Measuring running in miles or kilometres?

Everyone knows the answer to the miles vs kilometres question is clearly 'kilometres'. But why is there still a 50-50 split of runners that choose one or the other?

There is nothing worse than sitting down to watch a 'How to run a faster 5k' video on youtube only to hear the person start talking in what your splits should be for each mile!

A mile is 1760 yards. Originally defined as the left foot of a Roman soldier hitting the ground 1,000 times when they marched.

So even though the majority of running races are measured in metres and kilometres from 100m up to 10K, why are miles still a thing?

Three reasons why kilometres are better:

• The majority of running races can be split nicely into kilometres. Obviously 5K and 10K. But even 5mile races can be split into 8km (+40m) and a 10mile is 16km (+80m). Half marathons are close to 21km (+100m) and a full marathon 42km (+200m). So when calculating splits and working out pace it easier to do.
• A kilometre is shorter than a mile. So when breaking down a race into splits you can get more feedback and better analysis if you break it down into smaller chunks.
• When doing shorter interval sessions or pyramid sessions on a track - the track is split into 100m sections. The measurement of a yard on running tracks is consigned to the history books. Even 'imperial' USA changed in 1979 from a 440 yard track to 400 metres. The 100 yd race was last used in the Olympics in 1904 as part of the decathlon.

So I hope everyone can agree - let's forget about splitting running times or measuring running pace in miles.

...the only exception to this is obviously golf, where everything has to be in yards - or for putting inches. No logic. Just because. ;)