your move planet Earth wrote:
Nico will not be the first Young bro under 4 officially. Lex is breaking 4 tomorrow with Colin.
No offense but there’s no way he’s breaking 4 in January on a windy day.
your move planet Earth wrote:
Nico will not be the first Young bro under 4 officially. Lex is breaking 4 tomorrow with Colin.
No offense but there’s no way he’s breaking 4 in January on a windy day.
Peach Pit wrote:
your move planet Earth wrote:
I am hyped about Nicos performance. Especially because he won. I would say he is going to take a step or two forward this year and possibly win his first NCAA title in the winter or spring.
But I just don’t like the claim that he ran 3:54 when he didn’t run 3:54. He ran a very very impressive 4:02 at altitude why can’t we just say that? Anyone who knows running will be impressed.
I really dislike the idea that we should or shouldn't do something because 'anyone who knows running will know what it means'. When it comes to one of the biggest up-and-coming talents in the country, it's the perfect time to get people who don't know much about running to follow the sport. High schoolers who watch Total Running Productions on YouTube and have little-to-no more interaction with the competitive side of the sport may like following Nico Young's progression, and seeing the title "Nico Young runs 4:02 mile at altitude" is not gonna have them as excited to watch the video as "Nico Young runs 3:54 mile*".
If they watched the video, they'd see he ran a 4:02, be really impressed that it was equal to a 3:54, and hopefully they'd continue to follow the sport. If every headline says he ran a 3:54 and it gets people invested in the sport who weren't previously, I'd love that, even if in the future people say he ran a 3:54.
It gives me the same vibes as people saying Hocker was a 3:35 guy last year because his 'mile conversion didn't count', or 'indoors are faster anyways', or 'he's peaked already and will be burnt out by NCAAs/Trials/Olympics'. It's fighting against the hype in a way that is 1) detrimental to growing the sport, and 2) wrong because he proved the entire year he could run faster than 3:35.
This is a great post, and it puts into perspective just how annoying it is to see people always putting expectations of failure on athletes and negative predictions - even if they do end up being right, so what? Even the greatest will have their failures. People are always betting against an athlete's improvement, and even when an athlete consistently proves them wrong, there's always more to prove.
Peach Pit wrote:
your move planet Earth wrote:
I am hyped about Nicos performance. Especially because he won. I would say he is going to take a step or two forward this year and possibly win his first NCAA title in the winter or spring.
But I just don’t like the claim that he ran 3:54 when he didn’t run 3:54. He ran a very very impressive 4:02 at altitude why can’t we just say that? Anyone who knows running will be impressed.
I really dislike the idea that we should or shouldn't do something because 'anyone who knows running will know what it means'. When it comes to one of the biggest up-and-coming talents in the country, it's the perfect time to get people who don't know much about running to follow the sport. High schoolers who watch Total Running Productions on YouTube and have little-to-no more interaction with the competitive side of the sport may like following Nico Young's progression, and seeing the title "Nico Young runs 4:02 mile at altitude" is not gonna have them as excited to watch the video as "Nico Young runs 3:54 mile*".
If they watched the video, they'd see he ran a 4:02, be really impressed that it was equal to a 3:54, and hopefully they'd continue to follow the sport. If every headline says he ran a 3:54 and it gets people invested in the sport who weren't previously, I'd love that, even if in the future people say he ran a 3:54.
It gives me the same vibes as people saying Hocker was a 3:35 guy last year because his 'mile conversion didn't count', or 'indoors are faster anyways', or 'he's peaked already and will be burnt out by NCAAs/Trials/Olympics'. It's fighting against the hype in a way that is 1) detrimental to growing the sport, and 2) wrong because he proved the entire year he could run faster than 3:35.
Quick question:
Is Nico Young a sub four minute miler?
Why? Did a tornado 🌪️ rip the roof off the building?
Yes, he is. Do you believe he’s not capable of breaking 4 minutes at this point in his running career?
raging clue wrote:
Yes, he is. Do you believe he’s not capable of breaking 4 minutes at this point in his running career?
That wasn’t the question I asked. You don’t become a sub 4 minute miler until you actually break 4.
Otherwise John Landy would have been the first ever sub 4 miler and not Roger Bannister.
My bad, the 12980 feet is it’s highest point (Ajusco). So it’s only a 3:26.21 conversion
Colin got Low 4:05’s and Lex got High 4:08’s
2:18 at the casino and way off the grid wrote:
Why? Did a tornado 🌪️ rip the roof off the building?
He was talking about the younger Young brother running the outdoor meet today.
your move planet Earth wrote:
[quote]Peach Pit wrote:
Quick question:
Is Nico Young a sub four minute miler?
