pdxrunner2 wrote:
The Tooley kid from Oregon ran 4:01 on Friday night at the Nike/Jesuit relays.
Pretty good 1600/mile.
pdxrunner2 wrote:
The Tooley kid from Oregon ran 4:01 on Friday night at the Nike/Jesuit relays.
Pretty good 1600/mile.
J.R. wrote:
Another bogus list by watchout - note most of those are 1600m times.
This thread is about 3200m.
It is a comprehensive list of the top 1m/2m times in the nation for freshmen. Because almost every 3200 runner in the country also runs the 1600, the reasons to examine both are fairly clear. If you don't regard the 1600 as a guide to 3200 ability, then perhaps you could ignore the entries that don't include both distances.
It doesn't surprise me at all that Leon freshmen suddenly makes a huge progression.
http://fl.milesplit.com/athletes/68558-matt-mizereck/stats/graph/5000m
The kids there are highly flucuated in times year to year, it wouldn't surpise me if the coach trained them through the winter into spring each year and then hoped for the best during the summer for them to keep running.
Updated top 35 (2012 outdoor season only; 1500m-5k marks considered):
1. Elijah Armstrong, Pocatello ID - 9:04.78 3200m (also 4:22.65 for 1600m)
2. Jean Baptiste-Tooley, Central Catholic OR - 4:01.38 1500m
3. Logan Wetzel, Saline MI - 4:20.43 1600m
4. Marcus Wheeler, Hamilton AZ - 4:22.96y
5. Phillip Hall, Sanford NC - 4:21.40 1600m
6. Nick Diaz, Miami Sunset FL - 4:22.41 1600m
7. Tanner Anderson, North Central WA - 4:22.60 1600m (also 9:34.72 for 3200m)
8. Joey Duerr, Chaska MN - 4:22.62 1600m
9. Aaron Roe, Jackson WA - 9:22.55 3200m (also 4:25.90 for 1600m)
10. Nick Martin, Sammamish WA - 9:22.99 3200m (also 4:25.82 for 1600m)
11. Peter Kesting, Olympia WA - 4:23.88 1600m (also 9:33.27 for 3200m)
12. Patrick McDermott, Ingraham WA - 4:23.90 1600m
13. Connor Olson, Wayzata MN - 9:24.76 3200m
14. Benjamin Gonzalez, Warren CA - 4:24.22 1600m (also 9:33.70 for 3200m)
15. Connor Mantz, Sky View UT - 9:27.60 3200m
16. Michael Wegner, Loyola Blakefield MD - 8:49.78 3k
17. Lucas Arrivo, Ann Arbor Pioneer MI - 4:25.95 1600m
18. Matthew Maton, Summit OR - 4:07.75 1500m (also 8:50.09 for 3k)
19. Craig Schildmeier, Hamilton Heights IN - 9:29.08 3200m
20. Zack Snider, Brebeuf Jesuit IN - 4:26.24 1600m
21. Matthew Schumann, DeLaSalle CA - 9:29.63 3200m
22. Stephen Garrett, Tatnall DE - 9:29.96 3200m
23. Luke Hendrix, Marcus TX - 9:30.33 3200m
24. Cooper Kossick, HB Edison CA - 4:26.86 1600m
25. Bryce Millar, Fayetteville-Manlius NY - 4:28.64y
26. Pedro Nasta, John Cooper TX - 4:27.10 1600m (also 9:31.45 for 3200m)
27. John Dressel, Mt. Spokane WA - 9:31.78 3200m (also 4:28.13 for 1600m)
28. Graham Brown, Palatine IL - 9:31.90 3200m
29. Tristan Peloquin, Gig Harbor WA - 9:32.02 3200m
30. Stephen Mugeche, Blue Springs MO - 4:27.66 1600m
31. Joe Kelcker, Hopkins MN - 9:33.44 3200m
32. Peter Davis, Terre Haute North IN - 4:28.18 1600m
33. Sam Plaska, Zeeland West MI - 4:28.20 1600m
34. Alex Corbett, Lake Braddock VA - 9:34.42 3200m
35. Steven Sum, Saratoga CA - 9:34.72 3200m
... again, there could very well be some athletes missing from this list... I put it together rather quickly.
As cool as these underclassmen rankings are, they don't mean shit. Some of these kids are physically mature, others aren't. I bet some of these kids train really hard and burn the candle really hot as youngsters, and that hurts them later on.
If you look at the top kids from every class, very few of them do a lot in college.
Rasputin wrote:
As cool as these underclassmen rankings are, they don't mean shit. Some of these kids are physically mature, others aren't. I bet some of these kids train really hard and burn the candle really hot as youngsters, and that hurts them later on.
