If I described myself as an above average distance runner in high school, what would you expect my times to be?

Flagpole wrote:

2) You could not be more wrong about connecting 800 times to 3200 times. Ohio High School legend Scott Fry (1984 Kinney, now Footlocker, CC champion) had an 800 PR of 1:57 (set his senior year), and he ran 8:48 for 3200. People try to make equivalencies there, but everyone is different and it just doesn't work.

While I can definitely appreciate your opinion, I did in fact improve my speed the following year and the results for 1500/Mile/3000 were about what I wanted to run in high school. I never actually ran an 800 in college but I'm confident I was much faster.

Today?

If you break 17 on the track in high school, I see these kids walk the halls like they are guaranteed a D1 scholarship. Puhleeez.

I saw 3 guys break 15:30 in CT in the mid 1980's , in XC.

Mediocre is rewarded these days.

HardLoper wrote:

One thing LetsRun loves to do is redefine terms such as "average." Average is not your opinion, it is a factual measure of center, such as arithmetic mean or median. To find this all you have to do is open up the performance list on athletic.net and look. For high school boys in 2014, the center would be about:

5:13 1600

11:40 3200

So if you are above average you are better than that. There is no room for debate on this, it is a fact.

"Average" does not mean the arithmetic mean or the median in daily speech.

You're an above average idiot.

2:05

4:50

10:30

Sorry, I'd consider those times average.

These would be considered above average in my state:

2:03

4:40

10:20

wow, you're a tard wrote:

"Average" does not mean the arithmetic mean or the median in daily speech.

Yes it does.

The OP said he was 4:19/9:31 high school distance runner. Does anyone in here think that's NOT above average for a HS distance runner??? And you can use any version of average that you like.

Not sure if this is true, while one of the better runners on my team, I achieved these all after only 8 months of training. I went from a 7:30 mile in 8th grade with no running to 2:10/4:57 frosh yr.

Above Average:

1600 - 4:30-35

3200 - 9:50-9:59

5k XC - 16:30

how do you find the mean and median of people? I hope you're not talking about times because one standard deviation above the mean would mean below average

For a boy, I would say,

1:55

4:20

9:20

15:30 XC

You would be on the top end of average with those times. So I suppose the OP was just above average for the mile.

For a girl (and this reflects my bias for round numbers)

2:10

5:00

11:00

18:00 XC

"Average" is not descriptive enough. If you want to humblebrag to people to whom times are meaningless about your HS running ability, say things like "I was the best on my team", "I was one of the top guys on a state qualifying team", "I was one of the top runners in my conference/ district/ state /region /nation" etc. They can compare that to other sports more easily.

guy

800: < 2:20

1600: < 5:15

3200: < 11:50

girl

800: < 3:00

1600: < 6:10

3200: < 13:30

I ran a 1:59 800, 4:30 1600 and 15:35 for 3 miles and couldn't make my state meet team in either track or cross. I considered myself slightly above average. This was also in the 90's when breaking 9:20 for 3200 or 15 for 3 miles was a big deal. Above average to me means you were competing at a state level.

I think the New York varsity standards are a good measure of this:

800-2:10

1600-4:50

3200-10:40

A lot of kids break those standards but the vast majority don't or cannot.

so, what if you were, best in your city? or best in your state? or best in the nation? What do you say then? My advice to them would be to say "I was pretty good" - covers enough ground.

nguigi wrote:

Thanks for the response. I guess I am pretty modest. I was a 4:19/9:31 type. Qualified for the state meet several times. By yours and Daniels settings I'd be 'Good 8'.

I had fun. My teammates and I enjoyed our retired teacher coach but technically speaking he wasn't the best. I should have been able to get more out of my 3200 and I could only run a 1:56 which is where I know I needed work. Had I been a 1:54 type I might have been a 4:10/9:10 guy.

So when you ran 4:19/9:31 you didn't notice that you were much faster than most if not all of your teammates and were finishing races in front of most if not all of your competitors?

Get real, average letsrunner is 4:20, 9:20, 15:10 XC, 2250 SAT, and income of $250K/house hold member.

Anything less is loser category.

To me saying you are above average means you are well up on the Bell curve. It's like the letter grades you get in school. A 70 and a 79 are still C's. If you are above average you are a B or better.

This is my B list:

800: 2:05

1600: 4:35

3200: 9:50

5k: 16:30

Anything that or faster is above average. Close to that, we'll it gets fuzzy. 4:36...yeah you probably still qualify. 4:45? As a senior? Maybe if you also ran 9:55, or 16:35. Maybe not if you were 10:20. I had a buddy who ran 4:48, 10:02, 33:10, and broke 78 in a 1/2 marathon. While the mile time was certainly a C, the 10k and 1/2 were B's (IMO).

Does one B in one event make you above average? Probably.