If you ran a 4:17.98 mile, would you say you ran a 4:17 or a 4:18 and why?

I would say 4:17 high. If they ask how high, then I would tell them.

The time is not fast enough to matter.

Call it what you want. Call it 4:15, its still ordinary. And doesn't matter

4:15 is 76th in country for high school boys rn, don’t think it’s very ordinary

When I ran 4:59.97, I said I ran 4:59. Until I ran 4:50 three days later.

If someone told me they ran just under 4:10, I'd assume 4:08 or 4:09.xx, but my thoughts would not be to think 4:09.99. You trying to be modest actually made the listeners assume better than you actually ran. Just say 4:09. No one else actually cares. I don't remember my own bests to the tenths or even to the second for longer races.

If I ran this in college it would be 4:17.98 for the first year after I did it. During the following few years it would be a 4:17. At my 5 year reunion it would be a 4:15. When I turn 40 it becomes a 4:10. That is how my 4:08 in the early 90's became a 4:02.

I would simply say that I’m a hobby jogger, because, be it 4:17 or 4:18, both are hobby jogger mile times.

Usually guys will fudge one or two seconds as time goes on . this dude might say 415 10 years after graduation . whatever it happens all that time . but to answer your question 4:17.98 is a 4:17 . hand times a little different but trust me he won’t say 418 if he ran 4:17 anything

what did run the second 400m in?

OP never said it was a high school time.

I'd say 4:18, in the case of 4:17.98.

If I ran 4:17.90, I'd say 4:17. This makes sense to me.

4:15 still qualifies you for a lot of D1 meets. Plus sub 4:20 wins most college races outside of the Power 5 and insanely large invites. There is a world outside of the power 5, check tffrs if you don’t believe me.

What High Schools are timing to hundreds of seconds in dual meets? I guess at the big meets you might have electronic timing to the hundred but unless you are running the 100 or 200 everyone I knew who competed in track gave their time in whole seconds especially for distances above the 800.

Sorry, but I can't read through the whole thread, but in case no one has said it yet, I'd say, "I ran 4:17 for the FULL MILE."

So what did you run for the 1600 meter mile?

In my case- I was a 440 guy (sometimes the 330 hurdles) and always the relays (4x4 and 4x8).

I was a 50.1 hand timed on cinders 440 guy in mid 1970's spikes- it was PAINFUL on the lava rocks they called cinders.

I DID run a 2:02.7 open 800 (faster in relays but they don't count).

But- it was 880 (convert to 800 is 0.7) so 2:02.0

It was on cinders (the aforementioned lava rocks)- this track was deemed unusable about a year after I graduated. So we're talking a good 1 second per lap.

Now I'm down to 2:00.

Who grew up in the 70's? Decent training shoes for us biomechanically UNgifted people were nonexistent. My shins constantly burned, I always had that sharp pain in my knees.

Give me about 0.5 at least per lap for the overall effect that had on my training. I'm at 1:59.

Not to mention that my father smoked 3 packs of cigarettes a day and I was breathing that in when I was home and he INSISTED that I eat steak and eggs before every race.

I think I'm a 1:56 guy- 45 years later! ha ha ha

I had a co-worker tell me with a straight face he was a 4-minute miler because he ran 4:59 one time. So yeah, you're well within your rights to call 4:17.98 a 4:17 mile.

This is kinda of a pessimistic question. A simple congrats to Gary Martin would be sufficient.