Of course not. I’d assume (or hope) he and smith would say the same thing. You’re not until the clock shows 3:59.9999 (or whatever that Cornell guy ran at bu when it was rounded to 4:00.00)
That also doesn’t mean the performance isn’t worth significant hype/praise. We’ve seen time and again college milers at altitude put up these performances and then actually perform them
later at sea level. It’s worth noting that he has clearly improved quite a bit even from last spring. That’s all.
No, people ARE hyped by what's being bandied about as a 3:54 mile. NAU's homepage, Young's IG page and several other headlines claim that Young ran a 3:54 mile*.
I don't see young running 1:57-1:57 on the flat when his backup race was a 1:54 (albeit at altitude).
The nau page is run by some random athletics admin that just looks at the conversion and sees it’s faster than the real record. Do you seriously think they have a clue about what’s going on? That tweet was posted minutes after the race, so it’s not like someone associated directly with running did it.
As to him running 1:54 later, we don’t know what they did between the mile and 800, not to mention he ran an all out mile an hour before it. Give it a break.
your move planet Earth wrote:
Quick question:
Is Nico Young a sub four minute miler?
No.
I'd bet he wins any mile against anyone who's a 3:42/3:59 guy though. Luis Grivalja for instance, the guy he beat by 2 seconds, has a PR of 3:35.
Here's a question for you:
Do you think we should try to cater to people who already know a lot about competitive running, or do you think we can try to make things a bit more exciting in order to grow the sport?
There are a lot of people here who say Kipchoge isn't a sub 2 marathoner, but he's probably the only marathoner that an average person is going to be able to name, and they'll know his name because he ran a marathon in under 2 hours. I'm cool with a headline that says "Kipchoge runs the first marathon under 2 hours", as long as in the article it points out that it's not record eligible. I'm also cool with headlines saying "Nico Young runs 3:54* mile", so long as they mention that it's converted.
It’s a 4:02. Not a 3:54. What would it be on Mars? Shall we use that time?
Okay, thanks. Where is the outdoor meet ?
Only people who have raced at altitude can understand this. I was in Flag in 2016 and went for an 8 mile run with some Swiss athletes who were mostly cyclists and skiers. I got dropped at around the 3.5 mile mark and a female skier had to stop her workout and walk back with me because I didn't know trails. Embarrassing! I don't think the average people appreciates the effects of altitude unless they have experienced it. With that said, I would perhaps deduct about 2 seconds form the conversion for someone who lives and trains at altitude years round. Btw, if Jesus ever wanted to do some running, he would probably choose Flagstaff. Running through a birch tree forest on trails created by nature with snow capped mountains in the distance with perfect temps and no humidity in the middle of the summer.
ErolsInternet wrote:
It’s a 4:02. Not a 3:54. What would it be on Mars? Shall we use that time?
So this is where we stand:
Despite being the leading training group in the country and possibly the world, and
Despite being led by one of the greatest coaches in history, and
Despite having the 3 - or maybe 5 or even 7 - best current high school runners and some of the best ever, and
Despite producing various alumni, at least one of whom was the best high school runner of his era and perhaps the one of the greatest ever,.....
Newbury Park, if you include everyone enrolled there now, any graduates therefrom, and any who has ever attended, has produced exactly
0
4 minute mile runners.
Can everyone please stop saying Nico ram 3:54. He ran 4:02.
dsrunner wrote:
The NCAA conversion is a bit silly for somebody thoroughly acclimated.
Keino ran his best 1500 at 7000ft. Ritz ran his best 5000m at 3000ft.
The assumption of O2 limitation is just a mistake for some runners.
My guess is Young can go sub 4 but not much faster.
Future similar to Mantz if not overtrained.
Mantz has run a 3:37.96 1500m (not altitude converted).
rhimby wrote:
Looking the results here is interesting. For instance the 3k is incredibly slow...winning time of 8:42, with lots of legit NAU guys running 8:50-9:10
Does altitude really affect them that much? Don't they do race pace training up there anyway? Or am I missing something?
Yes. it's hot as all get out in that arena as well
I saw guys who go sub barely 9 in the 3k place at NCAA outdoors.
Anybody who who ran under 4:15 also placed. The record was like 4:07 tells you how really fast Nico ran
TrackCoach wrote:
Running through a birch tree forest on trails created by nature with snow capped mountains in the distance with perfect temps and no humidity in the middle of the summer.
*Aspen tree forest
TrackCoach wrote:
Btw, if Jesus ever wanted to do some running, he would probably choose Flagstaff. .
Jesus actually decided to tear down funky old houses and develop some luxury condos in flagstaff........bring back 2002 please!!!!!!!
Also, lets make the college ski pass 10x more expensive...those baffooonnnnsss are clogging up the ski area with their portable speakers!!!!!
Get off my lawn