KYTrackXC.com

Jonathan's Middle School Past Best post got me looking through previous 1600m standings. The girls' progression for the event over the past 5 years is pretty cool. There is still time this season for these numbers to grow.

2000 sub 5:10 = 3 / sub 5:20 = 12

2001 sub 5:10 = 1 / sub 5:20 = 10

2002 sub 5:10 = 0 / sub 5:20 = 11

2003 sub 5:10 = 5 / sub 5:20 = 13

2004 sub 5:10 = 5 / sub 5:20 = 8

2005 sub 5:10 = 1 / sub 5:20 = 9

2006 sub 5:10 = 2 / sub 5:20 = 8

2007 sub 5:10 = 3 / sub 5:20 = 5

2008 sub 5:10 = 4 / sub 5:20 = 9

2009 sub 5:10 = 1 / sub 5:20 = 11

2010 sub 5:10 = 5 / sub 5:20 = 16

2011 sub 5:10 = 4 / sub 5:20 = 19

2012 sub 5:10 = 6 / sub 5:20 = 25

Good work! What's always interesting with something like this is to attribute "cause" to the results, and break things down a bit more. I know that BC was addressing the girls 1600 from Eastern Relays and he suggested some reasons why times were so much faster at that meet, and some of that certainly applies here. One factor that seems to be either indirectly addressed or not at all is the role of indoor. I'd have to look at results, but my basic impression is that there are more girls looking seriously at their indoor performance in the distance events. To some extent, I also think that it's helped to have standards floating around - e.g. like the DM qualifying mark. I actually don't believe the weather has made a significant difference, at least not with our program, but maybe at the margin.

@jscott

Interesting. Perhaps we're asking the wrong question. Maybe the question should be why we had such a dip in depth from 2004-2009. Notice that the top-end quality didn't suffer as much as the depth of times. Interestingly, the resurgence in depth coincided with the arrival of Emma Brink in 2009. So does this give credence to the notion that one person running national-class times causes everybody else to step up their game?

I also find this interesting: Along the same lines as one great athlete pushing everyone else, could that also hold true for events like the "Dream Mile". Could an emphasis type event like the "Dream Mile" push individuals to put more focus on that and hence we are getting faster times. I think it would also be interesting to see if there is any relationship with this progression and cross-country times during the same years. In addition, it would be cool to look at other distances during these years and see if we are getting the same progression in the 800 and 3200 also.

@mschardein

We are all avoiding the point that needs to be identified. These numbers correspond with the development of KYTRACKXC.com as a focal point for all information and statistics in the state. As soon as the site gained the power to share every result in the entire state, rankings became a daily review and information that was nearly impossible to find previously, was now at the tips of your fingers.

While Milesplit may be the overarching theme in my mind, the rest of the points make sense as well, and together has synthesized to create the environment for running that we are experiencing right now. High quality events, more readily available education, forums to discuss issues, and top end athletes have all contributed in noticeable ways as well. We have been lucky to find the spike in interest at this point in time and I only hope that we can sustain the boom that is occurring at this point.

@steeplecoach: I agree with what you are saying. So I wonder does this answer the age old questions about Kentucky and distance running and do athletes train to their competition. I would say yes, we are just as talented as other states and yes it seems once the information was there athletes got faster. I would even say for me as a coach having the information and times for other runners allows me to know what goal paces to work towards throughout a season. With the hard work the web-site puts in with projected state qualifying times it is easy to see what an individual has to do get to state.

Something is a little strange with the girls 1600m/mile stats. I think it has to do with not all the Dream Mile results being posted, yet. Some of the girls reflect the new times in the 1600 conversion, while others reflect the new times in the Mile conversion. In any case, I was able to find the following update to the 2012 numbers:

2012 sub 5:10 = 12 / sub 5:20 = 25

That is a pretty big jump in sub 5:10's. I was expecting 2 or 3 new ones after the DM, but not 6.

Many good points made here. I believe for each athlete it is one or more of these things. Some athletes may be motivated simply by checking stats on mile split, while others are benefiting from a great indoor season. And we cannot argue with the, "if she can do it, so can I" attitude. Maybe it is a numbers thing, where the sport is becoming more popular and more kids are participating.

In addition to checking other events (800m and 3200m), it would be interesting to see if other states were also experiencing an upward trend in performances. Seems the college and US pro scene have been on the rise the past few years.

Girls 3200 meters
Year = sub 11:20 / sub 11:40
============================
2000 = 1 / 8
2001 = 1 / 2
2002 = 2 / 6
2003 = 6 / 8
2004 = 3 / 5
2005 = 2 / 3
2006 = 2 / 7
2007 = 2 / 5
2008 = 4 / 7
2009 = 3 / 14
2010 = 9 / 17
2011 = 6 / 16
2012 = 6 / 18

Girls 800 meters
Year = sub 2:20 / sub 2:24
==========================
2000 = 5 / 15
2001 = 2 / 13
2002 = 1 / 13
2003 = 7 / 10
2004 = 4 / 11
2005 = 4 / 15
2006 = 4 / 17
2007 = 2 / 16
2008 = 4 / 14
2009 = 5 / 16
2010 = 7 / 17
2011 = 2 / 15
2012 = 4 / 18

@jscott

Interesting that we see progression in the 1600 and 3200 but in the 800. Ideas?

It's probably just because the girls coaches aren't as good as the guys coaches.

@CoachMark

The 800 is a different type of event than the 1600 or 3200. It's much more speed oriented, and you can be good at it with natural speed combined with a little endurance training. The 1600/3200 require more endurance training, and if this is the component in which we have been advancing, then it would have less of an effect on the 800 than the longer races. At least that's one idea.

If you want to know whether "we" are progressing in an event, then you might also want to consider the distribution of top performances across schools. I don't know what you'll find, but if the number of top kids remains the same yet more schools are contributing to that group, then that would suggest some progression in a different sense.