Fernandez 4:00.29!!!!!!

well, you got me there. if you want to consider all those other factors, then i surely can't dispute that. i just don't think they need to be considered. i think the informal "best ever" category is for comparisons between the only two laurels that matter: titles and records. i mean, the ultimate "BEST EVER HS" comparison, and by far the most talked-out, is Webb vs Ritz. Ritz had the competitive record, Webb had the times. sure, people brought up that Ritz had a cold or Webb had an injury or Ritz ran uneven splits or Webb didn't run full time as a frosh (random/made-up examples) but only to help compare times to wins. the most important things were still the titles and records. it's impossible to compare a title to a record with any certainty, however, and that's where these "best ever" discussions come in.

but that's exactly it! this performance, while not a nat'l title or record* in and of itself, indicates that such a performance is possible for him. all i'm saying is that he doesn't have either yet, and "that's why the race is run."

wrongo wrote:

the facts don't refute my point of view. it is your opinion that longevity of a record determines its strength. i disagree. in my opinion, it is how that time at that distance compares to the all-time lists of all races at all levels.

That is where you perspective is warped. You can't determine the strength of a HS record based strictly upon how it compares to the performances of professional athletes. The very idea is ludicrous! You are trying to determine the strength of a high school record! In other words, how difficult will it be for other high school athletes to break that record. Based upon the fact that Nelson's 2-mile record is one of the very oldest, most people would consider that sufficient evidence that it is definitely NOT one of the weakest records.

Remember, you must compare HS athletes (and their records) to one another. Comparing their performances to "the all-time lists of all races at all levels" is a huge fallacy! Why? Because depending upon the particular event, an 18-year-old athlete will be much closer to their world-class prime than their class mates competing in other events. It is a statistical fact that the average age of a 100m specialist on the day that they set their final PR is significantly younger than a marathon runner under the same circumstances. The same general principle applies to high school athletes. When J-Mee Samuels ran 10.08 in high school a few years ago, he was much closer in age to the typical "world-class peak" of 100m runners than Jeff Nelson was compared to the world's best 2-mile (or 5,000m) runners when he was a teenager. As a result, Samuels' performance will compare much more favorably when it is "compared to the all-time lists of all races at all levels." Therefore, your opinion is primarily supported by a huge statistical fallacy.

You keep asserting that this is not a national record. You're wrong, and not merely because Nelson's two-mile time of 8:36.3 converts to a faster 3200. Nelson's time was not a national high school record. It was merely the fastest two-mile performance by a U.S. high school student. Finishing third in a "mixed" race doesn't qualify as a national high school record, just as Webb's 3:53 fifth-place finish doesn't qualify as a national high school record. (I believe Ryun still has the national high school one-mile record, in 3:58+.) It's similar to a woman's performance in a "mixed" race with superior male runners.

The distinction is not merely technical. Running behind a group of human windblocks for two miles is "aided" by much more than one second.

I'm not suggesting that this guy is the "best ever," or that he will go on to do great things in adult competition. I've seen far too many promising young runners drift away from the sport. Moreover, the impressive performances of young African runners are too easily brushed aside or overlooked by the more provincial observers of the U.S. running scene. But let's acknowledge this guy's performance for what it is -- nothing more, but also nothing less.

You ARE wrongo! wrote:

That is where you perspective is warped. You can't determine the strength of a HS record based strictly upon how it compares to the performances of professional athletes. The very idea is ludicrous! You are trying to determine the strength of a high school record! In other words, how difficult will it be for other high school athletes to break that record. Based upon the fact that Nelson's 2-mile record is one of the very oldest, most people would consider that sufficient evidence that it is definitely NOT one of the weakest records.

Remember, you must compare HS athletes (and their records) to one another. Comparing their performances to "the all-time lists of all races at all levels" is a huge fallacy!

you know, we could have this discussion without all the mud-slinging.

the reason that i like the iaaf tables and purdy points is that they are simple- compare everybody to everybody. if you are only going to consider the record as it relates to high schoolers, how about high schoolers from other countries? there are HS age africans who have run under 3:32 for the 1500, under 7:35 for the 3k, even under 1hr for the half marathon! if you want to ignore them as legitimate comparisons, why? while there is certainly a correlation between age and prime racing distance, it is not a hard-and-fast rule (see Sammy Wanjiru), so i don't believe you can base statistics on it.

by comparing american high school records only to themselves, you have reduced the sample size to the point where the comparisons are unreliable or, worse, meaningless. comparing them to all performances at all levels allows for more accuracy and perspective, and doesn't introduce subjective elements like "peak age" and the like.

It doesn't matter how the 2-mile record compares to other high school records! German is the 2nd fastest 3200/2-miler of all time and he did it by himself after already running a 4:00 mile!

Avocados Number wrote:

You keep asserting that this is not a national record. You're wrong, and not merely because Nelson's two-mile time of 8:36.3 converts to a faster 3200.

