Kim Conley 4:24.54 for the full mile at the NB Games

She graduated with a PR of 16:17 and 4:22, gets down to 15:38 and 4:12 as 3 years a pro.

The past 19 months she's been on a crazy roll. Makes team, 15:14, runs well indoors, runs 15:09 and 4:07 outdoors, makes team again, runs 8:47 in the 3k, wins San Jose 5k, runs a solid US 12k champs, huge PR in the 800 and now one of the best milers in the world. She should be able to run 14:40s outdoors and/or challenge for the US 1500 title if she chooses. She made some very good milers look bad and her race was more impressive then Mary's because she was solo the entire last 800.

[quote]Montesquieu wrote:

P.S.--when Treniere Moser dropped out of Worlds, my memory is that Conley's coach hinted that Moser was doping (following in part a Tweet by Geena Gall) and was worried about the testing that would be done in Moscow. I didn't see you defending Moser at the time.[quote]

Ad Kim Conley's coach to the growing list of PEOPLE WITHIN THE DISTANCE RUNNING COMMUNITY that have accused an NOP runner.

Kim Conley is not a doper. You guys are ridiculous.

Types of mile (courtesy of wiki):

Scots

Irish

Statute (what s/he called "full")

Metric

Nautical

Persian

London

And a whole bunch of other crap I didn't know about. I'm surprised there wasn't a mention of 1600m (or what you call American mile).

I'm going to start calling the full mile "statute mile" or "land mile" from now on just for gits and shiggles.

Kim Conley is a boss. She embarrassed a bunch of milers.

Don't forget the Swedish "mil", which is 10k. Got caught out big time when I was invited for what I thought was going to be a quiet 2 mile workout. I wondered at the time why the pace was a bit slack.

Paul Tergat:

7:28

12:49

26:27!!

59:06

2:04:55

Clean or doper? Rupp is not even in the same zip code as Tergat.

Bekele:

7:25

12:37

26:17!!!!!

Clean or doper? Again, Rupp is not in this league.

Rupp is really good. On the very short list of greatest American distance runners. However, I don't understand the willingness to call Rupp out as cheating, when all the Africans are let off with no comment at all.

Will BU's AD come out and state the BU track has been verified to be a "full" 200 meters?

Why won't he ask civil engineering students or faculty at MIT to measure his so called "200 meter" track?

Salazar calls it the fastest track in the country. Can Salazar confirm its 200 meter distance has been verified?

On Cain's 1500 PR in California in 2013, a PR that she has not come close to matching, why is that PR time still "pending?" That track, too, has never had its distance verified.

Aside from PEDs -- and there is no reason to think Cain uses PEDs -- these are two of track's dirty little secrets. Cain is innocent. Those arranging her competitions are not.

sc42 wrote:

Armory/BU wrote:

Conley's was at the Armory, the other three at BU's insanely fast track. Who measured BU's track and verified its purported distance?

A certified surveyor, same as every other track used in the NCAA.

Surveyors survey; they do not measure tracks. ADs like to say "surveyors measured it." Surveyors never measure a track. Their work is done before the track is built. After tracks are built ADs do not follow through to have it measured. They are not interested in due diligence. It may reveal inconvenient truths.

full and not so full mile wrote:

Will BU's AD come out and state the BU track has been verified to be a "full" 200 meters?

On Cain's 1500 PR in California in 2013, a PR that she has not come close to matching, why is that PR time still "pending?" That track, too, has never had its distance verified.

So Cain ran pretty much the exact equivalent of 4:04 for both the mile(4:24) indoors and the 800 at 1:59 in Eugene and ALL THREE of these tracks are short, by conveniently the same increment, whereas your keyboard jockey conspiracy theory is 100% valid and certified?

Perhaps you can get the USATF to personally fly you to all venues where you are suspicious of the PRs of top athletes so that you can personally measure them with your Home epot measuring tape. This crisis must be stopped now!

Why is it a FULL MILE that the women ran in the Armory? What other kinds of miles are there? Perhaps the person who wrote the headline did not think that women could run the mile, never mind the FULL mile.

What did the men run? They ran the mile and the women ran the FULL mile.

So I guess that makes the women better!

Oh darn--we're outed. You caught us. We run major meets; we had a major firm build our track; but if truth be told we're flying by the seat of our pants and we actually never even measured the track. That's why Rupp ran so fast. As to why no one else has, well that I can't explain.

full and not so full mile wrote:

Will BU's AD come out and state the BU track has been verified to be a "full" 200 meters?

Why won't he ask civil engineering students or faculty at MIT to measure his so called "200 meter" track?

Salazar calls it the fastest track in the country. Can Salazar confirm its 200 meter distance has been verified?

On Cain's 1500 PR in California in 2013, a PR that she has not come close to matching, why is that PR time still "pending?" That track, too, has never had its distance verified.

Aside from PEDs -- and there is no reason to think Cain uses PEDs -- these are two of track's dirty little secrets. Cain is innocent. Those arranging her competitions are not.

Oh darn--we're outed, too. You caught us, also. We run major meets, and we've run them for years; we had a major firm build our track; but if truth be told we're flying by the seat of our pants and we actually never even measured the track. That's why Rupp ran so fast. Oh wait, he hasn't run as fast on our track as indoors at Boston. Hurray! We're off the hook. But wait, Cain has run fast at our track. Now I'm really confused. How could someone have possibly run fast at our meet, a meet set up for people to run fast? Hard to explain.

full and not so full mile wrote:

Will BU's AD come out and state the BU track has been verified to be a "full" 200 meters?

Why won't he ask civil engineering students or faculty at MIT to measure his so called "200 meter" track?

Salazar calls it the fastest track in the country. Can Salazar confirm its 200 meter distance has been verified?

On Cain's 1500 PR in California in 2013, a PR that she has not come close to matching, why is that PR time still "pending?" That track, too, has never had its distance verified.

Aside from PEDs -- and there is no reason to think Cain uses PEDs -- these are two of track's dirty little secrets. Cain is innocent. Those arranging her competitions are not.

I've run on it a few times and it doesn't seem any faster than any other comparable indoor facility to me

LetsRun.com wrote:

Quick Take:

This is a great run for Conley as it equates to 4:04.9-4:05.0 in the mile and her pb is just 4:07.12.

No, it equates to a 4.07 1500m.

I agree with Quick Take, converts to a 4:05.

http://www.milesplit.com/calc

Oh, it's good to know that it converts to a 4:07 1500m or we would all think she's in 4:05 shape, seeing as she managed to split 4:05.70 at the 1500m mark of the full mile race she just ran.

http://www.runnerspace.com/gprofile.php?mgroup_id=45586&mgroup_event_id=1066&do=news&news_id=202328#Womens_1500m

Typos wrote:

Its neat how a 4:24.54 full mile equates to a 4:04.9-4:05.0 mile.

LetsRun.com wrote:

Quick Take:

This is a great run for Conley as it equates to 4:04.9-4:05.0 in the mile and her pb is just 4:07.12.

So he made a typo. Big deal we all do it sometimes. We knew right off he was talking about conversion to 1500. Geez no mercy on these boards. :)

P.S. Incredible run!