How big a role has Strava played in the level of competition in high school?

But how many 4:03 milers did we have before?

The shoes have obviously had a difference, but how much is the shoes and how much is a positive influence of social media?

You need to cast your assumption broader than Strava. It's the internet. The dissemination of news, sharing training information and instantaneous results reporting that has had a profound impact.

I kept my training log in the form of an old Blogspot blog in high school, and college and my college coach got mad at me for posting our workouts online. That was early 2000s though so it sounds like things have changed.

My semi-informed opinion though is that it has less to do with the influx of sub-4 kids than all the other recent innovations such as supershoes. Maybe there's a small number of kids who look at what their local area's studs have been doing and ask their coach to train them harder, but it's probably not that common unless teenagers have changed since I was one. Everybody is doing some kind of training, and as long as its smart I don't know how much it matters whether a team is doing Smart Training System A or switches to Smart Training System B just because they see on Strava that the local district champs do that.

The internet has been around a while. The biggest change in terms of the internet is being able to view other people's workouts and them being able to view yours.

I will add though that it does blow my mind that all your local rivals' training is now potentially visible. When I started running we were in the very beginning of meet results being widely posted online, and during my sophomore year our state got a track/XC news and results site on the milesplit network, so we knew what everyone was running in races at least, so I can't really even imagine what it was like in the 20th century where if your local newspaper didn't cover something you had no idea what your nearby rivals were running. But now you can see their training in addition to their race results? Pretty crazy.

Were you around then? My local newspaper listed the fastest times for the local runners, which were fast enough to get someone’s attention, and the fastest time in the state, as well.

I would say the advent of the internet/Strava has helped people shift their perspective a lot. Imagine you were your teams 5th guy all of cross season, now here are two different scenarios. 1: the 1st-8th guys on your team all break 4:20/9:20 in track. 2: 1st-4th guys are barely breaking 5 and 6th-8th can't break 5:10.

In each situation your fitness is the same, but I'd argue your perception of effort based off your peers means you will run a lot faster in scenario 1 than 2. In addition to supershoes, better training, etc. I would say the internet/Strava/availability of others times and efforts has led to a shift in perspective.

You can see this for example in places like Utah, where a state winning time 4-5 years ago is not even placing top 5 now. There is no magic drug everybody is taking, just everyone there is faster and it keeps shifting forward what people think is "fast" or "good" etc

I remember in 1998 we really didn't know how fast our main rivals were. They were about 100 miles northeast of us and we never ran against each other during the season. There weren't really any huge invitationals like there are now where pretty much everyone shoes up. We saw results from them during the season but you can't really tell much from that, especially back then when you didn't have a lot of super fast courses. Most courses were moderately hilly so a guy capable of 16:00 would probably run in the 17s for most of the year, maybe even 18 something on some courses. When we showed up to state the other team kicked our ass and we were pretty surprised. Nowadays you can do virtual meets and look at rankings and you pretty much know where you stand going into any big meet.

Most of the changes in terms of results have been around a while though. It seems the big drop in times has been well after results were ubiquitous. I think Strava has played an important role, but how much I'm not sure.

Our state has been running the state meet at the same location for about 20 years. They also have 2 invitationals each month before state (one in September, one in October, then state in November). The super shoe thing doesn't really come into play there, but the times have still seen a gigantic drop. It used to be a big deal to break 16:00 on that course (it's a pretty fast course and our state isn't exactly known for distance) but now you can't even win a T shirt for top 30 at one of the mid season invitationals.

I have kids asking about doing more training. They are asking because another kid across the country is doing more than he is and running faster. I am ok with pushing the milage up as long as it makes sense with the progression. 5-6 years ago I felt I had to justify doing threshold workouts because most clubs were doing speed based training and they didn't believe that you should start running more until mid college. Those coaches would not be ok with more running. You do need a coach who knows how to build milage or it can be a disaster. You need a kid willing to run the miles or they won't do it consistently enough to matter. The shoes keep the legs fresher while running longer workouts and longer easy runs. All these factors came together now - the sub 4 high school milers is a result of that.

In California, and it’s always been the case, a most runners will advance to a meet where there are faster runners and some by a lot. Of course, those runners will be curious as to how those faster runners train. Prior to Strava and social media, most coaches were aware of the best runners in the country and how they trained.

I coach middle schoolers. When I started at my current school if you broke 5:00 you were pretty much assured of scoring at the championship meet. Last month you had kids that had broken 5:00 that were in the slow heat. Literally the entire fast heat was made up of guys that had broken 5. I had a group of boys last year that were the first group in our state's history to break 9:00 for a middle school 4x800m. This year 3 more teams in our league did it. Nobody wore super shoes but most of the top kids post on Strava.

Hell, I had a kid crap on our workouts because his buddy at another school razzed him for not doing enough volume and taking too much recovery. This is for middle school!

My son runs for an historically pitiful team. He didn't run more than 10 continuous minutes during his first week of cross country. If you could break 21 min in a 5k you were one if the better runners. Now he and his teammates are on strava looking at what CBA (the northeast's premier team), Utah and Colorado schools and his rivals are doing. They're being motivated to train and are holding each other accountable. Same coach, but finally different results.

The other question you have to ask is, was running better before strava, social media, and the internet?

What does hold them accountable mean?

The upper classmen are doing what a coach should do. They want their teammates to push themselves in workouts rather than looking at the team as a place to socialize for a few hours after school. They're letting them know that if they want them in relays they need to work. They're getting them to run on weekends, vacations, and other days when the coach doesn't conduct practice. They're reminding them not to make excuses when they don't improve and that one look at strava will explain why some teams have multiple sub 4:30 milers and why they are not under 6.

Strava and social media definitely is motivating for kids, but I'd argue the biggest reason for overall depth is coaching knowledge. Everyone is training largely the same now days. Even in early to mid 2000s, there were tons of coaches who had "their" program. One coach is doing crazy speed, one coach thinks the secret is all out 10 milers once a week, and on and on. There were also plenty of coaches, even well meaning, who had absolutely no idea what a real training system looked like. Today, there is no excuse to be a bad coach--the information is instantly and easily available. Plus many "old school" coaches have since retired. When you have more knowledgeable coaches across the board, the overall depth is going to increase. I'm sure there were plenty of all stars in the 90s you never heard about because they were doing some truly whacky training.

It’s not fair to expect the 5th guy on the XC team to be as motivated as a teammate that’s winning races, receiving lots of positive attention and might even be in line for a scholarship. You really expect a 6:00 guy to train hard even though there is almost no chance for them to ever run 4:30 or be in a relay? So long as they aren’t disrespecting you, they have every right to decide how much effort they want to put into the sport.

Given your handle, I wonder if you really believe that. Anyway if you want to be part of a team, race, and contribute then you need to do a bit of work, especially if you're the #5 guy on a XC team.

My son who is on strava is just as impressed by the jv CBA kids as their best runners. For whatever reason he and some friends who didn't break 22 minutes in their first year of XC want to be good. He is an example of a kid who barely broke 6 in his first indoor 1600 to 4:48 in just over a year and he and a few others remind the younger teammates that they can also do well if they choose to put in the work.

He doesn't expect to run 4:20 as your handle states (I'm aware of the quote) but there's still pride in the effort for him and a few others. Some of the younger kids are taking the advice and are motivated to work while of course many are not putting in any effort. His coach provides a welcoming environment and no one is shunned for not working hard but there is more pride and effort than ever. And it is because of Strava and the internet.