Colorado HS XC State Champs -- was anyone there?

The course is tough. There is a huge hill on the second mile.

The elevation profile is below:

http://www.cmstampede.com/course-map

gilded age wrote:

The course is tough. There is a huge hill on the second mile.

The elevation profile is below:

http://www.cmstampede.com/course-map

Thanks, gilded age. Damn, that's a rough place to stick a hill that gains about 100'in about a quarter of a mile!

The data at the bottom has to be wrong, though. There is no way the course includes over 820' of total climbing or picks up 120' from start to finish, unless the graph itself is wrong.

It is a brutal, dusty course. It was also low 80's today, record-high temps.

Kit Carson wrote:

gilded age wrote:

The course is tough. There is a huge hill on the second mile.

The elevation profile is below:

http://www.cmstampede.com/course-map

Thanks, gilded age. Damn, that's a rough place to stick a hill that gains about 100'in about a quarter of a mile!

The data at the bottom has to be wrong, though. There is no way the course includes over 820' of total climbing or picks up 120' from start to finish, unless the graph itself is wrong.

800 ft of climbing would be pretty damn ridiculous. Assuming an even up/down you'd have to climb a 9.8% grade for the first 2.5k to make that happen. Average climbing would be even steeper if uneven.

It's safe to assume those numbers are wrong. I doubt it's a mountain race. From the graph it looks like there could be 200-300 feet of gain, which makes it a very hilly course, but not a mountain climb.

Numbers are definitely wrong.

Here's some date from the Colorado Mile Split site about conditions on the course today.

2A Girls, 9:20 AM: 64F, 30.14, density altitude ~7600 feet

3A Boys, 10:00 AM: 72F, 30.12, density altitude ~8150 feet

4A Boys, 10:30 AM: 73F, 30.11, density altitude ~8200 feet

5A Girls, 11:00 AM: 74F, 30.11, density altitude ~8250 feet

2A Boys, 11:30 AM: 75F, 30.09, density altitude ~8300 feet

3A Girls, 12 Noon: 76F, 30.08, density altitude ~8400 feet

4A Girls, 12:30 PM: 78F, 30.06, density altitude ~8550 feet

5A Boys, 1:00 PM: 78F, 30.04, density altitude ~8600 feet

The course narrows at a creek crossing about 400 meters into the race and goes over two bridges that are about 8' wide in the first 1K, so runners feel the need to get out fast and often pay for it later in the race. Alhamra went through the mile in 4:55 and seemed to be chasing the course record of 15:48ish set last year by Cerake Geberkidane. He was passed by Laguera after the 2-mile mark and then faded badly over the last 600 meters. This isn't unusual for some of the state's top runners to implode each year. Jordyn Colter from Cherry Creek DNF'd her sophomore year (after winning 5A state as a freshman on a different course), and then finished 4th at Footlocker Midwest Regionals and 4th at Footlocker Nationals that same year. Hopefully Alhamra will bounce back at whatever national meet he's planning to run this year.

at the meet too wrote:

Alhamra went through the mile in 4:55 and seemed to be chasing the course record of 15:48ish set last year by Cerake Geberkidane. He was passed by Laguera after the 2-mile mark and then faded badly over the last 600 meters. This isn't unusual for some of the state's top runners to implode each year. Jordyn Colter from Cherry Creek DNF'd her sophomore year (after winning 5A state as a freshman on a different course), and then finished 4th at Footlocker Midwest Regionals and 4th at Footlocker Nationals that same year. Hopefully Alhamra will bounce back at whatever national meet he's planning to run this year.

Jordyn Colter, who unfortunately has been up and down for a couple of years now, finished 104th yesterday in 22:16, and Boulder High School's usual number-one runner and one of the best in 5A, Satchel Caldwell, had a comparably rough day, winding up 57th. Do you know if either runner was ever in contention, a la Alhambra?

Also, this kind of thing always makes me wince. Yeah, rules are rules, but how can anyone enjoy a victory predicated on this kind of crap?

Having run the course about 4 times in my HS career, the course is stupid difficult to be a state championship course. The state course needs to be fast, a show case to run one the fastest times of the season. CHSAA, needs to understand that comparing times national makes CO running look slow. Most people outside the state don't know the course is super slow so this brings down the value of CO runners. One reason we think the course was chosen and has not moved after its 2 yr cycle is because the venue has great parking, easy in easy out. The course is also bad for spectators. You can see two things, the start and the 50m finish into the arena missing the race develop or walk out over the creek crossing and see them run by 2/3 times if you run and miss the start/finish. This is the worst state course to run on, and truly does not show the true talent of CO cross country runners. The course needs to come back to the Denver metro area to a flat dirt/grass park.

