With all the sub 4 high schoolers popping up, I was curious why the huge gap between the 3 guys who did it in the 60s (in the span of 3 years) and the next in 2001?
As a side note, I have seen Jim Ryun's training. I wonder what Tim Danielson's and Marty Liquori's training was like to pull that off so close to Ryun.
I think it used to be harder in some respects. Slower tracks, heavier, slower shoes, the big push in the 80s and early 90s to low mileage, high intensity training, population sizes (the number of HSers nationwide dropped in that period before an upswing started). Numbers may be dropping now. Also the introduction and growth of soccer played a huge part. Today advances
There were several kids around that 4:00-4:05 range in that time. I forget his name but there’s a video on YT called “Godspeed” or something where some kid ran 4low at his state meet with a big kick. Some people still had the talent and just didn’t get the right race, Webb getting into the pro field indoors for his 3:59 was really unusual.
I think a big part of it is the lack of national competition/other sports taking the top talent away from running. I’ve also seen people say it’s because training became more focused on “quality over quantity”, which really meant no one was doing the mileage required to run sub-4.
I think it used to be harder in some respects. Slower tracks, heavier, slower shoes, the big push in the 80s and early 90s to low mileage, high intensity training, population sizes (the number of HSers nationwide dropped in that period before an upswing started). Numbers may be dropping now. Also the introduction and growth of soccer played a huge part. Today advances
Slower tracks!? According to many on LR, runners should have been flying around those new synthetic tracks. Also, don’t forget electrolytes - which apparently wasn’t a thing during the cinder years.
Nvm this dude changed my mind all these HS kids are doping to rake in the money from the notoriously borderline philanthropist sport of track and field
I was a high school athlete in the late 1980s to early 1990s and then coached from 1993 to about 2000.
What did we do "wrong"? (I coached state champions, including a 9:30 3200 runner in a small school championship, and I'll honestly say that we did not optimize outcomes).
Too little mileage. Not enough strength work. Far too much static stretching and not enough dynamic movements and form drilling.
A fear that if anyone got injured it was surely "overuse" and you were a "bad coach." Better to get less out of the kids than to risk getting close to the edge. (I don't know that that is the worst philosophy with kids, but if you want sub-4:00 guys, then risk is involved.)
Too many low-stakes races that interfered with good training blocks. Not enough national-class races to put the best against the best.
In too many of those low-stakes meets the top guys would run for points (4X800, 1600, 3200), and do it again three days later. (I never had my guys run all that crap, but a lot of coaches did).
Kids thought locally. If you can beat the guys around here, that was good enough. With social media, YouTube, etc., the kids have a better idea of what it means to be truly great. It also makes them more aware of what is possible.
We lost a lot of potentially great kids to soccer.
Junk miles were the name of the game in the summer for a lot of kids. Run 500 miles (all slow) and get a "500 Mile Club" t-shirt, without even running some strides.
I could probably go on. Not all of these points applied to every program, but some points apply to most at the time.
In the 60s a sub 4 miler was one of the best in the whole world, so if you were close to the barrier you could enter in a pro race and go for it, but over time the gap between world class and low 4 drifted, 4:05 milers have a hard time getting in really fast races like that in the time between 67 and 01
Some are implying Peter Coe influenced lower mileage in the 1990's. Most likely true. Peter Coe David Martin, PhD books did not go to print until about 1990, so Peter Coe influenced lower mileage had zero to do with no sub-4 h.s. milers from late 1960's, 1970's or 1980's. U.S. had solid 800m runners 1968 through 2000 if we count Jim Ryun as a solid 800/1500 athlete. Not one of the high school sub-4 milers from 2001 on have earned an Olympic or W.C. medal. Let's slow down on condemning high school training from 1968 to 2001.
In the 60s a sub 4 miler was one of the best in the whole world, so if you were close to the barrier you could enter in a pro race and go for it, but over time the gap between world class and low 4 drifted, 4:05 milers have a hard time getting in really fast races like that in the time between 67 and 01
Interesting take. Might be something to that. I never thought about that. Also, I suppose there was more novelty to breaking 4 min barrier in general. So it was a big deal when anyone broke it.. so more would be motivated I suppose.
But why then the 3 high schoolers who did it three years in a row in the 1960s? Their shoes and tracks were not good.
Well two of them happened to be among the best of their day. Both made world #1 ranking at a young age. In other words, they were extraordinary talents. Who else after that generation reached such a level.
Per the mileage question, 70s were definitely higher mileage compared mid-80s to later 90s. But coaches from the early 2000s on have been much more dialed in. It's more "professional" now. You have kids flying around the country every other week at big invitationals. That would have been extremely rare ca. 1970 through most of the 90s.
Maybe not as much for the guys, but soccer seems to have spawned a lot of talented runners, like every other one, amongst the top girls. Heck even Abbie Steiner!
As far as sub-4:00, tons more race opportunities and availability of pacers (Birnbaum can thank Martin for 3:59)
I was a high school athlete in the late 1980s to early 1990s and then coached from 1993 to about 2000.
What did we do "wrong"? (I coached state champions, including a 9:30 3200 runner in a small school championship, and I'll honestly say that we did not optimize outcomes).
Too little mileage. Not enough strength work. Far too much static stretching and not enough dynamic movements and form drilling.
A fear that if anyone got injured it was surely "overuse" and you were a "bad coach." Better to get less out of the kids than to risk getting close to the edge. (I don't know that that is the worst philosophy with kids, but if you want sub-4:00 guys, then risk is involved.)
Too many low-stakes races that interfered with good training blocks. Not enough national-class races to put the best against the best.
In too many of those low-stakes meets the top guys would run for points (4X800, 1600, 3200), and do it again three days later. (I never had my guys run all that crap, but a lot of coaches did).
Kids thought locally. If you can beat the guys around here, that was good enough. With social media, YouTube, etc., the kids have a better idea of what it means to be truly great. It also makes them more aware of what is possible.
We lost a lot of potentially great kids to soccer.
Junk miles were the name of the game in the summer for a lot of kids. Run 500 miles (all slow) and get a "500 Mile Club" t-shirt, without even running some strides.
I could probably go on. Not all of these points applied to every program, but some points apply to most at the time.
High school athletes are just not that way about sports. Most want to be good and are willing to do what it takes to get there. Maybe it’s different at a small school?
I think you misunderstood. I don't believe he said that kids didn't want to be good or do what it takes. Just that when you don't have any way to compare yourself outside of your local meets, you think you ARE great when you run a 4:20 and win by 15 seconds. That's the whole Newbury park message that Brian gets so much hate for, but with Instagram and YouTube and the web kids finally get that "4:20 isn't fast".
All of the reasons already mentioned played a role in the lack of HS runners breaking four minutes during those decades. Most significant was the mental barrier. It was so significant that most top milers didn't even make it a focus of their HS careers except as something to be pursued after all other goals had been accomplished. Was someone like Mike Stember talented enough to have broken four in HS? Sure, but if I recall he only made a single serious attempt. Why? Mostly due to Injury his senior year but also mile races were (and still are) fairly rare. Especially ones that have the sufficient depth to enable a HS'er to be pulled to a top time. See this article for some insight into how a top miler perceived and approached trying to break the barrier in the 1990s.
