Mile officially replaces 1500 at NCAAs??

What did you run in the 1500m in Middle School PE class? Oh wait - you ran the MILE.

If anything - it should be the 1600m. The low mileage-per-week guys are gonna get exposed by running extra 109 meters!

French Dawg wrote:

4 laps+ a little vs 3 3/4? Really, 3 3/4? Who comes up with this shit?

In what world is a 4.02336 lap race any less arbitrary than a 3.75 lap race?

The 400m track is an arbitrary choice. Tracks should be 500m. The 100m would still exist. The 200m could still exist. With 500m tracks it becomes easier to establish lap counts for races 500m and over. Starts and finishes are always at the same point on the track.

I don't see this as a bad thing except for how it affects USATF.

USATF runs the 1500 and uses 1500m qualifying times.

They can use converted mile times from the college runners but for those on the bubble, I wouldn't want to see someone with a legit 1500m time get bumped by a mile performance that converts to a slightly faster time.

Outside of that this doesn't have an affect on preparation for the world scene.

You can race the mile in the spring and be fine adjusting to the 1500 later.

They will have to add that extra start line to a bunch of tracks, by I like that and think all tracks should have that mile waterfall start painted on.

Another concern is how invitationals are going to be run because post-collegiate runners run with collegiate runners in these meets.

Are they going to run a mile or a 1500 at these meets?

I assume people will need mile qualifying times and that may be good to give the post-collegiates a chance for a good mile time.

Do it like Cross Country: run 1500 throughout the season, then run the Mile at NCAA champs.

French Dawg wrote:

Thank god. Who cares if nobody runs the 1500outside the US, the mile is a far superior distance in general. 4 laps+ A LITTLE vs 3 3/4?

As long as we have 400m tracks, the mile doesn´t make more sense than the 1500.

5000m? Really? 12,5 laps...

Brought Back The Mile wrote:

What did you run in the 1500m in Middle School PE class? Oh wait - you ran the MILE.

And your point is...?

Here is the point - contrary to what people are saying the mile will not make track more popular to anyone. People who know track, know track. Those who don't know or care are the ones this movement is trying to appeal to. The problem with that is track is boring. Fix the problem instead of taking your eye off the ball. Bring back the mile is a distraction and administrators think those clowns at the convention are just that - clowns.

Fix the presentation of the meet for tv and live audiences and then we can talk about the 1500m or changing the 100m to yards or changing that random 60m event to 40 yards. The mile is outdated and sub 4 is no longer that fast. Use your brains people!

krispy kremlin_._NOT wrote:

krispy kremlin_._._ wrote:

What with the "we should be like the rest of the world" crap? This is America. They should be like us (and most of them agree).

Stop destroying a better system because of your liberal shame.

The 1500m is a ridiculous race that has no place in the world of track and field.

The Olympics and WCs are international. America will never get them to change to "American" units.

1/10 BTW.

Hey Bad Wigins,

Olympics = most overhyped sports fiesta. The MILE has been popular for much longer than the Olympics.

1500m = outdated distance anticipating 500m tracks. Obviously they failed to implement 500m tracks but still hang onto the awkward 3 3/4 lap race.

There's no Oslo Dream 1500. You don't say a dedicated person "goes the extra 1500." Robert Frost didn't write about 1500's to go before I sleep, 1500's to go before I sleep, did he.

YEAH BUDDY wrote:

French Dawg wrote:

4 laps+ a little vs 3 3/4? Really, 3 3/4? Who comes up with this shit?

In what world is a 4.02336 lap race any less arbitrary than a 3.75 lap race?

I think 1600 is 4 laps exactly. High school has it right!!!!

1500m wrote:

Very disappointing if it is true

So dumb wrote:

Such an idiotic decision.

You Know Me wrote:

Dumb. I'm going to start a bring back the 1500 campaign.

Hahahaha.

Suck it.

Many people miss one of the main mission's of Bring Back the Mile: promotion of the storied distance, AND in turn, the sport.

Elevating and celebrating the Mile, an event of consistent media interest in America, particularly sub-4 minutes, is one piece of the promotional puzzle for our sport hurting for coverage, "buzz" and attention.

And again, for the record, we have nothing against the 1500.

NCAA proposal and reasoning here:

http://bringbackthemile.com/news/detail/the_mile_and_the_ncaa_a_major_opportunity

Absolutely STUPID!!!! The coach who spearheaded this movement should spend more time with his mediocre team instead of wasting everyone's time with this BS!

What an absolute JOKE!!!!!

15hundo wrote:

Absolutely STUPID!!!! The coach who spearheaded this movement should spend more time with his mediocre team instead of wasting everyone's time with this BS!

What an absolute JOKE!!!!!

Most NCAA T&F coaches disagree with you.

French Dawg wrote:

Thank god. Who cares if nobody runs the 1500outside the US, the mile is a far superior distance in general. 4 laps+ a little vs 3 3/4? Really, 3 3/4? Who comes up with this shit?

I've been thinking the same thing for quite a long time. The 100 is only 1/4 of a lap, huh? What's up with that crap? And the 200 is only 1/2 of a lap. People have to go around to the other side to start with it, and the same for 5000 meters! The 100 and 200 should be abolished immediately, change the 1500 to 2000 meters, and the 5000 to 6000 meters.

armchair internet surfer wrote:

15hundo wrote:

Absolutely STUPID!!!! The coach who spearheaded this movement should spend more time with his mediocre team instead of wasting everyone's time with this BS!

What an absolute JOKE!!!!!

Most NCAA T&F coaches disagree with you.

Head coaches. Not the actual DISTANCE COACHES.

Why does the NCAA think the mile is better than the INTERNATIONAL STANDARD??????

Maybe one of you brain dead coaches who voted for this rubbish can explain.

Fan of 1500 wrote:

Why does the NCAA think the mile is better than the INTERNATIONAL STANDARD??????

Maybe one of you brain dead coaches who voted for this rubbish can explain.

Based on your demeanor, it's unlikely any explanation will change your mind.

Pacer X wrote:

Do it like Cross Country: run 1500 throughout the season, then run the Mile at NCAA champs.

I was thinking of that myself.

By actually like the idea of having the mile at all US meets.

USATF Trials has to stay with the 1500, though.

I have to tell you, I ran the 1500 back in the day.

And 20 years later I still refer to it as the metric mile or say mile equivalents when talking to most people about my running in the past.

And I'd have a better real mile PR (maybe sub 4) if they had more outdoor mile meets.

The positive of this move is it will create some buzz. We will certainly talk about here.

The negatives are very few. In fact I want to hear real negatives (outside of "it's stupid" or talking about the circumference of the track).