best watch for track running image
Q. i was watching the track events in the olympics & found that the men run 1600 meters while the women run 1500...they both run the 100, 200, 400, 800, & marathon equally, so why would they run a different mile? i know it's only 100 meter difference but it's not like the women runners can't go another 100 if they trained for it right? why aren't they allowed to run the full mile?
Answer
It's not, there must be a misprint or a misread... The 1500 has been the main "mile" in track for generations.
The real mile, 1760 yards, boils down to 1609 meters which would make it more sensible to run the 1600 and call it the metric mile, but for some reason they chose 1500 long ago and that's the way it is. Probably because it avoids having to start on the 1st turn, or using a staggered start, since there's more than 8 people in the race usually a turn start would be crowded. But that's a minor issue.
Women are allowed to run the mile and have done so for generations. Women run the real mile, the 1609 meter mile, about as often as men do, which in fact is not very often at all. It's almost always the 1500 that gets run, the mile is usually run by world-class athletes only at a few special invitationals, like the Wanamaker Mile at the indoor Millrose Games, the Dream Mile at the Bislett Games in Sweden (which offers a bonus for world records) and a few other European IAAF invitationals. That's all the miling that gets done anymore.
<another reason the 1600 makes more sense is it continues the binary pattern of running 100, 200, 400, 800...
Mike's point about record history in the 1500 is true but the standard mile has an even longer history and because of the 4-minute "barrier" much more famous... Since the 1600 is only 9 meters short of a mile it's much easier to compare to mile times than the 1500 is, less margin of error in deciding what it would have been in a mile>
It's not, there must be a misprint or a misread... The 1500 has been the main "mile" in track for generations.
The real mile, 1760 yards, boils down to 1609 meters which would make it more sensible to run the 1600 and call it the metric mile, but for some reason they chose 1500 long ago and that's the way it is. Probably because it avoids having to start on the 1st turn, or using a staggered start, since there's more than 8 people in the race usually a turn start would be crowded. But that's a minor issue.
Women are allowed to run the mile and have done so for generations. Women run the real mile, the 1609 meter mile, about as often as men do, which in fact is not very often at all. It's almost always the 1500 that gets run, the mile is usually run by world-class athletes only at a few special invitationals, like the Wanamaker Mile at the indoor Millrose Games, the Dream Mile at the Bislett Games in Sweden (which offers a bonus for world records) and a few other European IAAF invitationals. That's all the miling that gets done anymore.
<another reason the 1600 makes more sense is it continues the binary pattern of running 100, 200, 400, 800...
Mike's point about record history in the 1500 is true but the standard mile has an even longer history and because of the 4-minute "barrier" much more famous... Since the 1600 is only 9 meters short of a mile it's much easier to compare to mile times than the 1500 is, less margin of error in deciding what it would have been in a mile>
Looking for a watch that tracks miles run and calories burned?
lone_star_
I am training for my third 1/2 marathon and looking for a wear on my runs. I currently use RunKeeper to track my mileage. I like it because I can see the history of my runs, miles, calories burned and even the route I ran. So I am looking for something that I can sync and/or download to see my runs on a computer.
Also, I do cardio such as Zumba and Spinning. So I am hoping this watch will also be able to help me track calories burned.
Any recommendations?
Thanks!
Answer
nike
nike
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
No comments:
Post a Comment