Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Magness as HS-only miler: wow!

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Re: Magness as HS-only miler: wow!

    steve i am freshman who is also from the houston area. i ran a 435 in districts and got second to go to regionals. how did u feel ab brian not making it with a 411 after he won state last year?

    Comment


    • #47
      Re: Magness as HS-only miler: wow!

      Is this the first ever thread...? ;-)

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Magness as HS-only miler: wow!

        >Is this the first ever thread...? ;-)

        Nope. The one I put up was the 17th and it was at 8:27am. Now the first 16 may have been tests and you will note that thread was started by a quasi staffer which makes sense. This one was the 20th.

        Comment


        • #49
          Re: Magness as HS-only miler: wow!

          US high school track is the only place in the known universe that has EVER run dumbass distances like 1600M and 3200M. Until all the stupid old farts who refuse to deal with the metric system die off, then none of these races will ever mean a damn thing!

          And it doesn't help that "expert publications" like T&FN still use feet and inches in their reports. Most of the world have no idea whether a 57 foot triple jump is any good, but they do know what 18M+ means.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Magness as HS-only miler: wow!

            Keepmoving:

            The American response to your comments are that the rest of the world can stick it where the sun doesn't shine with regard to the metric system.

            As a mechanical engineer who deals all the time with both imperial and metric measurement systems, I can assure you that there is nothing magical about either system. It doesn't make a bit of difference. Neither is more important or advantageous over the other. I compare it to the difference in counting either in binary or decimal systems. The perceive advantages of one system over another is directly proportional to an individual's familiarity of one system vs. the other. And given that Americans en masse are used to imperial for the last several hundred years, we say STICK IT!!

            Kurt

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Magness as HS-only miler: wow!

              <<The American response to your comments are that the rest of the world can stick it where the sun doesn't shine with regard to the metric system.>>

              Well, that's always a nice, postive attitude to have.

              << It doesn't make a bit of difference. Neither is more important or advantageous over the other.>>

              Now this I have a hard time believing. Being Canadian, I'm somewhat schizophrenic in that things like my weekly mileage is imperial while workouts and races are metric, however I really don't see how an arguement can be made that there is no inherent advantage of the metric system over imperial.

              Obviously if one is brought up on imperial and is not numerically or scientifically inclined, the metric world can seem intimidating and confusing, but surely an engineer type person who deals with both can easily discern the advantages contained in a system who varying measurements are not arbitrarily related (how many yards/feet in a mile? Ounces in a pound?)

              <<I compare it to the difference in counting either in binary or decimal systems.>>

              How many people in the world do you know of that count in binary? I use decimal and I'd presume you do as well. Right there is a good reason why imperialists should be able to pick up on metric.

              The only real arguement those who stick with imperial (that would be the US and two tiny countries few could name or locate on a world map) is that they may not be able to visualize certain measurements (6m vault vs 20 feet). That is just a matter of experience, such as not really knowing how far 26.2 miles is until you have to cover it on foot.

              Comment


              • #52
                Re: Magness as HS-only miler: wow!

                We're putting down a new football turf and redoing the jump surfaces at Franklin Field this summer. I met with the engineers yesterday and brought a 50m tape with me so we could lay some things out.

                They flipped the tape over, using feet only. Then I looked at the engineering plans: everything is in feet and decimals. The length of the pole vault runway is 163.45 feet.

                There are several instances of measurements at the AAU championships being taken with surveyor's tapes before the 1930's. Hence you'll see someone throwing the hammer 169.48 feet. Norman Dole's PV WR in 1904 was 12.11 feet, but is often found listed as 12-1 32/100.

                In other words, using feet (or yards) doesn't necessarily mean discarding a decimal system.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Re: Magness as HS-only miler: wow!

                  I'm surprised (pleasantly, because I too prefer imperial, but only cuz I'm too old and lazy to learn anew) that KF says that imperial is just as easy to work in as metric. Wasn't the metric system invented because it IS so much easier to work in?