Also because the race is in Colorado springs which is about 2500ft higher than most runners in Colorado train at, the attitude does play a role late in the race. As you can see based on the attitude density chart set up by alan versaw of CO milesplit, the 5a boys race was at around 8600ft. Most 5a schools sit between 5600-5100ft around Denver metro south up north to Fort Collins.

Ran it 2yrs in a row wrote:

As you can see based on the attitude density chart set up by alan versaw of CO milesplit, the 5a boys race was at around 8600ft.

Huh? What chart? It's closer to 6,200' at its highest point, which is obviously going to slow everyone down but is a far cry from 8,600'.

Ran it 2yrs in a row wrote:

The state course needs to be fast, a show case to run one the fastest times of the season. CHSAA, needs to understand that comparing times national makes CO running look slow.

It's cross country, not track. Times don't matter. The more difficult the course, the better. There are way too many flat, fast courses these days.

Zebulon Pike wrote:

Ran it 2yrs in a row wrote:

As you can see based on the attitude density chart set up by alan versaw of CO milesplit, the 5a boys race was at around 8600ft.

Huh? What chart? It's closer to 6,200' at its highest point, which is obviously going to slow everyone down but is a far cry from 8,600'.

Read the whole feed, the chart was copied in someone else's post.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but as a long time runner, XC fan and CO resident I totally disagree that the XC course for the CO state meet should be flat and fast.

It is cross country! The weather, footing, elevation, hills, etc. all come into play and should be allowed to come into play. Ii is supposed to be about how you do against others and against the course that matters.

In today's world, with NXN and FLCC, there are other opportunities to showcase your XC ability and run fast against top runners in spite of a "slow" state meet course. There are also numerous flat fast XC invitationals in CO at which to run a fast time.

There is also track in the spring, with totally flat races held on surfaces that help you post fast times. Also the opportunity to run fast track meets outside of CO at lower elevations.

Also road races.

When coaches consider high school ability, they first look at track PRs and where you placed in bigger xc meets.

Kit Carson wrote:

gilded age wrote:

The course is tough. There is a huge hill on the second mile.

The elevation profile is below:

http://www.cmstampede.com/course-map

Thanks, gilded age. Damn, that's a rough place to stick a hill that gains about 100'in about a quarter of a mile!

The data at the bottom has to be wrong, though. There is no way the course includes over 820' of total climbing or picks up 120' from start to finish, unless the graph itself is wrong.

I am not sure the finish is 120 feet higher than the start, but it is higher. That hill is a bear. Add in temps approaching 80 and virtually no shade and the times can be slow (add in 6000+ feet of elevation).

As someone else pointed out, it is XC forget times, run for place. A coach knows that times are going to be slower, but being a state champ carries a lot of weight. In Katie's case, her heritage helps too :)

State already? Mt. Sac was this weekend, in CA teams haven't event run league meets yet. Crazy.

Why not have state meet on the same course and build history.

at the meet too wrote:

Here's some date from the Colorado Mile Split site about conditions on the course today.

2A Girls, 9:20 AM: 64F, 30.14, density altitude ~7600 feet

Can someone tell me what "density altitude" refers to? Last I knew, density had units of mass divided by volume and altitude had units of length.

I don't know for sure, but my guess would be a "feels like" altitude. Something like the O2 pressure in the air (which can fluctuate at the same altitude due do effects like humidity and Barometric pressure) makes running that day equivalent to running at a different altitude.

Disclaimer: My source for this is memory of an article I read years ago about why times are faster on days with high BP.

Density altitude is a term borrowed from aeronautics. It has to do with how dense the air is. A density altitude of 8600 feet means the air was the same density as would be considered "standard" at 8600 feet.

Air is a gas. As it heats up, it expands, but you don't get any more oxygen molecules, just more space. Oxygen molecules are already distributed more thinly because the blanket of atmosphere packing them down is thinner and lighter at altitude.

In summary, it wasn't such a nice day to run in Colorado yesterday. Heat, thin air, serious climbs. Yes, cross country is about place, but it became a lot about survival yesterday, too.