<p>Hey longuylind, what’s your 5k time?</p>
<p>uhh not fast at all, i was really bad in xc freshman year and had achilles tendonitis this year…</p>
<p>and for those of you who think 4:30 is fast, i emailed the VA Tech coach since that’s where i want to go and here are the WALKON standards there</p>
<p>sub 4:21
1:55 800
9:25 3200
15:50 5k XC.</p>
<p>Yeah that sounds right. I heard you can’t even walk on at UCLA without at 1:52. That XC standard is the easiest, IMO.
Also, you’re a sophomore? Nice. Our team also had a frosh last year run 4:30.1, and another at 4:34.</p>
<p>4:30 places you outside the top 6 in my school’s conference.</p>
<p>Yeah, those standards aren’t ridiculous, they aren’t even close to the best track college.</p>
<p>and xc standard is easy because they have 15 spots for XC</p>
<p>Wow, 15 spots? That’s several more than most schools.
Jersey13, I didn’t know you run. Are you an 800/1600 guy, or a 1600/3200 guy?</p>
<p>Im the slowest sophmore in the distance team at 5:45 ish…
I have to run with the freshman</p>
<p>Our team is no cut</p>
<p>Best time is a 4:29.9 and yes I have that time memorized because it was the best day EVA!!! Trust me people this time would get me like last at state for track, our qualifying times are 4:17</p>
<p>God, many CCer’s here are so athletic. This really supports Lewis Terman’s conclusion of his experiment with the gifted group.</p>
<p>
I’m actually a mid distance runner and occasional sprinter.</p>
<p>200/400/800 I suppose? I know a kid like that. Runs like 22.9/49.9/1:50 (4:16; he ran it twice). That was last year though, and he was a sophomore. 15:40~ in XC. Total freakshow.</p>
<p>This makes me sad…I think I’d be in the 9+ and I know a bunch of people slower than me…
I’m just hoping it’s because everyone here is just in that amazing group of people (that I “hate”/am jealous of) who are super-athletic and smart and just good at everything.</p>
<p>But other than that, nearly everyone at my school thinks running a mile is nothing since the least we ever run these days is a 1.5 and if we choose to run (not swim), we have to run a 10k. And…this is all freshmen, juniors, and seniors without medical excuses. And sophomores do a biathlon, but they’re not important. =P</p>
<p>…I feel like I need to go running now.</p>
<p>Uhh, I feel sorta fat after seeing this.</p>
<p>My best was 9:45. Guess I’m not that athletic, haha.</p>
<p>Lol, I’d recommend that you trust these as much as you trust the chance threads - some people really are awesome and the rest are just awesome liars. [noparse];)[/noparse]</p>
<p>
That sounds impossible, especially the 1:50 800 as a sophomore. You must be fudging the numbers or he’s one of the top in the country. If you know him personally, can you tell me his name? I would probably recognize it. I’m aware of a runner who has slightly faster stats than that and he’s a senior who’s the fastest 800 runner in the country at 1:50. A sophomore with those stats would break country and state records across.</p>
<p>^ Yeah, I was gonna say, our fastest 800 kid is ethopian, a senior, and runs a 1:53. I’m just not seeing a sophomore doing that. I’m not that familiar with the 200m but 22.9 seems a little fast too…</p>
<p>Looks like we’re gonna get a normal distribution. Bell curve forming.</p>
<p>However, this is obviously a flawed study bc there are nonresponse biases. I mean people who run really slowly will not want to post their times.</p>
<p>9:45 is NOT bad (to me, anyway). ■■■■■. My times are so ****ty compared to all of these.</p>
<p>He is 4th best in the history of the US for sophomores. He was 2nd at nike outdoor nationals last year, and was state champ. And he’s in my conference. The 200m is just an estimate, but I know it is 23.0 or just under.</p>
<p>He is the Kaiser.</p>
<p>Derivate is right. Also, there are people with 2400 SATs here. Why is it less credible that there are good students/top athlete here?</p>
<p>I wonder what the curve ACTUALLY looks like here. Probably much much lower.</p>