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Re: Magness as HS-only miler: wow!

                    I don't think metric was invented to specifically make things "easier." It is an offshoot of the great (French) Enlightenment project to make all things logical, rational, and universal. To that extent, it's an itegral part of a very specific historical, philosophical, and ideological project (from the period of the late 1700s/early 1800s). There's nothing "wrong" with that, but as KF said, there's no use pretending that metric makes any more intrinsic
                    "sense" than imperial.

                    Dave Johnson's comments above about the decimal use of imperial measure are most interesting...

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Re: Magness as HS-only miler: wow!

                      Thomas Jefferson proposed a decimal system of weights and measures in 1790.

                      The world's first decimal (hence metric in a real sense) currency was the United States dollar, and that dates back to 1792. If I'm not mistaken, there's a law that says no unit of money may be minted that isn't either an even multiple of the dollar, or an even division of the dollar. That's about as metric as you can get.

                      Since 1866 it has been unlawful in the United States to refuse to trade or deal in metric quantities.

                      U.S. weights and measures have been officially defined in terms of the metric system since 1893.

                      The modern metric system wasn't finalized until 1960, when the meter was redefined in terms of a specific wavelength of light. (In fact, I think that probably the specific wavelength of light had a lot more to do with matching 100 centimeters than developing a standard meter. It's no accident that a cubic centimeter is the exact cubic measure of one centiliter of pure water at standard temperature.)

                      Most consumable liquids have been bottled or containerized in metric units for quite a few years. The United States Department of Commerce's Bureau of Standards, now known as the National Institute for Standards and Technology, has played a leading role in development of metric standards, and in defining imperial standards in terms thereof.

                      Any suggestion that somehow the U.S. is backwards or stubbornly resisting what seems logical to the rest of the world is a shortsighted and colloquial attitude toward a society that has been deeply and historically ingrained with a measurement system that does not today differ in accuracy from metric, but only in convention.

                      I've dealt quite often in both systems, and clearly there are advantages to both. One particular thing I find irksome about the metric system is the fact that height and distance records in international track are only defined in centimeter increments, or roughly 4/10 of an inch. I would much prefer measurement values closer to 1/8 of an inch in events such as the high jump and pole vault, because one centimeter seems like an ungainly number, particularly when it comes to those establishing those records.

                      Perhaps the compromise could be made that 5 millimeters would be the minimum measurement increment. Unfortunately, I don't think it can ever happen. The international community is unlikely to follow any Yankee recommendation that tampers with their hallowed metric conventions.

                      http://lamar.colostate.edu/~hillger/dates.htm

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Magness as HS-only miler: wow!

                        thanks, ycn, interesting stuff.

                        2 notes:
                        1. In the 1800's we had a 3 cent coin (not an even decimal fraction)
                        2. Since sodas are now sold in 1 and 2 liter sizes is there a Communist plot to take us over from the youth ages up?

                        edit: typical thread - goes from miling to metrics in nothing flat.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Dredged up this thread with a search for SM, trying to find out what he's done in the last year or so. What has he done? Anyone know?

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Good question, Dr. Jay, I was wondering the same thing.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              He ran 4:03 indoors at Washington's Last CXhance meet last March, but didnt' run in NCs. Not on Rice's roster this year, when he should be a junior (HS '03).

                              He used to post here once in a while. Yo, Steve!!!!

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                I still post, although mostly lurking. I'm too much of a track junkie to stay away.

                                Last 2 years in track (XC went pretty well) didn't go to well so I decide to change things up a bit. This year I'm just going to race unattached at meets come outdoor season. I'm training hard and smart and it's going real well. By all indications I'm in the best shape I've been in ever, just waiting a bit to round into racing shape in may and june.
                                Then next year, I'm not sure exactly what I'm going to do as I'm weighing my options.

                                Hope that answers your questions,
                                steve
                                http://www.ScienceofRunning.com

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X