Freshman runs 14:08( 3-mile) at Woodbridge

oldold runner wrote:

Michael Teran finished fourth in 14:08. I don't know if the course is a true 3.0 miles, but placing 4th in a big Invite like Woodbridge as a freshman is very impressive.

http://www.dyestatcal.com/gprofile.php?do=view_event&event_id=361&mgroup_id=44789&year=2014

Something isn't right.

This says he ran 14:37 there as a JUNIOR last year -

He is actually a senior.

...and he runs the 2 mile in 9:00.

Nice software bug providing those results. Apparently a 14:60 is faster than 15:00.

Flagpole wrote:

oldold runner wrote:

Michael Teran finished fourth in 14:08. I don't know if the course is a true 3.0 miles, but placing 4th in a big Invite like Woodbridge as a freshman is very impressive.

http://www.dyestatcal.com/gprofile.php?do=view_event&event_id=361&mgroup_id=44789&year=2014

Something isn't right.

This says he ran 14:37 there as a JUNIOR last year -

http://ca.milesplit.com/meets/150416/results/262306

I should have done a little bit of research before posting. He was 13th at in the 3200 at the Cali. state meet in 9:05.51.

He is listed as a Junior in those results.

yes, it is a full 3 miles. but it's also completely flat, and run at night in nice and cool conditions.

49 runners under 15 in 1 race - that's pretty impressive.

oldold runner wrote:

Michael Teran finished fourth in 14:08. I don't know if the course is a true 3.0 miles, but placing 4th in a big Invite like Woodbridge as a freshman is very impressive.

http://www.dyestatcal.com/gprofile.php?do=view_event&event_id=361&mgroup_id=44789&year=2014

I thought so too...

It got me to Google to find out he's a senior.

but Rocha & Tamagno are Juniors!!

Insanity!

I thought I read somewhere it was 2.92 miles.

princeton15 wrote:

yes, it is a full 3 miles. but it's also completely flat, and run at night in nice and cool conditions.

49 runners under 15 in 1 race - that's pretty impressive.

That is pretty much a reason to quit running for most. FFS, 49 under 15? You can be a stupidly talented runner giving everything (70 mi/wk etc) and come in 49th??!?!

What is the point?

Most people should just fing quit and dominate the local 5k scene on 25mi/wk effort.

LOL DUDE wrote:

I thought I read somewhere it was 2.92 miles.

You're thinking of Mt. SAC.

Although, if people are consistently getting 3.00 on their garmins, it's probably closer to 2.98 miles (not a significant difference) as garmins will tend to show more distance covered as it tries to tracks your movement (especially if you are running or jogging the course, rather than walking).

Regardless, lots of fast kids at one of the major invites of the year isn't too shocking... 15:00 for a flat/fast 3 miles is not THAT fast (probably like a 9:40 or 9:45 on the track)

Oh ok let's see here...

- Race was 2.5 miles.

- Kid is a senior, not a freshman.

- Race was downhill.

- It's Michelle, not Michael.

- The "cross country meet" was actually a football game.

- You weren't wearing pants when you posted this.

- I'm out of milk.

- My left nut smells funny.

- The invite was held in Detroit.

- I thought dystat shut down years ago.

faaaaaaaaaaaaa wrote:

Oh ok let's see here...

- Race was 2.5 miles.

- Kid is a senior, not a freshman.

- Race was downhill.

- It's Michelle, not Michael.

- The "cross country meet" was actually a football game.

- You weren't wearing pants when you posted this.

- I'm out of milk.

- My left nut smells funny.

- The invite was held in Detroit.

- I thought dystat shut down years ago.

NICE!!!!

Oh? wrote:

LOL DUDE wrote:

I thought I read somewhere it was 2.92 miles.

You're thinking of Mt. SAC.

Although, if people are consistently getting 3.00 on their garmins, it's probably closer to 2.98 miles (not a significant difference) as garmins will tend to show more distance covered as it tries to tracks your movement (especially if you are running or jogging the course, rather than walking).

Regardless, lots of fast kids at one of the major invites of the year isn't too shocking... 15:00 for a flat/fast 3 miles is not THAT fast (probably like a 9:40 or 9:45 on the track)

15 flat is not equivalent to 9:40-9:45. And in reality, over 60 kids broke 15 over several races. Even if this were cool night on a track the times don't seem correct. Has to be somewhat short.

Woodbridge is 3 miles

for what it's worth, i garmined it at exactly 3.0 miles. i doubt i took all the perfect tangents since i had to run around a few large groups of people running/walking the course, and from my understanding, the more twisty the course is, the less accurate the garmins may be; that said, i'd guess it's as close to 3 as any other course that claims to be 3 miles.

my guess: if you're in front and keep your eyes forward, and have a little knowledge of this brand new course, you have a shot at a 2.9 high course with a lot of grass, some of it soft; for most runners in the middle, you're probably running 3...

Nope, its as close to 3 miles as any other race in the country that says its 3 miles. This is a huge meet in California, the most competitive state, in the most competitive race at the meet, run with great conditions. Of course its going to look loaded and tons of kids are going to run super fast. I know multiple kids in that sub-15 crowd and its exactly in line with what I'd expect them to be able to do.

Freshman @ random high school wrote:

http://www.mapmyrun.com/routes/view/542945338

Woodbridge is 3 miles

Always get a chuckle when people claim the legitimacy of the length of a xc course by a GPS route marked out on a website. Classic.