That should read, "You keep asserting that this is not a national record. You're wrong, and not merely because Nelson's two-mile time of 8:36.3, although convertible to a faster 3200 meters, was not the national high school record for 3200 meters."

Well put. I agree 100% that it is a mistake to compare high school records to world records. I am not so sure that the longevity of the 2-mile record makes it a strong record. I might even say that it means that the 2-mile record is overdue to be broken.

Watching his races this weekend on the internet was awesome. I can't even imagine what it must have been like to be there during that 2-mile. I find it very refreshing to see a HIGH SCHOOL athlete put on a performance like that at a HIGH SCHOOL meet. It will be exciting to see what German can do against the big boys at Hayward Field.

fernandez should try to get into the prefontaine 2 mile, because there's a chance he could run under 8:30, which is basically what a lot of the runners in that race will run

all good points. i think those are the strongest arguments in favor of his performance, actually. still, though, as far as records vs. championships go, i think that in modern track and field, records with rabbits are still records. your point has the most validity in high school, since adding pro runners to pace high schoolers could be like having men pace women to track world records (obviously illegal).

it is my opinion, though, that only in championships should rabbits and outside competition be banned. ever since Bannister got pulled to the first sub-4, track records have been legitimately helped by rabbits or pacers. 3:53 is the fastest a high schooler has ever run for the mile, and that's what matters as far as most people are concerned. for better or worse, anyone who beats that is probably going to need professional competition with rabbits, too.

i didn't intend to put it on the same level. in my view, the quality of a double is somewhere in between the quality of a record and the quality of a workout. closer to the record, because it's run on a track, with officials and timers, but still a little on the "workout" side of a record.

further down, past record, double, and workout, would be things like physio lab tests. surely we've all seen some impressive numbers come out of the lab, but we wouldn't think to crown a champ because of them. similarly for impressive workouts, and i think we should at least PAUSE before anointing titles based on a very impressive double.

wrongo wrote:

the usatf field being weak is up for argument, but you can't seriously be saying that the 3200m record of 8:34 is relevant when the 2mi record is 8:36. it's close, but not quite as good. add to that the (arguable, see above) fact that the 2mi is already weaker than the other HS track records, and you've got yourself a footnote of a record.

It's not a footnote of a record any more than the 1500 record is a footnote to the mile record. The 3200m record is just that...the 3200m record. He owns that record over every single u.s. high schooler who's ever run that distance, including all of the recent greats you've mentioned (Ritz, Hall, Webb, Sage, etc.). None of those guys even came close, even by conversion from a full 2 mile. The only ones who might have been close are Nelson,Virgin, Lindgren, Prefontaine...

Here's the combined list:

Combined 3000/3200/2M list (expressed as 2M):

8:36.3 Nelson

8:40.0i Lindgren

8:40.9 Virgin

8:41.5 Prefontaine

8:42.37+ Rupp (8:03.67 for 3000m)

8:44.03 Scharsu

8:44.0 Reynolds

8:44.13+ Ritzenhein

8:44.6 Hulst

8:44.7+ Trautmann

How can you still say Fernandez's performance isn't one of the best HS of all time?

more typical than jumping on the nuts of the latest elite HS runner? huh. if i recall, people were ready with the same predictions for acosta last year. it's the crowning of each year's best runner as the "best ever" that's typical....

there's no award for the best 1600-3200m double.

it's not a national championship.

it beat an obscure record (3200m, not 2mi)

let him get an LEGIT national record or national title before you start crowning him the next webb, ritz or ryun. if there was proof that some hs kid ran a 4:55 2k in practice, would you call him the best hs runner of all time? no! you'd wait for him to get the 1mi/2mi national record or win a national championship! sure, that's a bit more extreme, but it's the same idea.[/quote]

Let's look at your asinine points one at a time:

1.) "people were ready with the same predictions for acosta last year"

Nobody was making the same predictions for Acosta LAST YEAR. He was already a college freshman. Do you really follow this sport? True, SOME people (mostly over-eager teenagers) were making outlandish predictions for him TWO YEARS AGO, when he was a senior in HS, but the common wisdom among adult fans of the sport was that he would become a very good college runner (which he has). Acosta ran the same 16/32 double his senior year at CIF. He won the 1600 in a competitive race with help from Coe, in about 4:05 and came back for second in the 3200 in about 8:59 - a very good HS double, but for you to conflate AJ's times with someone who basically TIME TRIALS a 4:00.xx and 8:34.xx shows that you are either being disingenuous or you have absolutely no understanding of the difference between running alone and running with help, and are completely clueless about how much better German's times were. Do you really not understand how much faster 4:00/8:34 is than 4:05/8:59? So to try to compare those two is just retarded.

