if the newbury park trio all go under 8:30 in the 3200, will you finally agree they are better than ritz?

Is the best all time based on a time only?

Hutchins Record Breaker wrote:

But that is why all NP guys are better, not just the 1st guy. Imagine a kid winning the state meet in Alaska by 1 minute and saying that he is better than the NP boys because they didn't win by more. If Ritz would have finished 4th at RunningLane, the top 3 are better.

Haha he would've run 1350 or better on that ridiculous course

Kikllb wrote:

ligma wrote:

I said "the talent" ....where did you get adolescents from? Don't be a creep.

They are adolescents. Please do not use the term mouthwatering when describing them. Mouthwatering means “highly attractive or tempting.” Please do not describe adolescents in that manner.

It was talent that was referred to not adolescents.

I have oftent thirsted after talent in music, but not in running. No sexual connotations at all.

What is the Soph 3200m record (or 2 mile)?

just the ticket wrote:

Is the best all time based on a time only?

Yes it is. Especially when discussing track times, which the OP clearly was. It could actually be multiple times. Who has the current 1500, mile, and 2k records? Even after all this time, he is still the best ever. No subjectivity required to ascertain that. We need not speculate what would happen if you had a time machine and El G races Tim and Jakob. We know to the 1-100th of a second what they can run.

Admittedly, various XC course records and other non-standard, imperfectly measured running can be used when you have an agenda not supported by actual track times. However, the precison and objectivity of track racing render the debates endemic in other sports moot. Is LeBron better than MJ, or better yet, Babe Ruth? Is Tom Brady better than anyoneone to have playd his sport, or perhaps all other sports? Who's better, Djokovic vs Ali?

We do not need such nonsense. If, in fact, it is a mere formality to rewrite the HS record books from 1500 - 10k, let's see them do it. I am unaware of a single record, high school or otherwise, held be a current NP runner or even an alumnus, listed by T&FN. They are clearly, objectively, and measurably NOT the best HS runners ever. Period.

Hutchins is the best girl ever?

you're absolutely do not understand running if you think the newberry park boys have any chance of running sub 830 in real condiitons lmao

Hutchins cut about 25 seconds from Runninglane to the track last year. Did Ritz run 13:25 in HS?

This is so wrong its absurd. We do not know exactly how a race would turn out just by looking at PRs that is the stupidest thing I have ever read. Looking at PRs before the 2000 Olympics they should not have even run the race according to you since El G had the fastest pr, yet he still lost.

Terrible take.

According to wikipedia, Ritz ran 8:11. Much faster than 8:30

xcobserver78 wrote:

This is so wrong its absurd. We do not know exactly how a race would turn out just by looking at PRs that is the stupidest thing I have ever read. Looking at PRs before the 2000 Olympics they should not have even run the race according to you since El G had the fastest pr, yet he still lost.

Terrible take.

The post was exactly 100% accurate. Did I claim El G won every race he ever ran? Did I claim he won a particular race? Did I even mention the race you did? El G is THE BEST ever at 1500-2000m. We know to the 1/100th of a second how much faster he ran than anyone else who has posted a mark for the events in question. This has been objectively measured.

So have NP's times. They are slower than the PRs of the all-time US HS greats. Therefore, none of them is the GOAT. Moreover, they are not the best 3, best 5, nor best 7 ever. If they DO get it together and run something fast, this could change.

Im literally quoting you right now.

"We need not speculate what would happen if you had a time machine and El G races Tim and Jakob. We know to the 1-100th of a second what they can run"

How are you now claiming that you didnt say El G would win in a race because he has the fastest PR? That is EXACTLY what you said. I have no doubt El G would beat these 2, but saying you dont need to run a race to figure it out because we can look at PRs is asinine. Your post was 0% accurate and you're now trying to switch your argument. One of the dumbest takes in the history of this site.

No such race has faksn place and none will. Nevertheless, those guys have NOT run faster than El G. How does your argument (hard to say what that even is... perhaps that El G is not the GOAT?) make NP the greatest ever? They are the greatest runners in history in the same way the Magic Wizard is the greatest coach. My accurate claim is this:

It is very easy to ascertain who is the best at any event. By fastest PR. This works for WR holders. It also works for NP. It is possible that one of them holds a school record. Betond that, the resumes get thin. They are legends in their own driveway.

I'll Take This One... wrote:

Hot take: NO Newbury Park athlete will ever become truly elite in this sport. They do too much training in high school and train too much like professionals at such an early age. As a result, they will enter collegiate competition having already reached 98% of their potential. They will not improve much in college and may be physically/mentally used up by age 24.

there’s this funny norwegian fellow i think you should learn about

better at cross sure. better in hs?? no

Surprise! wrote:

Hutchins Record Breaker wrote:

But that is why all NP guys are better, not just the 1st guy. Imagine a kid winning the state meet in Alaska by 1 minute and saying that he is better than the NP boys because they didn't win by more. If Ritz would have finished 4th at RunningLane, the top 3 are better.

Haha he would've run 1350 or better on that ridiculous course

out of touch with reality

hunter wheres the coke wrote:

According to wikipedia, Ritz ran 8:11. Much faster than 8:30

Ritz ran 8:11 as a Pro, not in HS. I actually can'r believe you said that.