distance shorter than 400m run when the athlete runs 20cm from the line changes when the track becomes shorter because the turns are different distances

think about it malmo, i know you can do this!!

Ran many,

Thanks for adding your thoughts. From a purely practical viewpoint I would think you would have to expend at least some mental if not physical energy keeping yourself that close to the curb,line, cone, flag whatever that in the long run you would gain no advantage.

As far as endogeny it means growth from within to me and I fail to make the connection between it and indoor versus outdoor sub 4 success.Please explain what you mean.

The curves having curvatures has nothing to do with it.

The difference between the stated distance and the least you can legally run per lap is given by

2*pi*(r + d) - 2*pi*r = 2*pi*d

which is independent of r, so malmo is right. The more laps you have, the greater the distance you can get away with cutting off.

And the corollary is also true - the more laps you have the more distance gets added on once you are away from the innermost lane.

5 to a mile tracks are not indoor tracks in the traditional sense of the word, they're undersized outdoor tracks inside a building.

I think we might as well move to 400 meter tracks inside anyways. That would remove the west coast advantage.

molmo wrote:

the distance shorter than 400m run when the athlete runs 20cm from the line changes when the track becomes shorter because the turns are different distances

think about it malmo, i know you can do this!!

Please don't aspire to become a math teacher or an engineer, or any other job that others will depend on the results of your calculations.

This is 7th grade math.

The difference in circumference between radius R1 and R2 is always 2*PI*R(2-1). This is the same whether or not you are comparing small radii or extremely huge radii. It is the same even if the track doesn't have perfectly uniform radii on the turns. It is the same even of you take a wandering path, just as long as you make one complete revolution.

Read this, and write it down if you have to: one revolution is 2*Pi*R

I know you can do this, kid.

Let's just end this indoor sub four minute mile debate right now . . .

Cush said, "real sub 4 miler, i've run a real sub-4 mile, i knew real sub-4 milers, real sub-4 milers were friends of mine. real sub 4 miler, you're no real sub-4 miler..."

The he said, "i don't know MY indoor PR (other than i never broke 4 indoors); why should i know coghlan's?"

The he said, "i've never heard a sub-4 miler say indoors was easier than outdoors" after three sub 4 milers stated it was "easier" on this very thread, i.e. Malmo (3:40 1500m), Low 3:50 Guy, and me.

Fact --- malmo did not break 4 in the mile.

fact --- "As a reference point, I've run many sub-four miles. My first was indoors, but I WOULDN'T SAY IT WAS "EASIER" OR "HARDER THAN OTHERS. You try your best, race the competitors and run through the line. My PR was in the low 3:50's, but guess what - that was the easiest race I ran (based off of feeling)."

this poster never said it was definitively easier indoors and he may have never broken 4 (in this case I will believe him)

fact---we have no idea who you are. In your case I think you may have broken 4, if so, tell us who you are you have no reason to be anonymous.

Real Sub 4 Miler wrote:

Cush said, "real sub 4 miler, i've run a real sub-4 mile, i knew real sub-4 milers, real sub-4 milers were friends of mine. real sub 4 miler, you're no real sub-4 miler..."

The he said, "i don't know MY indoor PR (other than i never broke 4 indoors); why should i know coghlan's?"

The he said, "i've never heard a sub-4 miler say indoors was easier than outdoors" after three sub 4 milers stated it was "easier" on this very thread, i.e. Malmo (3:40 1500m), Low 3:50 Guy, and me.

point 1: learn who lloyd bentsen is. get a sense of humor.

point 2: and your point is? i DID, however, look it up.

point 3: i always thought malmo was a steepler, though it sounds like he was at least a sub-4 caliber athlete, even though he did NOT officially break 4. that said, his post, if i understand it correctly, just points out that the opportunity to run the shortest distance presents itself indoors, NOT that it's easier perse. low 3:50 guy presents good points as well that i won't dispute, other than he may or may not really be a sub-4 guy. same goes for you. i can't imagine why people hide behind anonymous handles online--oh wait, i know EXACTLY why people may hide behind anonymous handles...

for the record: i'm not saying you're wrong; i just doubt that you can come up with definitive evidence to prove your point. also for the record, since it occurs to me that maybe you don't frequent the masters threads where my identity is more obvious, i am christian cushing-murray, and proud to say i am indeed a sub-4 miler (3:55.42 outdoors/4:01.57 indoors; 1500m: 3:37.94 outdoors/3:40.92 indoors), and my personal experience is that indoors was always harder.

that's MY story, and i'm sticking to it...

check your statement wrote:

fact---we have no idea who you are. In your case I think you may have broken 4, if so, tell us who you are you have no reason to be anonymous.

