Re: NEW U.S. FROSH BOY RECORD 1600 meters
I agree...
When you look at it in terms of laps, the 1600 and the mile are 4 laps around the track (of course, the mile on a 440y track). Just like the 200m and 220y are both half-lap races. So, why is some many people insisting that the race be 4 and 9/400 laps around the track. Tradition back in the day was to have a race of 4 laps -- just happened to be a mile. Today, the 4 laps happen to be 1600m instead. What's the big deal?
Now, the 1500. OK, so it's been the internationally recognized distance for years and years and years, while the mile was once an American staple. Perhaps we should have and still should switch to the 1500 at the high school level.
Here's the problem... for the casual observer of track and field who sees a runner run 3:40 or so in the 1500, he's probably going to ask "Wow, that's fast. Is 1500m close to a mile?" and we'll respond, "No, but it's the international equivelent to the mile of yesteryear. However, if that same runner were to run a mile instead, his time would translate to something around 3:55 or so." The casual observer then replies "Huh???".
No, fastforward... the causal observer of track and field sees a runner run 1600m in about 3:55 or so. He says, "Wow, that's fast. Is 1600m close to a mile?" and we'll respond, "Yes, it just a few meters short". The casual observer than replies "WOW, THAT"S REALLY FAST"
I agree...
When you look at it in terms of laps, the 1600 and the mile are 4 laps around the track (of course, the mile on a 440y track). Just like the 200m and 220y are both half-lap races. So, why is some many people insisting that the race be 4 and 9/400 laps around the track. Tradition back in the day was to have a race of 4 laps -- just happened to be a mile. Today, the 4 laps happen to be 1600m instead. What's the big deal?
Now, the 1500. OK, so it's been the internationally recognized distance for years and years and years, while the mile was once an American staple. Perhaps we should have and still should switch to the 1500 at the high school level.
Here's the problem... for the casual observer of track and field who sees a runner run 3:40 or so in the 1500, he's probably going to ask "Wow, that's fast. Is 1500m close to a mile?" and we'll respond, "No, but it's the international equivelent to the mile of yesteryear. However, if that same runner were to run a mile instead, his time would translate to something around 3:55 or so." The casual observer then replies "Huh???".
No, fastforward... the causal observer of track and field sees a runner run 1600m in about 3:55 or so. He says, "Wow, that's fast. Is 1600m close to a mile?" and we'll respond, "Yes, it just a few meters short". The casual observer than replies "WOW, THAT"S REALLY FAST"
Comment