Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

3:35.99 for Josh Kerr

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
    Master403
    Senior Member

  • Master403
    replied
    Originally posted by Tuariki View Post
    Oh no Master. I must raise the flag of nationalism again.

    Point 1. NZ is ahead at each ranking, that is, our first is faster than their first, as is our 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th.

    Point 2. For this decade I think Willis is faster than anything the Scots have come up with.

    Point 3. Kerr is a great talent and I would celebrate him taking Scotland ahead of Willis if it so comes to pass
    You are correct on all counts. I phrased everything carefully to give deserved credit to Scotland, without pointing out Kiwi superiority, just using them as a yardstick.

    In other words, I avoided letting my national bias intrude. The maternal side of my family tree goes back well into the 1800s in NZL, not as far as yours, but a ways back. I visited the country 3 years before you were born. In 1962 my grandfather sent me a copy of Run to the Top, which I have used for training for over 50 years.

    I noted, but did not post, that one of my heroes, Peter Snell, has fallen to 15th on the NZL list. Who is 15th on Scotland's?

    If I ever get down there to hike the Milford Track, maybe we can meet on our shared birthday.

    Leave a comment:

  • bruce3404
    Senior Member

  • bruce3404
    replied
    Originally posted by Tuariki View Post
    I think what you meant to say was that:

    The translation is more like 3:53.27, not 3:52

    Leave a comment:

  • Tuariki
    Senior Member

  • Tuariki
    replied
    I think what you meant to say was that:

    The translation is more like 3:53.27, not 3:52

    Leave a comment:

  • bruce3404
    Senior Member

  • bruce3404
    replied
    I don't know if I started this, but when I converted Kerr's 3:35.99 1500 using the Big Gold Book, I extrapolated it to a 3:52 mile(the book only lists 3:35.7 and 3:36.2). I will confess to mistakenly using the 1600 mark vs the mile mark, so the real time would be right around 3:53. Not sure how everything got turned upside down on this post.

    Leave a comment:

  • Alan Shank
    Senior Member

  • Alan Shank
    replied
    Good grief! Just take 215.99 x 1.08 = 232.91.
    Your first post on this seemed to be mixing apples (1500) time with oranges (Mile).
    "The translation is more like 3:35.5, not 3:52."
    Cheers,
    Alan Shank
    Woodland, CA, USA

    Leave a comment:

  • 26mi235
    Senior Member

  • 26mi235
    replied
    3:42.22 for 1500m is <=> 4:00.00 for a mile.

    3:35.99 is 6.23 sec below 3:42.22 so 1.08 times 6.23 and subtract it from 4:00, So 6.73 seconds less than 4:00 is 3:53.27 is the equivalent of 3:35.99. Which part do you want another comment on to clear up uncertainty?

    Leave a comment:

  • Tuariki
    Senior Member

  • Tuariki
    replied
    Originally posted by 26mi235 View Post
    3:42.22 <=> 4:00.00; 3:35.99 is 6.23 sec below the equivalent, so take 1.08 times 6.23 and subtract it from 4:00, SO 6.73 seconds less than 4:00 is 3:53.27 is the equivalent of 3:35.99 (sorry that when I did the approximate calculation in my head I was off by a quarter second).
    Sorry, but I am more confused than ever.

    The difference between 3:35.5 and 3:52 is 16.5 seconds.
    So how can a 3:52 be more like 3:35.5?

    Leave a comment:

  • 26mi235
    Senior Member

  • 26mi235
    replied
    3:42.22 <=> 4:00.00; 3:35.99 is 6.23 sec below the equivalent, so take 1.08 times 6.23 and subtract it from 4:00, SO 6.73 seconds less than 4:00 is 3:53.27 is the equivalent of 3:35.99 (sorry that when I did the approximate calculation in my head I was off by a quarter second).

    Leave a comment:

  • Tuariki
    Senior Member

  • Tuariki
    replied
    Originally posted by 26mi235 View Post
    The translation is more like 3:35.5, not 3:52.
    Huh ?? You got me lost on the logic of this one

    Leave a comment:

  • Tuariki
    Senior Member

  • Tuariki
    replied
    Originally posted by Master403 View Post
    Interesting list.
    When I think of small countries and 1500/mile, New Zealand (4.8 million) comes to mind.
    Both now have six sub-3:36, with the Kiwis having the edge head-to-head all-time, but the Scots ahead for this decade
    Oh no Master. I must raise the flag of nationalism again.

    Point 1. NZ is ahead at each ranking, that is, our first is faster than their first, as is our 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th.

    Point 2. For this decade I think Willis is faster than anything the Scots have come up with.

    Point 3. Kerr is a great talent and I would celebrate him taking Scotland ahead of Willis if it so comes to pass

    Leave a comment:

  • 26mi235
    Senior Member

  • 26mi235
    replied
    The translation is more like 3:35.5, not 3:52. Also, Tim Hacker had a European 3:35 in his extended season (senior year, probably, but not sure; his son is a red-shirt freshman at Wisconsin this year, having turned down an offer from Stanford).

    Leave a comment:

  • bruce3404
    Senior Member

  • bruce3404
    replied
    Originally posted by 26mi235 View Post
    Not a surprise after taking down 3:52.01i guy from Oregon.
    Though, in all fairness, Ches had already run a winning 5000 the day before along with the 1500 heat. And I appreciated Kerr mentioning that in his post race interview. I doubt if Ches will run the 1500 at NCAAs (and if he did it would probably be part of a triple), but I'd love to see those two go head to head somewhere like Monaco. Also, Kerr's time translates to a 3:52 mile, so I'd say both he and Ches are equals.

    Leave a comment:

  • bruce3404
    Senior Member

  • bruce3404
    replied
    Get him in a rabbited race later this summer and he should shatter the NCAA mark.

    Leave a comment:

  • Master403
    Senior Member

  • Master403
    replied
    Originally posted by gh View Post
    SAC indeed in Torrance, but Kerr's mark was at the Clay Invitational, which was in Azusa
    Thank you. There is so much great early season track, I'm having trouble keeping up.

    My impression is that we are coming off one of the best indoor seasons ever, and are seeing some of the best early outdoor season marks ever. I wonder if these early marks are precursors of even greater performances at Nationals, Worlds, and Diamond League, or if the real stars of 2017 are building a base and are yet to emerge.

    Leave a comment:

  • gh
    Administrator

  • gh
    replied
    SAC indeed in Torrance, but Kerr's mark was at the Clay Invitational, which was in Azusa

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X