2.) "there's no award for the best 1600-3200m double"

No, but there is an award for the CIF 1600 champion and for the CIF 3200 champion. He has both of them. And they do keep a list of the fastest 1600 and 3200 times ever run by California HS runners. He's at the top of both of them. And the fact that he accomplished all of this within the span of a few hours is justifiably impressive to all of us who know how difficult this double is. You are apparently not part of that group.

3.) "it's not a national championship."

You're right about this. How astute of you to have figured out that the California HS championship is not the same as a national championship. California isn't a nation. It's a state. You knew this. I underestimated you.

Does that mean that any great time run in anything other than a national championship is somehow not legitimate?

If so, then Webb's 3:53 isn't legit, nor is Ryan's 3:55, so you are arguing against yourself.

4.) "it beat an obscure record (3200m, not 2mi)"

How is the 3200 record "obscure"? I know they run the 3,000 in Oregon, but virtually everywhere else, HS runners have been running the 3200 all season long for decades. The record for the 500 meters, or the high school steeplechase might qualify as "obscure," but not the 3200. You list Ritz as one of the greats we're not allowed to compare German to -- you apparently didn't know that it was Ritz's 8 year-old record that German just smashed.

In your mind, is the fact that German ran 7 seconds faster than Ritz ever ran in HS somehow less legit because German did it as part of a double? Because for most of us, it's more legit.

We all know that he hasn't run faster than the converted 2 mile record yet, but if you somehow don't get that an 8:34 3200 in:

A High School only race,

By himself,

After running a 4 minute 1600

isn't as impressive as an 8:36 two mile,

then,

you, sir, are a moron.

midwaste wrote:

How can you still say Fernandez's performance isn't one of the best HS of all time?

i didn't. i just said that this one performance doesn't make HIM one of the best HS of all time.

also, the 3200 is a footnote to the 2-mile the way the 1600 (not the 1500) is a footnote to the mile.

Webby ran a 14:32 solo at the Hagan Stone meet in NC as a senoir...he cruised that baby...and Hagan Stone is no speed course by any means at all...mulch, lots of sharp turns, and some decent hills...

but German is a beast!

Post of the Day.

well then what makes the other guys the best high schoolers of all time?

Webb's 3:53 seems to be one of your important points, but he only did that once. Most of the rest of his times were good, but not earth-shattering. So how is it that Webb's one performance made him one of the best HS of all time, but German's one performance doesn't?

Why is the 1600 a footnote to the mile, but not the 1500?

alright, i'll assume you haven't read anything beyond that post of mine, because i've already addressed all those points. you have taken everything out of context, gotten very worked up, and said some totally irrelevant things. i'll just respond to each numbered item:

1) the point was that nearly every year, the best HS runner is laden with all sorts of expectations and premature laurels like this. i gave Acosta as an example of this phenomenon (and was off by one year), not to say that his was a similar performance. clearly Fernandez ran a much better double than Acosta, but (so far) Acosta has a better championship record in HS.

2) california is the strongest state, but the state meet is not nationals.

3) yes, it's not a national championship. you didn't include where i said that it's also not a national record (at least not when the 2mi is considered). those two TOGETHER make a point. quit being pompous.

4)

-the 3200m distance is almost the same as the 2mi distance, is not internationally recognized, and has a slower record. that makes it a footnote to the 2mi.

-i already said that Ritz is on the list for his championship record, not his times.

-i never said the performance wasn't an all-time great, but one performance doesn't make HIM an all-time great.

when you argue against points that i'm not making, nitpick, call names, and act arrogant, it makes *you* look like the moron.

People really need to stop responding to posts about whether German is the greatest, near greatest, or not near greatest of all time. It's a waste of a thread that should be celebrating his spectacular (in its own right) 1600, and his absolutely mind-boggling 3200 two-hours later.

What stood out to me about his races is how powerful he looked at every stage of both races. He never seemed to tire or lose form in the slightest. What a remarkable day. I am now pretty sure that the next decade will eclipse any other in history in terms of the accomplishments of US distance running, when all is said and done.

Personally I wouldn't mind seeing German turn pro because I'm highly doubtful that he'll stay the full four years in the NCAA, so why even bother going. He's obviously got a routine with his coach that is working and its pretty much a given that he'll lower these times when he focuses on each race on its own. At the rate he's improving and the excitement he's causing I honestly don't think it would be a bad move for him at all.

i answered that a few posts back. Ritz has the (best) competitive record, Ryun and Webb have the times and the competitive record.

well, it doesn't (his few nat'l champs help, and being second in xc to Ritz), but a 3:53 mile is far, far better than an 8:34 3200m. if you wanna talk ancillary justifications (like doubles), he has the indoor sub-4, the 4:14 (2:12/1:52)-1:49-49 triple, the :47-1:47-3:53-8:44 PRs, the sub-14 XC 3mi, making the USATF senior final, the win over Hall and the Jeffersons at Arcadia, and all those relay performances.

is this a serious question?