Athlete 1:
1600- 4:23
3200- 9:38
Athlete 2:
1600- 4:28
3200- 9:29
Athlete 1:
1600- 4:23
3200- 9:38
Athlete 2:
1600- 4:28
3200- 9:29
Whoever has more medals.
What was the weather during these? Hot? Windy? Perfect 50-60degrees? Without knowing what the weather was like we really can have absolutely no idea which athlete is better can we?
But, I'd say they are probably equals if weather was exact same for both. 1 is just more anaerobic, and 2 is more aerobic.
I'll take Athlete 1. It's easier to improve the endurance and improve the 3200 time than it is for Athlete 2 to get faster in the 1600. Only way I'll take Athlete 2 is if they won the 1600 and can probably run a lot faster. But then again if Athlete 1 won the 3200 and that's why it's not as fast, I'd still take Athlete 1.
gofindanothersport wrote:
What was the weather during these? Hot? Windy? Perfect 50-60degrees? Without knowing what the weather was like we really can have absolutely no idea which athlete is better can we?
But, I'd say they are probably equals if weather was exact same for both. 1 is just more anaerobic, and 2 is more aerobic.
Athlete 1's PRs were in Southern California in April, both races were in 60-65 degree weather. Athlete 2's PRs were in Alabama in May. 1600 was in 85 degree weather, heat index 92, and 3200 was in 75 degree weather but almost 100% humidity.
Unless athlete 1 has a ton of medals, I think athlete 2 is more impressive.
Athlete 1
satorsquarepants wrote:
gofindanothersport wrote:
What was the weather during these? Hot? Windy? Perfect 50-60degrees? Without knowing what the weather was like we really can have absolutely no idea which athlete is better can we?
But, I'd say they are probably equals if weather was exact same for both. 1 is just more anaerobic, and 2 is more aerobic.
Athlete 1's PRs were in Southern California in April, both races were in 60-65 degree weather. Athlete 2's PRs were in Alabama in May. 1600 was in 85 degree weather, heat index 92, and 3200 was in 75 degree weather but almost 100% humidity.
Take the Alabama kid 💯 % over the California kid. More competition in CA.
satorsquarepants wrote:
gofindanothersport wrote:
What was the weather during these? Hot? Windy? Perfect 50-60degrees? Without knowing what the weather was like we really can have absolutely no idea which athlete is better can we?
But, I'd say they are probably equals if weather was exact same for both. 1 is just more anaerobic, and 2 is more aerobic.
Athlete 1's PRs were in Southern California in April, both races were in 60-65 degree weather. Athlete 2's PRs were in Alabama in May. 1600 was in 85 degree weather, heat index 92, and 3200 was in 75 degree weather but almost 100% humidity.
Athlete 2. Id like to think athlete 2 beats athlete 1 at both events in 65 degree 0 altitude weather.
I'd have to know more to say. Is one undertrained? Level of competition? Age? Are both boys? Lots more to it than just times.
satorsquarepants wrote:
Athlete 1:
1600- 4:23
3200- 9:38
Athlete 2:
1600- 4:28
3200- 9:29
9:29 is the most impressive time of all of those 4, so athlete 2.
Athlete 1 went to a big school in Southern California, much better competition but ran like 40 mpw of mostly hard intervals.
Athlete 2 went to a small rural school in Alabama, almost never got to race the good runners from the bigger schools in Alabama, but ran around 60mpw, mostly easy mileage and tempos, with few track workouts.
Which athlete has higher upside in college?
Splitting hairs, they are pretty much the same. Does one have more 400m speed?
Depends, what is their marathon time?
Probnotthepope wrote:
Depends, what is their marathon time?
2:02