The irony is rich here isn't it, "Check Your Statement"?

Is 'Your' a middle name or is it your maiden name?

socalcush wrote:

point 3: i always thought malmo was a steepler, though it sounds like he was at least a sub-4 caliber athlete, even though he did NOT officially break 4. that said, his post, if i understand it correctly, just points out that the opportunity to run the shortest distance presents itself indoors, NOT that it's easier per se.

You understand correctly, sort of. I'm saying that on modern tuned and banked 200m tracks, indoors where there is no wind variable, and the temperature is always perfect (track and shade temperatures are equal), and compounded with the fact that athletes can actually run less distance on an indoor track than than the same nominal distance on an outdoor track, it is in fact, easier to break 4:00.

Is anyone going to run 3:43 (55s) on an indoor track? NO. But at 60s pace it seems to be easier to run for a combination of the reasons that I've cited.

I'd suggest that for you, if all things were equal, that is, you were in the same peak condition during the indoor season as during outdoors, and you actually trained on indoor tracks (which I suspect not?) your times would have been identical.

Your 800m times would probably not be identical.

At my alma mater, Penn State, they installed an indoor track that was modeled after the fastest indoor track in the world, Stuttgart. Most of the 800m runners on that team have set PRs on that track. Those that have run faster outdoors, have only improved on those times marginally. That track is faster than any other track that they will ever run on, indoors or out.

Coghlan trained every week on a board track during the winter during his college days. He understood the boards and it showed. He ran 3:49 on them. Could he run his 800 PR on an indoor track. 1970's technology the answer is "NO". 2010's track technology, the answer is "Yes".

Additionally, the human element is at work. As others have stated on other threads now and before, the compliance with the inside lane rules with respect to UW and Notre Dame's track have come under fire each and every winter. By placing the cones off of the track, it allows runners to hug the curb even more.

Fact: Low 3:50 Guy said, "breaking four for the first time is "easier" indoors."

Fact: Malmo, who has run 3:40 for the 1500m - faster than a Sub 4 mile - said it's easier to break 4 indoors.

Fact: I have broken 4 minutes in the mile, and I believe it's easier to break 4 indoors due to the fact that all the guys who run 3:57 - 3:59 indoors become 3:44 1500m guys when the outdoor gets underway.

Fact: Cush, I know who you are. Plus, I've beaten you many times. However, your 1500m/mile times are faster than mine.

Excuse my stupidity, but a track is measured to be EXACTLY 200m (160m, 307m, etc) from the inside line right? I don't understand how you can run less than 200m on a 200m track unless you're not on it in the first place. What difference would it make if you run right next to the line, if the line is 200m?

Real Sub 4 Miler wrote:

Fact: Low 3:50 Guy said, "breaking four for the first time is "easier" indoors."

Fact: Malmo, who has run 3:40 for the 1500m - faster than a Sub 4 mile - said it's easier to break 4 indoors.

Fact: I have broken 4 minutes in the mile, and I believe it's easier to break 4 indoors due to the fact that all the guys who run 3:57 - 3:59 indoors become 3:44 1500m guys when the outdoor gets underway.

Fact: Cush, I know who you are. Plus, I've beaten you many times. However, your 1500m/mile times are faster than mine.

this is fun; let me try:

fact 1: i acknowledged this, didn't i?

fact 2: i acknowledged this, didn't i?

fact 3: umm, i'm not sure this is a fact...

fact 4: lots of people have beaten me. i suppose it's possible you did, which is discouraging because the competitors i actually knew were stand-up characters who would not hide behind an anonymous username. hate to think i got beat by a poser. oh well, i'll get over it...

fact 5: i'm 2-0 vs. el gherrouj. nothing to do with this thread, but it helps me get over the fact that you've purportedly beaten me many times, plus it eliminates the possibility that you may in fact be el gherrouj. now if someone can help me get over the fact that i never went on a date with farrah fawcett...

fact 6: @malmo: my indoor 1500 pr was indeed set on that track in stuttgart. very fast track.

from the onset of this thread, i acknowledged that others' experiences may be different than mine. hard to give much credence to anonymous posters, but what the hell, this IS letsrun. despite the drivel, i enjoy being informed, and remain open to the possibility of being wrong, even if it means admitting "real sub 4" dude is right. i doubt i'll ever get to prove malmo's point of racing an indoor/outdoor mile in equal shape. if everyone's read my posts carefully, one of my points was that i doubt ANYONE can conduct this experiment, because we know races just don't happen like that...

cush

"who's more of a fool, the anonymous fool, or the knucklehead who argues with him?"