Why is the SF BAY AREA so bad (per capita) at high school running?

MurderDub wrote:

Vxzvzx wrote:

Once an awesome place to live. Now a waste land. I hate it for the people who live here. I don't understand why its sooo bad here now.

The actual reason that the Bay Area has declined in T&F is gentrification, resulting in a general decline of the Af-Am population. Jim Hines, Warren Edmonson, Lee Evans, Tommie Smith and many more used to call the Bay home. But y'all would rather not talk about that.

This thread relates to runners, not sprinters.

And the San Francisco Bay Area has more blacks today than ever before. The entire East Bay is full of blacks. In fact, at the present rate, whites are bound to become a minority in Oakland in just another several decades.

SF wrote:

Athletic.net is not a good ranking source for California. Many meets are not captured in that site. Check ca.milesplit for true CA rankings.

Every meet I’ve been to in CA for the past few years has used athletic.net.

Vxzvzx wrote:

I don't understand why its sooo bad here now.

Liberalism

to name a few wrote:

albuterol saladbar wrote:

Huh? Who are these great HS runners from the SF Bay Area?

Well, to start there were 3 female FL champions - Trotter, Bei, and Stamps. (Ok, I'm counting Ukiah as it's NCS). The current NXN champion, Oregon runner Cooper Teare. From the distant past, Rich Kimball. I'm sure people can think of a lot more.

I don't think you understand the difference between the Bay area and the rest of Norcal. Santa Rosa being bay area is a stretch for me with it being about 50 miles north of the bay. Ukiah is over 100 miles from the bay so definitely not bay area. Funny that those 2 cities with a combined population of about 200K produced those 3 runners and the Bay area with it's millions has a much weaker tradition.

My feel is much of the bay area sucks to run in. Have you tried running in most of San Fran or Oakland? It's pretty much streets. Of all the metropolitan in the US I've traveled to the bay area has fewer good places to run than most. Palo Alto has some good running spots but it isn't as population dense.

Primo Numero Uno wrote:

My feel is much of the bay area sucks to run in. Have you tried running in most of San Fran or Oakland? It's pretty much streets. Of all the metropolitan in the US I've traveled to the bay area has fewer good places to run than most. Palo Alto has some good running spots but it isn't as population dense.

if you are in an apartment in downtown sf then yeah, that's awful. but i think most of the high schools in the bay area have good running routes near them (or near the students' houses), if not trails and bike paths then neighborhoods and towns that are okay for running on the roads/sidewalks. i've lived in a few spots in the bay area and im familiar with a lot of the running routes in areas i havent lived in so i feel like i have a pretty good idea of what's out there.

and the weather is amazing. SF has particularly cool summers but anywhere in the bay area you can count on sub-60 temps in the mornings all summer, and none of the crazy humidity that the south gets. and depending where in the bay, the highs are generally reasonable all summer

i grew up in texas which produces a ton of great HS runners and i'd much rather train in the bay area. any texas suburb is probably safe for running on the roads/sidewalks, so all these huge texas high schools in the burbs have that going for them, but it's so hot/humid and in many areas hilly. but those schools have established a great running culture so they grit it out and get it done.

anyway, my wife and i have great running genes. give us 16 more years to raise our kid and check back on if any good HS runners are coming out of the bay area! if his high school coach sucks and the team is too casual, we'll make sure he has the opportunity to train harder if he wants to

The Census Bureau defines the Bay Area as Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano, and Sonoma Counties. Santa Rosa does have a great tradition in distance running but athletes at schools like Maria Carrillo, Montgomery, and other Santa Rosa schools compete against schools in the rest of Bay Area. Maybe Ukiah is a stretch but it’s still part of the North Coast Section, which is mostly Bay Area schools, and we are really only talking about one runner.

I do agree that San Francisco is probably the worst place in the Bay Area to run, but even then, how many other cities have a Presidio or a Golden Gate Park? Most cities are just streets downtown, but near Oakland have you ever run in Redwood Park, San Joaquin Miller or Tilden Park in Berkeley? What about the Marin Headlands? There are many trail ultras run on Bay Area trails, including the North Face 50. How many other metros can make that claim?

The problem with the OP’s assertion that the Bay Area has bad (per capita) at high school running is that no one has provided quantitative evidence. It may be true, but let’s see some supporting data.

