11 boys run 4:09.70 or better full mile in one race

A mile is a mile?

There are even multiple definitions of a nautical mile. One of my ex-employers, that built missiles for the US Navy, used the term "data mile" for one of those definitions. It was easier to plug into the simulation program (6080 feet).

11 'boys' - is there an allergy on this site to giving runners age

d. rudisha wrote:

Of course all of them will be burnt out by the time the dream mile happens, thats what happens to californians.

Typical letsrun response

Yes. Notwithstanding your sarcasm, I'll provide a serious answer. As I'm sure you well know given your years on this site, US boys/girls largely compete for their schools and ages are not typically given. If any further information is given, it will be their grade in school (up to grade 12). "Boys" over here means high school or younger (grade 12 or younger).Having said all that, I'm not sure why you posted since I can't imagine you didn't know this and it failed as humor (humour) if that was your intent.

ukathleticscoach wrote:

11 'boys' - is there an allergy on this site to giving runners age

Gracias! That was it.

420 ... Mile? wrote:

Angry Willy wrote:

Hmmm .... the end of my post was chopped, conspiracy? Too lazy to repost. ;-)

Did you try to use a less than symbol? That is a strange thing on these boards; anything after a < gets cutoff

Asks manse wrote:

Full mile is not a thing. A mile is a mile.

Full mile is not a thing? Have you heard of a half mile? Quarter mile? Maybe it's not as ridiculous to specify as people around here tend to think.

And yeah, metric mile, nautical mile... maybe one day we'll call a 1600 a track mile. Everyone thinks they're so brilliant when they make this correction, but it's pretty pointless.

As I look out at the snow pile on my deck and try to will the thermometer past the 32 degree mark by mid-day, I look with envy upon this result. Great to see.

Why? You might have a good xc team. One school has 3 guys at 9:06 and better for 2 miles indoors.

YEAH BUDDY wrote:

Asks manse wrote:

Full mile is not a thing. A mile is a mile.

Full mile is not a thing? Have you heard of a half mile? Quarter mile? Maybe it's not as ridiculous to specify as people around here tend to think.

And yeah, metric mile, nautical mile... maybe one day we'll call a 1600 a track mile. Everyone thinks they're so brilliant when they make this correction, but it's pretty pointless.

No it isn't pointless. A mile is a mile. 1600m is a different thing. A nautical mile is a different thing as well. It is totally unnecessary to use the term "full".

Shall I start saying the everyone full marathon so no one thinks I mean the half marathon? Shall we go with full 1600 so we don't get confused with the 1500?

What do we do about nautical miles? They are longer than a mile so do I have to say "full nautical mile" every time so that people don't think I might only mean mile when I refer to a nautical mile?

Do I need to say full half mile so we don't get confused with 800m? Of course not.

Adding the term "full" implies that the term mile could mean more than one thing. It doesn't. To suggest it might mean 1600 is ridiculous since it doesn't.

I had never heard of Dunne before Colorado signed him. Dunne + Rocha + Herrerra = monster recruiting class. Wetmore has reloaded for the future.

Grampa Ches wrote:

Translation.... wrote:

"Boys" over here means high school or younger (grade 12 or younger).

There is an allergy. Boys can mean a 25yo high-schooler like Verzbikas or a 35yo high-schooler like Grampa Ches.

I mean Verzbicas legitimately looks his actual age. I think you just have an allergy to not being overly skeptical.

MileMonger wrote:

Wow....that's a fast race and great prelude to the Arcadia mile in 2 weeks.

By the way, last year's Arcadia Invite mile was won in 4:11 !!

Does anyone know is Drew Hunter is coming to Arcadia this year?

If so, could be a Sub-4 in an All HS race.

Why would he go to Arcadia? Simple answer no.

The meet is April 8-9.

Hunter told me indoors his plan after HS nationals was to take some down time - maybe even a week off- and then build back up. He said he'd have a long time of no races. His first race outdoors might be Penn Relays.

Here him talk about it here.

>>To suggest it might mean 1600 is ridiculous since it doesn't

And yet when I talk to parents about their kid's times, when they say "mile", more than half the time they really mean 1600m. Probably closer to 75%. Maybe they just think they are roughly equivalent and don't care to be precise. Maybe it is just easier to say. Maybe they don't know what they are talking about. The reason doesn't matter, that's just the reality of it.

So the suggestion that it is necessary to say something more than "mile" to actually mean "mile" instead of 1600m is unfortunately not ridiculous, and it is frequently necessary depending on who you are talking to. Yes, the U.S. has problems, but this is the least of our worries.

CA State CHAMPIONSHIP 1600 MILE WILL BE SUB 4 WITH SEVERAL BOYS SUB 4 the 1600 MILES!

With times like these you'd think the U.S. would soon be dominating the world scene in the mile/3000 and 5000. But I predict that won't be the case. Just another example of doing too much too soon and most of these kids probably won't amount to much in college. To run sub 4:10 you've got to put in some serious training (talent or not). HS is a time to have fun and compete, college is when it becomes a job. I've seen plenty of sub 4 collegiate runners come out of HS never having broke 4:20.

If you have talent and work hard in college you'll reach your potential regardless of your HS times. But it's kinda hard if you're already sick of running by your second year. And there are plenty of decent DI schools out there that will gladly recruit a 4:20 miler with talent.

Real world issues wrote:

>>To suggest it might mean 1600 is ridiculous since it doesn't

And yet when I talk to parents about their kid's times, when they say "mile", more than half the time they really mean 1600m. Probably closer to 75%. Maybe they just think they are roughly equivalent and don't care to be precise. Maybe it is just easier to say. Maybe they don't know what they are talking about. The reason doesn't matter, that's just the reality of it.

So the suggestion that it is necessary to say something more than "mile" to actually mean "mile" instead of 1600m is unfortunately not ridiculous, and it is frequently necessary depending on who you are talking to. Yes, the U.S. has problems, but this is the least of our worries.

Thank you for your reasoned reply. I don't disagree with your analysis, but on a site full of track runners I expect more.

We can do better.

ronwilson wrote:

Austin Tamagno washed up now?

[Font= sarcastic] Yeah, because a 4:04 mile in March for a high school senior, leading almost the entire way is really embarrassing. He's clearly washed up. [/font]

Bold Prediction wrote:

CA State CHAMPIONSHIP 1600 MILE WILL BE SUB 4 WITH SEVERAL BOYS SUB 4 the 1600 MILES!

I think it is possible. I think it is much more likely we'll see a group of 4:02 type of times. But sub 4 would be cool to see at a high school state meet.

If it was a group of senior runners, it would most likely be tactical. But with high school kids, somebody almost always wants to take it out hard at the state meet.