Ex-miler, I don't think that individual testimony is relevant for either side. The numbers speak for themslves. If you break 4:00 indoors it is going to be a coin toss on whether or not you will eventually beat that time outdoors - in both the mile and the metric equivalent. Despite the fact that number of indoor competitions are few, nearly all of the indoor sub 4:00 performances come from a handful of venues.
I think that you already knew what the result was going to be if I mined the dated with your method, didn't you?
2006-2010
131 milers ran 3:42.2 or better in the 1500, or 3:59.99 or better in the mile.
Out of the 131, there were 71 individuals who ran sub 4:00 in the mile indoors, or the metric equivalent (3:42.2). The other 60 milers did not run faster than 4:00 or the metric equivalent on an indoor track.
Of those 71 individuals, 37 had run faster than their indoor PR (taking best 1500/mile indoor time against their best outdoor/mile) 34 of them ran slower.
I'm going to say it once more, using the data mined from the yearly lists:
34 out of the 71 milers who broke 4:00 indoors (or 3:42.2) would not improve on that time again outdoors, either in the mile, or its metric equivalent.
34/71 = 47.9%
Those are the facts.
As I said before "you can see why many people never run faster outdoors than their indoor times."
You just proved yourself wrong. Out of the sample size of 131, 60 of the milers never broke 4 (or its equivalent) indoors, but did outdoors. This means they ran faster outdoors. In addition, 37 of those who did break 4 indoors ran faster outdoors. This means (37+60)/131*100% = 74.046% of them ran faster outdoors than indoors. That is the relevant statistic. Of the fastest 131 milers in the United States in the last 5 years, 74% of them ran faster outdoors than they did indoors.
I haven't proved myself wrong at all.
"Of the fastest 131 milers in the United States in the last 5 years, 74% of them ran faster outdoors than they did indoors."
Of the 60 who didn't break 4:00 indoors, You don't know how many of them competed in BOTH indoors and outdoors. All you're doing is comparing raw numbers of where they set their PRs, without knowing if they ran both indoors and outdoors. Your assumption is that all of them ran miles or 1500s indoors. Your calculation is speculation.
That's irrelevant to my point. My point has alwasy been the same: those milers who broke 4:00 indoors, many of them (about half of them) will never run that fast on an outdoor track, either at 1500m or a mile.
The stalking is creepy.
2010 Indoor Mile on left, 2010 outdoor 1500 on right
1 3:55.66 Will Leer 3:37.26
2 3:55.75 OT Chris Solinsky no 1500s outdoors
3 3:55.79 Russell Brown 3:36.89
4 3:56.22 OT Galen Rupp 3:57.72
5 3:56.34 Bernard Lagat 3:32.51
6 3:56.69 David Torrence 3:34.25
7 3:56.82 Leonel Manzano 3:32.37
8 3:57.32 Alex McClary 3:43.90
9 3:57.34 Garrett Heath 3:37.12
10 3:57.70 OT Mac Fleet 3:43.21
11 3:57.80 Dorian Ulrey 3:47.53
12 3:57.87 OT Ben Blankenship 3:39.77
13 3:58.08 OT AJ Acosta 3:36.48
14 3:58.20 OT Andrew Wheating 3:30.90
15 3:58.36 OT Mark Matusak 3:39.59
16 3:58.52 Kyle Merber 3:45.00
17 3:58.67 OT Jordan Horn 3:42.98
18 3:58.80 Tony Jordanek 3:42.47
19 3:58.82 OT Jeff See 3:40.06
20 3:58.90 OT Dylan Ferris 3:40.07
21 3:58.91 OT Andrew Jesien 3:39.68
22 3:58.95 Andy McClary 3:44.78
23 3:58.98 Andrew Bayer 3:41.87
24 3:59.07 Riley Masters 3:42.01
25 3:59.32 OT Eric Garner no outdoors results
26 3:59.44 OT Jacob Boone 3:42.19
27 3:59.58 Erik van Ingen no outdoor results
28 3:59.72 OT Sam Bair no outdoor results
29 3:59.80 OT Cameron Levins 3:43.20
30 3:59.83 Kyle Heath 4:04.79 (mile)
31 3:59.85 OT Blake Shaw 3:45.43
32 3:59.97 OT Eric Harasyn 3:43.10
What I noticed from jotting down these times was that the superior 1500s mostly came from athletes who got the opportunity to race in Europe over the summer.
It looks like an indoor 3:59 mile is equivalent to an outdoor 4:02/3:44 mile/1500m.
What I noticed from jotting down these times was that the superior 1500s mostly came from athletes who got the opportunity to race in Europe over the summer.[/quote]
I may have missed this in the two million inane messages that preceded your message, but a 1500 isn't a mile. Anyone want to help me on this point?
to head off any misunderstandings, let me first state: sub-4 is sub-4 if it's on a track. no, i don't think road miles should count, nor your middle school course around the p.e. fields.
that said--and i've never run on this track--from what i've seen, it definitely looks like it's easier to run sub-4 on that oversized track in washington. i'll have to ask tony young about it--it is where he popped off his 4:05 indoors as a master.
i'd love to see an experimental study between zurich's outdoor track, whichever indoor 200m track that's purported to be fastest, and washington's 300 oversized indoor track. hell, throw in santa monica city college's outdoor track (which has produced some prs for people that were never duplicated and/or beaten), rieti, and hengelo for good measure...
Seriously? You spend the entire thread supporting the the statement that indoor sub-4 mile are not "true sub-4 miles" and you have the nerve to ask this question?[/quote]
It's been clearly stated that not all indoor sub-4 miles are alike. There is a difference between those run on 11 lap board tracks or 200 meter flat tracks compared with those run on 200 meter banked or "over-sized" tracks. There are far more of both of the latter today because of the improvements of technology.
If I ran "3:59-point what ever" on a banked 200 meter or over-sized track, I would want to run another "sub-4" somewhere else (outside) to confirm the status. If you're at that fitness level, it shouldn't be a problem.
thirty-two wrote:
If you run under 4 minutes for 1 mile on a track, you are sub-4 miler. You and this other clown have absolutely no right to put down other people's accomplishments.
malmo wrote:
Exactly WHOSE accomplishments have I put down?
thirty-two wrote:
Seriously? You spend the entire thread supporting the the statement that indoor sub-4 mile are not "true sub-4 miles" and you have the nerve to ask this question?
You are clearly an idiot, and proud of it. Bravo.
I was the one who said an indoor sub4 is not a true sub4 mile. Malmo did not agree with this statement. He merely said it appears to be easier to run sub4 on some of the modern indoor tracks. There is a difference between these two assertions.
You know what? races in perfect conditions are easier than race in bad conditions. Do you consider that an insult to people who run their best times in perfect conditions? If you do you then have some mental issues you need to address.
Go luck.