track and field question; running 4-6

[depechemodefan]

Sunday some guy called, asking what running a 4-6 or a 4-2 means. He said it was a track and field question. I found something, in google, about running a 4-8 meaning you can run a 4 mile and a 8 mile. But then he asked what does it mean if you run a 4.2. I said I can type up his question and we can get back to him. Then he said, "maybe I should call one of the colleges and ask the sports department." I say ok. Then he asks, "don't you need my information?" I ask why and he says, "so you can call me back with the answer." I said, " I thought you were going to call a college?" He says, "I want you to call me back."

So anyway, any one familiar with track and field or running? was does a 4-6 or a 4-2 mean? I submitted his question but the person who assigns questions decides to give to me...because I worked on it. Since I didn't find an answer in the first place (that satisfied the patron), I don't see how I'm going to find the answer this time. Looking at some track and field books, I don't see the answer, or really were to look, since I'm not familiar with running. And I think the patron must be confusing things.

[Greenday]

He's talking about the 40 yard dash, which isn't really a track and field thing. Track and field uses meters. Only people who actually make use of the 40 yard dash is football players. A 4.2 (4-2) is really damn good. A 4.6 isn't too bad.

[lordrel]

Maybe talking about the 40 yard dash? It's often used for measuring "football speed".

[Jester]

Running a 4.2 or a 4.6 means you run the 40 yard dash in 4.2 seconds or 4.6 seconds. Generally speaking, a good football player can run the 40 in under 4.5.

As has been pointed out, it has nothing to do with track and field. As has also been pointed out, it is used to measure football speed. What was not pointed out is that it is far too often used to project how a football player will be, and it is often wrong. Jerry Rice never turned in that fast a 40, and it is generally agreed that he was the best wide receiver the game has ever seen. On the flip side, there have been many, many fast football players that turned in killer 40 times that just sucked on the field. A great example of the latter is former Raiders wide receiver James Jett. True to his last name, Jett was blindingly fast. Unfortunately, he had hands of stone, and couldn't catch a cold.

Next sports question?

[depechemodefan]

Thanks Greenday, lordrel, Jester. I'm gong to call him in a while and hopefully he doesn't argue with me. Because people will argue with you if they think you don't understand their question. Because God knows this guy will think he is right about it being track and field. *sigh*

But at least I spoke with experts so he can't say I didn't do my job.

[Jester]

I don't know that I am an expert, but I am a sports fan, and actually ran track and cross country in high school.

There is no track event I know of that you could say you are "running a four two" or "running a four six." In a relay you could run two or four, meaning you are the second or fourth runner in the relay. You could run a 4x200 relay (spoken as "four by two hundred relay," where four runners each run 200 meters successively, handing off a baton from one to the other at the end of each 200 meters), which I suppose someone could call a "four by two," but that is the only track event I could think of that could conceivably come close.

But when you speak of someone "running a four two or a four six," it is virtually a lock that they are talking about someone's time in the forty yard dash. The shortest sprint in almost every track event is the 100 meter dash.

Myself, I was neither a sprinter nor a distance runner...I ran the in between events, the 400 meter and the 800 meter. And I did so rather badly, at that.

[Greenday]

Running a 4.2 or a 4.6 means you run the 40 yard dash in 4.2 seconds or 4.6 seconds. Generally speaking, a good football player can run the 40 in under 4.5.

As has been pointed out, it has nothing to do with track and field. As has also been pointed out, it is used to measure football speed. What was not pointed out is that it is far too often used to project how a football player will be, and it is often wrong. Jerry Rice never turned in that fast a 40, and it is generally agreed that he was the best wide receiver the game has ever seen. On the flip side, there have been many, many fast football players that turned in killer 40 times that just sucked on the field. A great example of the latter is former Raiders wide receiver James Jett. True to his last name, Jett was blindingly fast. Unfortunately, he had hands of stone, and couldn't catch a cold.

Next sports question?

Raiders fans WOULD know a lot about the lack of correlation between a player's 40 speed and their potential...

[Jester]

Thank you for reminding me how bad my team is due in large part to its owner's insistence on getting players with certain skills for a certain style of offense, whether or not those players can actually play, and whether or not that style of offense is actually effective with the players on the field that year.

[Greenday]

Thank you for reminding me how bad my team is due in large part to its owner's insistence on getting players with certain skills for a certain style of offense, whether or not those players can actually play, and whether or not that style of offense is actually effective with the players on the field that year.

No problem. I may not like Oakland, but even I can't wait until Davis is gone.

[depechemodefan]

I havn't called him today.

He called Sun. and it is 3 days latter that the question got assigned. I don't know if the person who assigned me the question worked on it first then gave up and gave it to me or it was just busy. But it hasn't been busy so who knows why it took so long to be assigned.

And when it comes to sports, I am no expert. I didn't even know the Astros went to the World Series until like game 5 or something.

[Jester]

If you ever have sports questions, I am not a bad person to ask. ESPN is one of my favorite TV channels. I love football (the NFL is my area of expertise knowledge-wise), and am very fond of basketball, baseball, and hockey, and even watch some Olympic stuff. I don't care for NASCAR, but because I watch ESPN, I often know stuff about it.

And it is one of the subjects I don't mind at all talking about or being asked about. For some reason, my brain seems to retain a lot of sports trivia and information.

[depechemodefan]

I called the guy this morning. I told him it was a football question, not track and field and he apologized. He accepted my answer and all is well. Thank goodness he didn't start up with "but what about..." or "but I heard...."

[Jester]

Don't worry. He'll call back with another inane question, such as "What is the zone blitz in hockey?" (The zone blitz is a defensive scheme in football.) Or, "What does it mean when they do a pick and roll in hockey?" (The pick and roll is an offensive play in basketball.)

[Broomjockey]

Don't worry. He'll call back with another inane question, such as "What is the zone blitz in hockey?" (The zone blitz is a defensive scheme in football.) Or, "What does it mean when they do a pick and roll in hockey?" (The pick and roll is an offensive play in basketball.)

Or "what's a triple-raise takeout in hockey?" (It's a shot in Curling, but at least they're both played on ice )

[wolfie]

Or "What brand of ball will the Leafs be using during the Stanley Cup Finals?" (It's a running joke around Toronto that the Maple Leafs play so poorly that they'll have been eliminated early in the playoffs, so they'll be out on the golf course while other teams are still playing hockey)