If you look at the top kids from every class, very few of them do a lot in college.
of course, I agree that success as a freshman doesn't necessarily mean they'll have the same success as seniors, in college, or beyond... class rankings and age group rankings are nothing more than looking at similarly aged kids, not projecting potential.
My teammate ran sub 9:30 in the 3200m as a freshman last year, and just ran a 9:25 again this weekend as a sophomore. Its very impressive but there are a handful of other kids his age that can run faster. Best of luck to him and the rest of his high school career.
watchout wrote:
Updated top 35 (2012 outdoor season only; 1500m-5k marks considered)
Again with the misleading stupid list which means nothing.
If you wanted to be credible, then make a 1600m list, a 3200m list, and a 5000m list.
UpStateXC wrote:
My teammate ran sub 9:30 in the 3200m as a freshman last year, and just ran a 9:25 again this weekend as a sophomore. Its very impressive but there are a handful of other kids his age that can run faster. Best of luck to him and the rest of his high school career.
last year as a freshman i ran 4:30 for the 1600. Last Friday, I split a 4:18, so I've been improving too. What's the name of the kid from your school.
J.R. wrote:
watchout wrote:Updated top 35 (2012 outdoor season only; 1500m-5k marks considered)
Again with the misleading stupid list which means nothing.
If you wanted to be credible, then make a 1600m list, a 3200m list, and a 5000m list.
Again, how is it misleading?
You must really be enjoying your tirades.
watchout wrote:
how is it misleading?
Because you're mixing different events, like for example making a 100, 400, mile list. The events have no relevance to each other at all.
This is why they are DIFFERENT EVENTS.
You're desecrating the runners who actually ran the times they have run, by putting people in front of them who didn't even run their events.
The only way to get a time for 3200m is to run a 3200m, not a mile, an 800 or 400. Let's keep it that way.
J.R. wrote:
Again with the misleading stupid list which means nothing.
If you wanted to be credible, then make a 1600m list, a 3200m list, and a 5000m list.
^^^^^
There's always this guy.
lol, it's desecrating the runners who focus on other events to include them in lists covering all the distance events?
No one is saying you can get a 3200m time by running a 400, 800, or even a mile. A time is a time is a time. But that doesn't mean you can't compare performances.
I think comparing 1600 and 3200 times is valid because they use mostly the same energy systems. Of course there will be some runners who are better at 1600 or 3200, but the benefit of putting them in one list outweighs the shortcomings of leaving runners off who happen to focus on only one distance. I think having one comprehensive distance list is valuable. Also, Watchout is only listing actual times that the athletes have run, so I don't think he is misrepresenting anyone.
Comparing 100 meter and 800 meter runners would be silly, because the energy systems are so different, but 1600 and 3200 meters are not nearly so.
I also meant to say that not only do the 1600 and 3200 have much the same energy systems that drive those performances, but there is a much higher correlation between 1600 and 3200 times (because they share the same energy system) than there is between any other track events related to high school distance athletes.
J.R. wrote:
watchout wrote:Updated top 35 (2012 outdoor season only; 1500m-5k marks considered)
Again with the misleading stupid list which means nothing.
If you wanted to be credible, then make a 1600m list, a 3200m list, and a 5000m list.
Can we just ban this guy? Watchout stop trying to explain yourself to him, there's no rationalizing with someone who is insane and has an IQ of 45. Your list is great and helps define who the best freshman distance runner is.
Mrr82 wrote:
there's no rationalizing with someone who is insane and has an IQ of 45.
That explains why you'll never comprehend the obvious.
watchout wrote:
lol, it's desecrating the runners who focus on other events to include them in lists covering all the distance events?
What is funny about it?
You're putting people ahead of 3200m runners, who don't even have a time for 3200m!
No one is saying you can get a 3200m time by running a 400, 800, or even a mile. A time is a time is a time. But that doesn't mean you can't compare performances.
Again you're contradicting yourself.
Archimedes wrote:
Stephen Garrett of Tatnall ran a 4:23 1600 and a 9:41 3200 as an 8th grader.
How's Garrett running this year?
How about Tyler Tate?
It's the old Pat Castagno adage. Train them like pros and burn them out by the time they hit college. It was really nice to see Castagno have Tate running hurt last year and now look how he's run this year. Don't worry Garrett you're next.
J.R. wrote:
watchout wrote:
No one is saying you can get a 3200m time by running a 400, 800, or even a mile. A time is a time is a time. But that doesn't mean you can't compare performances.
Again you're contradicting yourself.[/quote]
Explain.