This is just another classic lrc thread where hacked off anonymous conservatives attack what they don't know and can't have. As a former Bay Area high school runner, it sure doesn't seem to me that the bay is underperforming whatsoever. We pale in comparison to the southern section, but so does everyone else. In the last couple years we've had Liam Anderson and Cooper Teare, two 800m state champs in Jett Charvet and Alyssa Brewer, and some really solid cross country results with St. Francis Mt. View, Dublin, Drake, just to name a few highlights. So when you actually know what you are talking about, come on back, but until then keep complaining about our homelessness problem

Because everyone is a winner.

No sports days at school anymore.

Home environment.

Silly me, I forgot about our two Foot Locker qualifiers last fall, too. Must've slipped my mind. And I misspoke above, Alex Scales won the state 800 the year before Charvet. Sounds like success to me, but I must be drinking the liberal cool aid

to name a few wrote:

I do agree that San Francisco is probably the worst place in the Bay Area to run, but even then, how many other cities have a Presidio or a Golden Gate Park? Most cities are just streets downtown, but near Oakland have you ever run in Redwood Park, San Joaquin Miller or Tilden Park in Berkeley? What about the Marin Headlands? There are many trail ultras run on Bay Area trails, including the North Face 50. How many other metros can make that claim?

It's nice to have GGP and Presidio for destination running but few high schools are close enough to use them on a daily basis. And while there are trails in the Oakland Hills they are practically un-runnable for a group of students. The grades are steep and the trails are single-track.

The formula that works all over the country is to have a large suburban high school with easy access to a park system, a home track, and a high school community that supports participation in athletics. The Bay Area just doesn't have that combination in too many places.

Another detail that is overlooked is the oppressive traffic. If you watch the upcoming Payton Jordan Invite at Stanford, look for a glimpse of the crowd. Even the biggest meet of the year only draws a few Palo Alto residents from the neighborhood because attending the meet means driving 90 minutes, in traffic, from San Francisco or beyond.

Big Sir wrote:

Another detail that is overlooked is the oppressive traffic. If you watch the upcoming Payton Jordan Invite at Stanford, look for a glimpse of the crowd. Even the biggest meet of the year only draws a few Palo Alto residents from the neighborhood because attending the meet means driving 90 minutes, in traffic, from San Francisco or beyond.

;

If traffic is a reason why high school running is bad in the bay area why is the southern section so good? LA has the worst traffic in the country. Hundreds of high school teams manage to get to mt sac every year from all over the state despite the traffic.

Bay Area Athlete Placings

2018 CIF State Meet

Girls 800 - 3,4,6 @ 2:09, 2:09, 2:10

Girls 3200 - 9,10 Both at 10:35

Boys 800 - 1st at 1:50 (I believe the #3 time in USA), 4th in 1:51

Boys 1600 - 1st @ 4:09

2017 State Meet

Girls 800 - 1st at 2:07, 4th @2:09

Boys 800 - 1st @ 1:51, 4th @ 1:52

Boys 1600 - 1st @ 4:08, 4th @ 4:11

Boys 3200 - 2nd @ 8:54, 3rd @ 8:55 (Cooper Teare, who was coming off a stress fracture in his big toe, but earlier in the season had gone 4:00)

Empirically, those don't look too bad

I would have thought that given the big population of Texas that it under performs in distance running?

Open to correction though.

TrollAlert wrote:

MurderDub wrote:

The actual reason that the Bay Area has declined in T&F is gentrification, resulting in a general decline of the Af-Am population. Jim Hines, Warren Edmonson, Lee Evans, Tommie Smith and many more used to call the Bay home. But y'all would rather not talk about that.

This thread relates to runners, not sprinters.

And the San Francisco Bay Area has more blacks today than ever before. The entire East Bay is full of blacks. In fact, at the present rate, whites are bound to become a minority in Oakland in just another several decades.

How dumb are you? Whites have been a minority in Oakland for decades. Their numbers are growing in Oakland due to gentrification. The East Bay is not "full of blacks." It is full of non-black people. I actually live here and can read demographics.

And sprinters are better than runners. No one wants to see you twigs jog around, Kipchoge excepted.

Ciro wrote:

I would have thought that given the big population of Texas that it under performs in distance running?

Open to correction though.

per capita you may be right. i dont know. but there are (or were, when i was in high school) a few really strong TX high schools that consistently produced great mid distance and distance runners. my point is that there's nothing wrong with training in the bay area compared to the locations of some other great high school programs in the country. if coaches have been able to establish great programs in texas then they can do it in the bay area too. the availability of good running routes is not an issue for many high schools in the area. the weather is better

I always thought Texas was weak compared to states like Colorado & California.

Nice, how great are we talking here?

Could be exciting times in a decade and half for track fans ?

Liberals typically don't care about sport. It's also challenging to run through ankle deep feces.