Tweet
There's a lot of great facilities out there with poor track surfaces, and vice versa. As a high jumper i thought Arkansas had a great facility but poor surface to jump on. What other Indoor facilities have the same problem. Ex. Nebraska-Great track/ok facility.
-
-
Re: Track Vs. Facility
Millrose has one of the worst jumping facilities ever. Heard the track is pretty nice though. -
Re: Track Vs. Facility
The track at Milrose may be Mondo, but it's 11 laps to the mile and slow, slow, slow.Comment
-
Re: Track Vs. Facility
I've always thought that was pretty ludicrous to have a 133m track. That is completely unreasonable.Comment
-
Re: Track Vs. Facility
The Millrose track is a joke and a relic from a bygone era. If it weren't for the tradition involved in that meet, no elite runner would compete there.Comment
-
Re: Track Vs. Facility
Hey, let's not bad mouth old 11- or 10-lap to the mile indoor tracks. Some pretty fast times were run on them. I don't think Coghlan was complaining too much.
They may not have been as fast as today's super 200 ovals, but they fit in smaller arenas and allowed for some great racing, which is what it's all about. The new tracks are a bit dull, if you ask me.Comment
-
Re: Track Vs. Facility
2&3/4 laps for a 400! This track sucks! They need to move this meet to the Armory!Comment
-
Re: Track Vs. Facility
platinum,let me differ:
Those old 11 laps to the mile tracks are way cool, and were the norm for many many years, when Indorr Track was a million more times popular than today... plus they were wood, creating noise from the pounding of the legs. Nothing like it for intimacy. You were right on top of the action. Greatest show on Earth.Comment
-
Re: Track Vs. Facility
well glad I could chgange the topic. As someone who has competed there twice, I can say the sound of the pounding boards was always really cool, as well as the sight of the garden from the infield. almost negated how bad the surface was for high jumpers. Would never pass up a chance to jump there. Same goes for Penn, where the astroturf was dreadful, but the crowd was overwhelming.Comment
-
Re: Track Vs. Facility
>Hey, let's not bad mouth old 11- or 10-lap to the mile indoor tracks. Some
>pretty fast times were run on them. I don't think Coghlan was complaining too
>much.
Couglan trained every day on one of those tracks - outdoors no less! It doesn't mean those tracks weren't as bad as they were.Comment
-
Re: Track Vs. Facility
>>Hey, let's not bad mouth old 11- or 10-lap to the mile indoor tracks.
>Some
>pretty fast times were run on them. I don't think Coghlan was
>complaining too
>much.
Couglan trained every day on one of those tracks -
>outdoors no less! It doesn't mean those tracks weren't as bad as they were.
They may have been bad, but they were FUN to run on !Comment
-
Re: Track Vs. Facility
<<They may have been bad, but they were FUN to run on !
Isn't that the truth?Comment
Comment