That's probably from about the time the marathon was 19 miles or whatever.
Not that the reality of 500 meter tracks isn't relevant (and I think speedskating has tracks about the big, but not matter). I maintain that in this country, concerning track and field, we should do what the rest of the world does. That seems, in a lot of ways anyway, how we operate generally in schools, business and society.
Annoying! wrote:
The local high school coach has his kids setting 1600 and 3200 school records which are significantly slower than the mile and 2 mile school records set back in the 60s! Sad!
Have you contacted the school about the faster Mile & 2-Mile records that, at least, should be the 1600 & 3200 records?
Here's what one Ohio HS did re: old 880 & Mile school records:
https://www.bringbackthemile.com/news/detail/high_school_record_holder_gets_mile_record_backBobby Beck went into the Louisiana high school hall of fame but they would not give him his record back.
800 on Maths wrote:
100
*2
200
*2
400
*2
800
*2
1600
*2
3200
^^ makes most sense
By your logic, there should be no triple jump. It should be the long jump, the "double jump", and the "quadruple jump".
No'sense wrote:
mazel tov wrote:
congratulations on the completely irrelevant post
Congratulations on your completely ignorant comment. The point is entirely lost on a pea-brain like you. You picked an arbitrary point when top stop doubling while claiming that doubling is the "makes most sense" solution. Then you whine the doubling has to restart at some point. Imbeciles like you keep trying to create base 10 looks to base 2 distances.
If you want it to make sense then try:
100
200
500
1000
2000
5000
10000
20000
50000
Only the values 1, 2 and 5 are used to set up distance. Too bad tracks ovals were not set originally at 500 metres. Then it would be simple matter to run the above distances. Distance runners would be less confused counting laps because 1000m is 2 laps, 2000m is 4 laps. 5000m is 10 laps. Start and end where you started for all distances except 100m and 200m.
"The point is entirely lost on a pea-brain like you. You picked an arbitrary point when top stop doubling while claiming that doubling is the "makes most sense" solution. Then you whine the doubling has to restart at some point. Imbeciles like you keep trying to create base 10 looks to base 2 distances."
Where is any of this coming from? I literally never said any of that...
Your post was randomly listing the results of doubling distances from 3200 with no explanation whatsoever.