Do it outdoors or you can't claim a true sub 4 mile. Plus, you will be resigned to indoor lists that are not as recognized as outdoor lists. It is becoming apparent that indoor mile times are aided times.
Do it outdoors or you can't claim a true sub 4 mile. Plus, you will be resigned to indoor lists that are not as recognized as outdoor lists. It is becoming apparent that indoor mile times are aided times.
thank you clarifying, anonymous poster who is clearly the highest of authorities when it comes to determining what is and what isn't considered a real sub 4 mile. Your input is valuable
Do it outdoors or you will forever have (i) next to your time. In the future, (i) will be seen as aided.
Yeah! What the OP said! Indoor sub-4's shouldn't count. Because a sub-4 effort indoors is so much easier than an outdoor sub-4 effort...NOT. Idiot.
What's the master's record for the mile?
Real Sub 4 Miler wrote:
What's the master's record for the mile?
Master's anything records aren't relevant.
Indoor Mile Superior, if Any wrote:
Master's anything records aren't relevant.
He's probably referencing Coghlan's sub 4 at age 41, which was indoors.
I'd agree that indoor time isn't an outdoor time, however I'm fairly certain that no indoor WR is better than the outdoor WR, which would indicate to me that indoors is harder.
College runners don't get any chances to mile outdoors. Simple as that.
oh please wrote:
Indoor Mile Superior, if Any wrote:Master's anything records aren't relevant.
He's probably referencing Coghlan's sub 4 at age 41, which was indoors.
I'd agree that indoor time isn't an outdoor time, however I'm fairly certain that no indoor WR is better than the outdoor WR, which would indicate to me that indoors is harder.
you also have to factor in that the vast majority of athletes aim to peak in the summer
oh please 2 wrote:
College runners don't get any chances to mile outdoors. Simple as that.
some outdoor meets have the full mile
you can qualify for ncaa regionals with a mile time - they just convert it to a 1500 time
Sub 4, is Sub 4. I can argue that indoor tracks are smaller, and tighter than outdoor, thus more difficult. But who cares, as long as the run a FULL mile under 4 its all good. Also, its fun watching all these guys go after it during the indoor season.
Running 59-60 second pace indoors is easier than running 59-60 second pace outdoors. Obviously, sprinting around the tighter bends is more difficult, but at 59-60 pace it's more advantageous indoors.
Real Sub 4 Miler wrote:
Running 59-60 second pace indoors is easier than running 59-60 second pace outdoors. Obviously, sprinting around the tighter bends is more difficult, but at 59-60 pace it's more advantageous indoors.
Evidence?
Real Sub 4 Miler wrote:
Running 59-60 second pace indoors is easier than running 59-60 second pace outdoors. Obviously, sprinting around the tighter bends is more difficult, but at 59-60 pace it's more advantageous indoors.
If, on an outdoor track, you are able to hug the turns 20cm (8") from the curb you are running 0.63m short of 400m on each lap, or 2.52m short for one mile.
Compare that to an indoor track. If you hug the inside lane 20cm out on the turns on an indoor track, you get the same 0.63m short for EACH LAP, but you are running twice as many laps. That gives you 5.04m short of a mile when running on an indoor track.
In summation, running at exactly the same place on the lane, you are running less distance indoors than outdoors.
Additionally, running in still air and with banked turns, you can see why many people never run faster outdoors than their indoor times.
malmo wrote:
Real Sub 4 Miler wrote:Running 59-60 second pace indoors is easier than running 59-60 second pace outdoors. Obviously, sprinting around the tighter bends is more difficult, but at 59-60 pace it's more advantageous indoors.
If, on an outdoor track, you are able to hug the turns 20cm (8") from the curb you are running 0.63m short of 400m on each lap, or 2.52m short for one mile.
Compare that to an indoor track. If you hug the inside lane 20cm out on the turns on an indoor track, you get the same 0.63m short for EACH LAP, but you are running twice as many laps. That gives you 5.04m short of a mile when running on an indoor track.
In summation, running at exactly the same place on the lane, you are running less distance indoors than outdoors.
Additionally, running in still air and with banked turns, you can see why many people never run faster outdoors than their indoor times.
And even the old 160 yd/mile board tracks had nice spring to them, so I wouldn't be surprised if the energy return is better on indoor tracks than outdoor.
Clueless Joe wrote:
And even the old 160 yd/mile board tracks had nice spring to them, so I wouldn't be surprised if the energy return is better on indoor tracks than outdoor.
Some of them had spring. Some of them were like running through a lumber yard.
3/10
And, just for your edification, the pole vault world record is better indoor than out.
The master of indoor mile running, Eamonn Coughlan, knew that running a subfour mile is easier indoors than out. That's why he went for the masters record indoors. He holds the indoor masters mile record at 3:58. The outdoor masters record is 4:02. Running 59 - 60 seconds 400s is easier indoors due to the factors Malmo previously mentioned. However, when running faster than 59 - 60 second quarters the tighter turns become more of hindrance. 59 - 60 pace is a sweet spot running indoors. Just look at all the guys who break 4 indoors, and then fail to run 3:42 low or sub 4 outdoors.
malmo wrote:
Some of them had spring. Some of them were like running through a lumber yard.
The old board track in Detroit was pretty much chewed up into sawdust!! Lots of dead spots, too.
real sub 4 miler, i've run a real sub-4 mile, i knew real sub-4 milers, real sub-4 milers were friends of mine. real sub 4 miler, you're no real sub-4 miler...
with apologies to malmo and his logical explanation, i doubt there's a sub-4 miler out there that would agree with this assertion--even coghlan (i suspect his indoor expertise was partially a marketing ploy/commercial venture since he knew his real outdoor chances were in the 5k; his 3:59 indoors as a master just tells me that he could have run faster outdoors, but having done it there was nothing left to prove)--but i'm willing to be proven wrong. any non-anonymous sub-4s want to chime in?