Forums >Technical Support>1600m vs 1 mile
Hmm, I think I have selected both for this topic, but am receiving no emails.
Lou, (aka Mr. predawnrunner), MD, USA | Lou's Brews | lking@pobox.com
It appears Trent has been reading my mind instead of my typing!
- Joe
We are fragile creatures on collision with our judgment day.
The PR feature really works best if you don't use what the garmin says
This much is for sure!
Lou, I can special case the 1600m race so it won't be lumped into the miler. Also, I haven't forgotten about you. I just haven't the time to write back. eric
Lou,
I can special case the 1600m race so it won't be lumped into the miler. Also, I haven't forgotten about you. I just haven't the time to write back.
eric
eric,
I know you can't make everyone happy, but I would like to make a request to cancel Lou's request.... (sorry Lou). I like seeing the 1600s and the miles grouped together. To me they're the same frickin' race, and I really wouldn't want you separating them into separate piles for PRs and such. Just my 2c.
Joe
Options,Account, Forums
If it were up to me, I'd probably distinguish them -- that is, treat 1500, 1600, 1mi, 3000, 3200, and 2mi as six different races.
I'd even distinguish the 440(yd) from the 400m -- which is really a lemma of distinguishing mile from 1600.
It's a 5k. It hurt like hell...then I tried to pick it up. The end.
Why is it sideways?
If it were up to me, I'd probably distinguish them -- that is, treat 1500, 1600, 1mi, 3000, 3200, and 2mi as six different races. I'd even distinguish the 440(yd) from the 400m -- which is really a lemma of distinguishing mile from 1600.
Yeah, but your PR list is a freakin' mess!
If a race director offers a 440yard dash I hope that you steal their time machine so that they can't return back to the 1970s.
The process is the goal.
Men heap together the mistakes of their lives, and create a monster they call Destiny.
eric, I know you can't make everyone happy, but I would like to make a request to cancel Lou's request.... (sorry Lou). I like seeing the 1600s and the miles grouped together. To me they're the same frickin' race, and I really wouldn't want you separating them into separate piles for PRs and such. Just my 2c. Joe
I agree with this. In fact I think you should have to designate a race as a PR, not click a box to exclude it from PRs. Currently if I run a race at an oddball distance like 9.5 miles it shows up as a PR unless I specifically exclude it. That's just not how PRs work, at least in my mind.
I've been saying this for years though and at one point I was in the clear minority.
Runners run
Let's look at both sides, and how to satisfy everyone.
If Eric makes the change (and like AmoresPerros said, make 6 races out of those distances), I can be satisfied. But what about Joe? If this change is made, I think Joe and Mike can be satisfied as well. There's nothing stopping them from recording a 1600m race as 1 mile, or a 3200m race as 2 miles, if that's how they want it to be bucketed.
However, if Eric does not make the change, Joe and Mike are satisfied, but I don't see how I can be -- or anyone else who is as anal as me (and a lot of us runners are anal about statistics, aren't we?).
And, yes Jeff. Perry's PRs are a mess, which is part of the reason I said, "The PR feature really works best if you don't use what the garmin says".
There's nothing stopping them from recording a 1600m race as 1 mile, or a 3200m race as 2 miles, if that's how they want it to be bucketed.
No, this will not do for me. (Sorry for being hard headed...) I want to record a 1600m race as 1600m, and a mile as a mile. I'm not going to fudge the sacrosanct items of distance and time. But what I don't need is a 1600m PR that is 4:51 and a true mile PR that is 4:54. There is no value to me to having that -- because I know the 4:51 is really the PR, and all I want to see in that case is the 1600m PR of 4:51.
Now, if my fastest true mile were 4:52, then I would work around the problem by DQing my 4:51 1600m, making it PR ineligible.
Well, I understand the need to keep the races separate -- because they're different distances. I guess I don't understand why you'd want to bucket them together.
From my perspective, either they're the same (so record them the same), or they're different (record them differently and bucket them differently).
I hope and assume that one of my 1600m races will be faster than my mile. I could manually remove that from the PR, or (assuming a change is made) have two PRs. As my running club runs the 1600m a couple of times a year, I'd like to keep them separate from the 1 mile races.
But I expect we're not going to agree on this, and that we will both try to be happy with whatever Eric finally decides.
My head hurts
I agree with this. In fact I think you should have to designate a race as a PR, not click a box to exclude it from PRs. Currently if I run a race at an oddball distance like 9.5 miles it shows up as a PR unless I specifically exclude it. That's just not how PRs work, at least in my mind. I've been saying this for years though and at one point I was in the clear minority.
Yep to this. Is this a formal feature request? It annoys me a little bit to open my PR list and see a 5.92 mile PR (as I post this I opened my PR list and there the fuck is a 5.92 mile PR from a club race that I forgot to 'uncheck' the box!).
I'd like to second the request for making the 1600 / 1 mile being their own distinct race.
Anyone have ideas on how to differentiate a 3k and a 3k steeplechase? I just log my steeple as 3.1 miles since that seems to be distinct enough to have it show up in my PR list, but it's not ideal.
I'll be redoing the PR page as part of the log revamp. It'll special case 1600m. It'll also take terrain type into consideration so you can have PRs for road and off road.