Reed Brown just ran a 2:21 1k

the sands wrote:

Maton (2015) turned 19 in March of his senior year of HS.

Slagowski (2016) turned 19 in June of his senior year of HS.

Brown (2017) turned 19 in August after his HS graduation.

Hunter (2016) turned 19 in September after his HS graduation.

By historical standards, most students that age are college freshmen. That leaves only Fisher (turned 18 in April of senior year) as "normal track."

This is utter gibberish.

Comparing the feats of sub 4s or near sub 4s aa based on how many months apart from each other???

GET A LIFE TTARD-PHHUKK!!

....Another way to put it?

You're slow, they're fast,

You're a loser.

2:21 isn't really that fantastical considering the kid has run sub 4.

A 1:50/3:59 runner can run 2:21. It's like 1:53 through 800.

Yes, U of Oregon is a high school.

the sands wrote:

Maton (2015) turned 19 in March of his senior year of HS.

Slagowski (2016) turned 19 in June of his senior year of HS.

Brown (2017) turned 19 in August after his HS graduation.

Hunter (2016) turned 19 in September after his HS graduation.

By historical standards, most students that age are college freshmen. That leaves only Fisher (turned 18 in April of senior year) as "normal track."

I didn't realize they were all so old for their grade. My friends and I all turned 19 at the end of our freshman year in college.

glad you figured it out wrote:

Bjb19 wrote:

The issue is that people are slightly discrediting Hunter and Brown's achievements even though they turned 18 during their senior year of high school and 19 during their freshman year of college. If they had been born two or three months later then they'd have November or December birthdays and all of a sudden it doesn't matter. Really? Come on now...

Correct

Get a life bruh

Obviously age matters. Otherwise we wouldn’t have age groups for youth track and field. The runners who broke 4 in HS are the best high schoolers of all time but will they be the best runners all time or were they slightly ahead of the other elites due to age? Some yes and some no. The top Americans right now are Murphy, Engels, Centro, Blankenship, Jagger, and Andrews. These guys were good in HS but no sub 4s and they are born between dec and may.

Reading this thread, I have to say, there have been good points made for both sides of the discussion. Neither is necessarily right or wrong and I’m sure that that will remain the case for decades to come.

My two cents on the case is, there is no real correlation between age and success in track and field. If there is I believe it is generally coincidental and points can be easily argued for the opposition. For example, amongst the group of teenagers who ran near or under 4 minutes in recent years, Jakob Ingebrigsten was obviously the most successful and was only 16 years of age last year.

I think the correlation we see comes more from increases in training volume and intensity over the course of years rather than directly from age. If you look at someone like Tyrese Cooper, although he is “overaged” he has also been consistently performing at a high level regardless of his age; adversely, the number one thing Cooper continues to preach is how intense his training has continued to be.