Which of my hurdle times are better?

[400M]

I'm just kinda curious. I'm a sophomore in HS.
110-16.61 (39")
300-44.21 (36")

[Mansfield]

110

[tach44444]

neither

[400M]

neither
Good enough for my small D2 league anyway.

[boon322]

Good enough for my small D2 league anyway.

neither of your hurdle times are spectacular

i think you have more potential in the 300h... your 400 time is 53.8 and ur 300h time is 44.2... i think you could bring that down to at least a 42.0 with better form and such...

[400M]

neither of your hurdle times are spectacular

i think you have more potential in the 300h... your 400 time is 53.8 and ur 300h time is 44.2... i think you could bring that down to at least a 42.0 with better form and such...

Possibly. I've only run the 300IH twice... and the first time I got a hurdle knocked in my lane and had to practically stop. And I know that I was jumping vertical in the beginning of that 44.2 race.

[boon322]

last year i was running 58.0 in the 400m when i ran the 300h... i ran a 42.7, then i never got to do 300h since then and i do 400h, so now im a 55.6 guy and i run 57.8 in the 400h
so being that ur like 4 seconds faster than i was in the 400h you could probably be a 42 guy no problem if you just learned some better form and learned to attack the hurdle insteadda jump over it

[400M]

That could be my problem. I usually start off slow. Thanks for the advice.

[chinischilla]

your 100 time is what kills you

[one_more_hurdler]

lets think about this. the kid asked, "Which of my hurdle times are better?" thats all you need to tell him. not stuff like "neither" no need to be a jerk. and yes the 110 time is better.