Matthew Maton runs 3:42.54 1500!

Not to nitpick but his name is franzmair

maton on why he was kicked off his HS team

http://highschoolsports.oregonlive.com/news/article/5531474896179029154/summit-distance-star-matthew-maton-talks-separation-from-team-season-plans/

I'm not "figuring." I'm doing the math based on the ustfccca conversion tables.

It comes to 3:58.94

I teach my athletes to run through the finish, and to not showboat down the home stretch.

So, if Mr. Maton were one of my runners and continued to the mile finish line, I have no doubt that he would've joined the sub 4 club.

If he eases up, looks at the crowd and puts his hand to his ear, then yes, maybe he does run the 4:00.35

Very rarely does someone advertise their stupidity so successfully.

Why is no one giving Haney props? He is a day younger than Maton and he beat him.

Why is no one giving Haney props? He is a day younger than Maton and he beat him.

A couple questions:

If he was 19, wouldn't he have been ineligible for high school athletics once he turned 19? That used to be the rule in Idaho and I think Washington, not sure about Oregon.

Two: It was reported he broke Rupp's Oregon high school record. But if he was running unattached, does that still count? I don't think it does.

Nevertheless, a great effort.

from the chart you linked:

1500 Meters>1600 Meters

1.0737

1500 Meters>Mile

1.08

Please show your 710 SAT math that results in 3:42.5 times 1.08 equaling

3:58.94 for a mile.

Thank you

714 SAT early 1960s wrote:

coach B wrote:

I'm not "figuring." I'm doing the math based on the ustfccca conversion tables.

http://www.ustfccca.org/assets/track-event-conversions-standardized.pdf

It comes to 3:58.94

I teach my athletes to run through the finish, and to not showboat down the home stretch.

So, if Mr. Maton were one of my runners and continued to the mile finish line, I have no doubt that he would've joined the sub 4 club.

If he eases up, looks at the crowd and puts his hand to his ear, then yes, maybe he does run the 4:00.35

from the chart you linked:

1500 Meters>1600 Meters

1.0737

1500 Meters>Mile

1.08

Please show your 710 SAT math that results in 3:42.5 times 1.08 equaling

3:58.94 for a mile.

Thank you

Oh.

Didn't realize you were talking about the full mile.

That's not the kind of mile we run.

Now your conversion makes sense.

714 SAT early 1960s wrote:

coach B wrote:

I'm not "figuring." I'm doing the math based on the ustfccca conversion tables.

http://www.ustfccca.org/assets/track-event-conversions-standardized.pdf

It comes to 3:58.94

I teach my athletes to run through the finish, and to not showboat down the home stretch.

So, if Mr. Maton were one of my runners and continued to the mile finish line, I have no doubt that he would've joined the sub 4 club.

If he eases up, looks at the crowd and puts his hand to his ear, then yes, maybe he does run the 4:00.35

from the chart you linked:

1500 Meters>1600 Meters

1.0737

1500 Meters>Mile

1.08

Please show your 710 SAT math that results in 3:42.5 times 1.08 equaling

3:58.94 for a mile.

Thank you

Oh.

Didn't realize you were talking about the full mile.

That's not the kind of mile we run.

Now your conversion makes sense.

salukidawg wrote:

Why is no one giving Haney props? He is a day younger than Maton and he beat him.

Haney ran a great race as well, but he has had a year of college level training and competition, that matters.

He his red shirting this year so will be a freshman next year as well.\

But yes a great race.

Coach b wrote:

714 SAT early 1960s wrote:

from the chart you linked:

1500 Meters>1600 Meters

1.0737

1500 Meters>Mile

1.08

Please show your 710 SAT math that results in 3:42.5 times 1.08 equaling

3:58.94 for a mile.

Thank you

Oh.

Didn't realize you were talking about the full mile.

That's not the kind of mile we run.

Now your conversion makes sense.

Could you be more explicit in defining the kind of mile you run and the state and league that contests it. Is there a published sub 4 list generated by that type mile.

here is one version of such a list using the distance I call my mile

please note it is restricted to actual 1760 yard miles and does not include any converted from a shorter distance marks- you have to actually run a mile under 4 minutes to be on this sub4 milers list

Wondering in the West wrote:

A couple questions:

If he was 19, wouldn't he have been ineligible for high school athletics once he turned 19? That used to be the rule in Idaho and I think Washington, not sure about Oregon.

He would have been eligible. Most state associations have the age limit set at 20 (that is, you can't at any time during your senior year turn 20 years old). Typically, the rule is stated as you can't turn 19 before the end of your junior year. 19 during senior year has always been eligible.

Wondering in the West wrote:

A couple questions:

If he was 19, wouldn't he have been ineligible for high school athletics once he turned 19? That used to be the rule in Idaho and I think Washington, not sure about Oregon.

