Explain why high schoolers race 1600 and not 1500

Running On Empathy wrote:

Explain wrote:

Makes no sense. 1500 would be easier to compare to everything else. More runners would be trying to break 4

The 1500 makes no sense on a 400 meter track. Never has, never will.

Where I come from the 300m hurdles are contested in HS. Same starting line as the 1500m would have I believe. At least in Lane 1.

Running On Empathy wrote:

Explain wrote:

Makes no sense. 1500 would be easier to compare to everything else. More runners would be trying to break 4

The 1500 makes no sense on a 400 meter track. Never has, never will.

How about the 3,000m, 3,000m steeplechase, and 5000m

1600m makes zero sense. Run the mile or 1500m

ukathleticscoach wrote:

1600m makes zero sense. Run the mile or 1500m

Please use logic to explain to me how the mile on a 400m track or a 1500m on a 400m track makes sense but a straight up 4 lap 1600m race makes zero sense.

crickets....

In Massachusetts High School meets the 1m and 2m are still contested not the 1,600m and 3,200m.

Explain wrote:

Makes no sense. 1500 would be easier to compare to everything else. More runners would be trying to break 4

Explain to me why your desire for races that are whole integer multiples of 500m is any more important than my desire for races that consist of whole integer multiples of laps.

Explain to me why you find it think it would be helpful to breaking 4 minutes in a 1-mile race (1609.344m) by running 1500m.

The distances should be (metres) 100, 200, 400, 1000, 4000, 5000, 10000, 20000, 40000 (marathon)

> The distances should be (metres) 100, 200, 400, 1000, 2000, 4000, 10000, 20000, 40000 (marathon)

It all happened with the original sin as schools gradually switched from 440y tracks to 400m tracks.

100y went to 100m

220y went to 200m

etc

Those moves all made sense because now they would be running actual Olympic events.

But somehow they agreed to go from a mile (a recognized world record event) to the 1600m (which was a nonexistent event).

That was a chance to either make another line 9. m back from the start line and keep the mile, or put down a line for the 1500m start.

The 1600m compromise was simply a bad decision.

The two mile event may have had some influence.

Going from a two mile race to a 5000m race is a bit drastic.

But two mile races and 3000m races are at least IAAF recognized records.

A stupid 3200m was adopted with the stupid 1600m.

1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32

Maybe a 5k on the track, but that's it. 10km should be cross or road only. Man, I hate that race.

I'm in favor of the marathon being 40km.

When the push came to convert to metric, why didn't the power that be say, "ok, we're running 1609 meters?"

Because 1609m doesn't make sense on a 400m track. It's not that hard, people. Take the English distances that used to be run, then find the whole number metric distances that closely match them on a 400m track: 440yds becomes 400m, 880yds becoomes 800m, mile becomes 1600m, 2 mile becoomes 3200m.

It really isn't that difficult, people. Any way you look at it the 1500m is the odd man out.

Explain wrote:

Makes no sense. 1500 would be easier to compare to everything else. More runners would be trying to break 4

Why does Trump hold himself ever so tightly at cabinet meetings?

Why do people drink Amstel Light?

Why is there a racewalk?

Why do people suck on a strap-on?

Nope Nope Nope wrote:

1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32

Maybe a 5k on the track, but that's it. 10km should be cross or road only. Man, I hate that race.

I'm in favor of the marathon being 40km.

You distances are nonsensical. Might as well be 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, 512.

What makes a lot more sense are either:

1, 2, 4, 10, 20 ...

or

1, 2, 5, 10, 20 50 ...

Nope Nope Nope wrote:

Because 1609m doesn't make sense on a 400m track. It's not that hard, people.

The problem with the 1600m is that HS runners believe that four laps equal one mile. It gets ingrained into their heads. Running 1500m and 3000m would help put an end to that nonsense.

The distances are what they are and have since a long time been a mix between metricized events stemming from multiples/fractions of the mile (200, 400, 800) and metric events (100, 1000, 1500, 3000, 5000, 10000) with the One Mile the only internationally surviving imperial units event. And the Marathon as the odd historical exception. It is just conventions, so why not stick with them.

The 1600 has only ever been contested in US high schools. No other 1600 on the planet ever. Pros? Ever seen a college 1600? What happens when some high schooler runs a 3:54 1600? Is that going to be the national 1600 record?

Schools keep 1600 records separate from mile records. Lil Jonny 2018 runs 4:20 and holds the school 1600 record. The mile record is still 4:15 from 1975 but nobody talks about that.

I've never understood the hate that pops up here regularly towards the 1600 and 3200? The 1600 and 3200 meter runs are no more illogical than the 200, 400 and 800 and in fact are the next sensible progressions from those distances. When track went metric they should have gone all in and adopted the 500, 1000, 2000 and 3000 but they didn't, they opted to go with the closest metric distances to the old Imperial races, except for the stupid 1500, which they have the audacity to call the "metric mile"! How does 1.5 kilometers make any more sense than 1.6? 1500 is neither close to an Imperial distance nor is it a nice round Metric distance, it is an absolutely meaningless distance, with no historical significance in the sport. The fact is modern track and field has a rich history in Imperial units and the traces of it are still all over many events from the obsession with the mile to the high hurdles being 42 inches tall and exactly 10 yards apart or the the shot put being exactly 16 pounds, even the pole vault plant box is exactly 8 inches deep, we could go on and on. Heck it was a big deal when the first guy broke 8 minutes for two miles, and multiple attempts were set up to make it happen in the late 90s. What metric distances have gotten that kind of excitement in recent history?

This could be an opportunity to wipe the record books clean and adopt true metric values for all events, why not an 8 kg shot? Why not make the high hurdles 1 meter high and 9 meters apart and why not make the Kilometer run the marquee middle distance race? Of course there's that other little issue that a 400 meter track fits nicely around most soccer/football fields in most modern stadiums and as long as the track is 400 meters long, it kind of makes sense to keep most of the distances in some even fraction or multiple of 400...and we're right back where we started.

If you are from a true running state, then high school athletes (boys and girls) are being prepared to run in college and beyond by competing in the 1500 and 3000 outdoors

theJeff wrote:

Much better question would be, “why do College and Pros run the 15&30 instead of the 16&32?”

1600 and 3200 are odd distance for countries who use the metric system - where these distances came from (a pretty long time ago).

You can ask why they run 400 and 800 instead of 500 and 1000 for the same reason.

(I certainly wish they had run 2000 instead of 1500. It would have been a much better distance for me:))