When will people figure it out about NCAA's?

BUMP

you're right

Yeah, Colorado follows the fundamental XC strategy. Even splitting. My coaches have told me to go out easier and try to pick up time later since I was a freshman in high school.

Why go out in 4:25 for the first mile, then run 6:00 minute pace towards the end like Solinsky, well obviously he had a horrible race, but I love what Colorado does, they must LOVE that no one else is smart enough to follow their lead and win races. I know people will argue that they train at altitude and that means they must go out slower, but altitude or not it is smart to be the person rolling past people at the end instead of the guy getting passed left and right. Just my thoughts. Look at the end of the race, the Buffs were flying into the finish.

Joe Newton, a HS coach who knows a thing ot two about cross-country, used to hold his team at the line for a count of five after the gun at the state meet, to keep them out of the sprinting mentality of the first mile. Now THAT is commitment to a strategy!

Positive split for Colorado from 5K to 10K was less than 5 seconds average, best in the field. They won the race.

Yet this idea that in cross country you have to go out like a manaic the first mile and hang on for dear life persists. "It's too hard to pass people in cross country." Harder than on a track? No way.

XCTC wrote:

Joe Newton, a HS coach who knows a thing ot two about cross-country, used to hold his team at the line for a count of five after the gun at the state meet, to keep them out of the sprinting mentality of the first mile. Now THAT is commitment to a strategy!

wouldn't that make you want to sprint more to catch up with the leaders if indeed you have that mentality in the first place? just asking

well my coach told our team to take the lead at our regional meet and we finished 9th out of 13 teams. We did, however, have 15 points at the 400 mark. He wanted us to "send a message" to the other teams. Yeah, it worked out beautifully.

brc1355 wrote:

He wanted us to "send a message" to the other teams. Yeah, it worked out beautifully.

the message being "we're poorly coached ..."

I remember my National meet in '97. Our coach was adamant about the fact we had to get out hard because the course was tight after the first mile. There would not be much room to move. So just as he wanted us to do, I was out in the top 15 at a 1/4 mile. For the next 4.25 miles, it did not seem as if any of the 110 runners that past me had any problem whatsoever moving by me!

I remember in high school my coach always saying how you have to get in front of people before going into the trails on the course or something like that. I never did it. I can't tell you how many races I won going out with or behind my closest competition and then making a move later in the race - just hanging around the first mile or so. Actually, I could tell you, but don't want to be that much of a dork.

Either way...my worst experiences always came when I went out harder than I should have and had nothing to do at the end.

I think the idea is that in XC it's more difficult to accelerate than on a track and so it is harder to pass lots of people. Also, if you have 100 people going out in 4:20, and you hang back in 4:50 it becomes difficult to pass a wall of people. You expend energy navigating through runners falling back. You end up running too many extra steps getting around people and less time running the tangents.

I've always been a fan of hanging back and picking people off toward the end. I can remember at the Indiana State XC meet back in '95, 300 people on the line, I was near the back of the pack through the first mile, finished 12th. Colorado apparently knows how to race well over 10k.

Alan

Hey I ran that meet (you beat me)... who did you run for?

"Joe Newton, a HS coach who knows a thing ot two about cross-country, used to hold his team at the line for a count of five after the gun at the state meet, to keep them out of the sprinting mentality of the first mile. Now THAT is commitment to a strategy!"

---------------

I see the point, however, it seems like overkill...who wants to give up 5 seconds right off the bat? One should be able to train themselves to go out at a more reasonable pace.

This does bring to mind an interesting thing about CC. Why do most folks run absolutely mad at the start? You don't see that on the track. Probably to get position due to all the runners I presume?

When I was a freshman in high school, I thought everyone at our state meet went all out at the start. By the time I was a senior, I figured out that the leaders were going out at a decent pace for them and everyone else was stupidly trying to match it.

About Newton/York: to get the full explanation, read his XC book, but the tactic was centered around the nature of the Illinois state course, which had a hairpin turn about 200m into it. Everyone would sprint to get to it, but there would be a "logjam" nonetheless. By waiting five seconds and pacing properly, apparently his team would catch teh back of the pack just as they turned the corner, and then went on to win easily (they had lost the year before, due to getting out too fast).

sometimes going out hard and hanging on is a good strategy, though. For example Henry Rono in '76 or Boaz in '02

Though those are great examples of someone going out extremely fast and hanging on to win. Not sure if strategy was a big priority in those races, you can get away with that when you are that much better than the field, those guys weren't going to get beat.