Two: It was reported he broke Rupp's Oregon high school record. But if he was running unattached, does that still count? I don't think it does.

Nevertheless, a great effort.

I think the rule is as long as you don't turn 19 before August 1st of your senior year you're good, they do it for regular aged seniors who might've failed a grade say back in PreK, Kindagarten, that happens a lot... I was 17 years old my whole senior year, I knew what it's like to run against 19 year olds, it sucks if there's not a paticular reason why they're 19, I don't know Maton's reason, but I don't think it's fair that if a person failed back in kindergarten, and they are an academically excelling student is HS they should be penalized for something that happened a decade ago

And no, you can run with a club and still get a HS record, as long as you run for HS and are age eligible, you're fine

Kind of like Nike Nationals or Footlocker for XC, you don't technically run for your school but you can still set records, NB Indoor and Outdoor Nationals again, you can run for a club or unattached and still set a record

The 1.08 conversion factor from 1500 to mile is an average someone figured based on some set of data, I do not know which. The fact is that some guys never match their predicted mile (so far, the Algerian lion, an 800-1500 guy, is one of them, complaining about the extra distance), whereas others are better at the mile than the 1500m, though these tend to be from the 1980s or earlier when they might not have taken too many opportunities at 1500m. Currently, it is difficult to get too many outdoor mile races even in the United States, much easier indoors since they went back to the mile, but on the international circuit there are pretty many shots at the mile, including Oslo, the UK, and others. With all those shots, including numerous at Pre, Asbel Kiprop's best mile is 3:48, yet his 1500m best is 3:27 (3:28 converts to 3:44.64 on the 1.08x). Kiplagat runs a lot of both and his 1500m best is 3:27.64 but his mile best is 3:47 or 3:48. Those are in season paced races and still nothing close to the conversion predictions. El Guerrouj couldn't run his 1500m conversion to mile (=3:42.48) but he came close enough (about .6 s off) and did run more 1500s. However, Lagat's best 1500m is 3:26.3 and he ran only 3:47, slower than Webb, who could only run 3:30 in a 1500m at his best. Ngeny ran 3:43.40 behind El G but never came close to 3:26 in his short career (3:43+ converts down by 1.08 to 3:26.85). His best 1500m was 3:28.12.

coach B wrote:

[quote]wellwellWell wrote:

[quote]coach b wrote:

Having said that, I know a lot about the mile.

Two of my male athletes and one of my young ladies were all-conference middle distance runners last year alone.

Beyond that, I ran it the mile in high school and was a varsity letterman 2 years in a row.

I also scored 710 on my math SAT, and tested out of my freshman college calc class, so even though I am no Archimedes, and didn't major in math or science, I am competent enough to handle "elementary school math," and TRUST ME, 3:42.54 for 1500 converts to a sub 4 mile.

I know what I'm talking about.

I'm not "figuring." I'm doing the math based on the ustfccca conversion tables.

http://www.ustfccca.org/assets/track-event-conversions-standardized.pdf

It comes to 3:58.94

Even if you use the chart you linked and "your mile" is an even 1600meters you get

3:58.941198 and that converts to 3:58.95 using commonly accepted timing practices . I'm trying not to be snarky but in your "Trust me I know what I'm talking about" world not only is 1600 meters called a mile you round times to the shorter 100th. I wonder what else is different in your world.

Sub Four "My Mile" Runners wrote:

Coach b wrote:

Oh.

Didn't realize you were talking about the full mile.

That's not the kind of mile we run.

Now your conversion makes sense.

Could you be more explicit in defining the kind of mile you run and the state and league that contests it. Is there a published sub 4 list generated by that type mile.

here is one version of such a list using the distance I call my mile

http://www.trackandfieldnews.com/index.php/archivemenu/13-lists/1476-tafn-us-sub-400-milers

please note it is restricted to actual 1760 yard miles and does not include any converted from a shorter distance marks- you have to actually run a mile under 4 minutes to be on this sub4 milers list

In 1981 (it might have been 1980 or 82, I don't remember exactly) our state changed from competition distances based on yards (440, 880, Mile, 2 Mile) to one based on meters (400, 800, 1600, 3200).

Ever since then our scholar athletes have run the 1600 mile rather than the full mile, with the exception of a few invitational meets, where they run the full mile.

My conversion from 1500 (meters) was to the standard 1600 mile (also measured in meters) that all our kids run now, rather than the antiquated full mile ( the only one measured in yards rather than meters).

5/10. Several people bought in, and I laughed out loud at the "1600 mile rather than the full mile" bit. Strong work.

troll-O-meter.. wrote:

5/10. Several people bought in, and I laughed out loud at the "1600 mile rather than the full mile" bit. Strong work.

As I have demonstrated often- I'm not the smartest guy on the boards but is there actually something called an unfull mile (or empty mile or half empty mile)?