Katelyn Tuohy is racing at Holmdel Park NJ tomorrow. If she breaks 16:00 it will be the greatest HS achievement ever.

Phantasy Star wrote:

Impressive, I must say. She will be able to win World Juniors next time it's held, in either the 3000 or 5000.

Lane would have beaten Tuohy on this course today though. Tuohy can't even be considered in the "GOAT" discussion until she attempts Footlocker.

You are not doing Claudia Lane any favors with your mere assertions or poor arguments.

hart crane wrote:

webby wrote:

I predict that this was a more impressive race than the one that LRC has a ticker running for.

I'm going make another bold post:

Unless Rupp runs under 2:06 tomorrow or Gwen runs under 2:23, KT has the performance of the weekend AND one of the races of the year, high school through pros.

Here is her first race from the same meet, anchoring DMR as a 7th grader. 4:57 I think

http://www.nbnationalsin.com/eprofile.php?event_id=1164&do=videos&video_id=148875

I love that Meylan puts out a lot of data on races outside of my area, but the guy has fallen in love with certain performances and is too stubborn or simply blind to realize how off he is. I've given very clear data before why Amber Trotter's 180.3 is way off. Look at the time gaps between Trotter and the other CA girl at Foot Locker that year and the time gap between that same girl and Trotter at the CA state meet. Same for the gaps with the boys from CA at Foot Locker and the boys gaps to her at the state meet.

As I recall, her speed rating jumped up nearly 30 points between the state meet and Foot Locker. How tf could she possibly run 30 seconds faster per mile all of a sudden? Not buying it for a second. If the ratings are based upon time gaps between runners, that means a national field could let a top runner go and then they all jog just watching each other and whoever went off the front is going to have an insane speed rating that relative to other speed ratings you see doesn't mean jack. Just look at this below

2001 CA state meet time and speed rating followed by Foot Locker time and speed rating

Amber Trotter: 17:01/151 - 16:24/180

Julie Allen: 18:29/122 - 17:50/151

Time gap between Trotter and Allen is 1:28 at the state meet and then 1:26 at Footlocker. So what's more likely here guys, they both improved their fitness enough to warrant a 29 point jump in their speed rating, or maybe, just maybe, the speed rating is hyper-inflated for that race or it simply does not mean what most people think it means.

This is the problem with Meylan's speed ratings; a 170 can actually be a better absolute performance than a 180, for instance someone could run a faster time on the same course but if they don't win by as much it theoretically won't be considered as good of a performance. Our minds don't naturally think of 170 being greater than 180 and this problem is only compounded by the fact the speed ratings are put in numerical order to rank them when that's not what's supposed to be done at all.

It's his system so he can label any race whatever he wants, but it's vastly misunderstood and misapplied, even by himself.

Two things....mentioning Claudia Lane in the same paragraph as Tuohy is silly....Kelsey Chmiel is better than Lane and has beaten her, if I am not mistaken. Tuohy is better than Chmiel, obviously.

Some of you folks do not really understand Meylan’s Speed Ratings...I suggest they read his philosophy on his site tullyrunners.com

I have seen Meylan's work over many, many years and I have always worried about the FL Nationals as a point of comparison, especially those run at the Orlando course. These work best when you have many points of comparison. The Orlando course did not have a lot of comparison points (not many years to compare) and few runners who ran against Trotter more than once in the race. The Tully Runners speed ratings are best at describing results in state/regional ratings with many runners competing who have competed with other runners in the field more than once during the year. In those races I have a lot of trust in Meylan.

Asbel Kiprop wrote:

Some of you folks do not really understand Meylan’s Speed Ratings...I suggest they read his philosophy on his site tullyrunners.com

Why don't you try explaining it to us and see how logical it sounds?

Well, in that one comparison, she improved 37 seconds and her speed rating improved by 29 points, while her opponent's speed rating improved by 29 points while her time improved by 39 seconds.

Sounds pretty reasonable. Speed ratings would reasonably be higher for races with the top athletes in the country all peaking for the championship. As for the future, just enjoy the course records for the next couple of years and let that be that.

I would not make NXN or FL the focus, she could win both easily. I say she should run them, but make World Jrs the focus and perhaps do the Mayor's Cup and/or Edinburg as well. We already know she's the best USHS girl, I would like to see how she stacks up against better athletes.

Katelyn Tuohy is so clearly the best American high school XC runner ever. Any ratings that say otherwise prove just how stupid the people making those rankings are.

As someone who has seen the Ocean State course and Holmdel, her performance at Holmdel is at least 3 times more impressive. Plus she ran at like 4pm and races were going consistently since 9am so the course was already torn up, slippery, and really soft because it was raining. If she raced earlier, she would have run significantly faster.

She is at least 30 seconds better in a 5k than any other women's high school XC runner ever this year. And that may be generous as she's breaking course records by 60-90 seconds her first time seeing those courses.

ratings are fake news wrote:

Katelyn Tuohy is so clearly the best American high school XC runner ever. Any ratings that say otherwise prove just how stupid the people making those rankings are.

As someone who has seen the Ocean State course and Holmdel, her performance at Holmdel is at least 3 times more impressive. Plus she ran at like 4pm and races were going consistently since 9am so the course was already torn up, slippery, and really soft because it was raining. If she raced earlier, she would have run significantly faster.

She is at least 30 seconds better in a 5k than any other women's high school XC runner ever this year. And that may be generous as she's breaking course records by 60-90 seconds her first time seeing those courses.

FYI - a bunch of NJ girls in Tuohy's race set Holmdel PRs and 3 of the 4 North Rockland girls behind Tuohy closed the gap between themselves and Tuohy at Holmdel compared to Ocean State.

Her interview skills seem to have plateaued since that very moment.

zxcvzcxv wrote:

Well, in that one comparison, she improved 37 seconds and her speed rating improved by 29 points, while her opponent's speed rating improved by 29 points while her time improved by 39 seconds.

Sounds pretty reasonable. Speed ratings would reasonably be higher for races with the top athletes in the country all peaking for the championship. As for the future, just enjoy the course records for the next couple of years and let that be that.

Bruh, these were different courses being run. A 29 point jump in speed ratings is like running 1:27 faster on the SAME course. That is absolutely absurd to think a state champion would be capable of doing that and even more asinine to think 2 girls could both improve that much in the space of 2 weeks. It simply does not happen, ever. Period. That likes being able to run your mile pace for 3 miles all of a sudden 2 weeks after the state meet. BS!!!!

zzyzzx to vegas wrote:

Bruh, these were different courses being run. A 29 point jump in speed ratings is like running 1:27 faster on the SAME course. That is absolutely absurd to think a state champion would be capable of doing that and even more asinine to think 2 girls could both improve that much in the space of 2 weeks. It simply does not happen, ever. Period. That likes being able to run your mile pace for 3 miles all of a sudden 2 weeks after the state meet. BS!!!!

The 2001 California State Meet was run in periods of pouring rain and the course was at times a mudbath. Some races also had much worse conditions than others, so I wouldn't put too much stock into any of the time comparisons or speed ratings.

hart crane wrote:

webby wrote:

I predict that this was a more impressive race than the one that LRC has a ticker running for.

I'm going make another bold post:

Unless Rupp runs under 2:06 tomorrow or Gwen runs under 2:23, KT has the performance of the weekend AND one of the races of the year, high school through pros.

Rupp got that 2:06. So......?

Reservoir Hill wrote:

zzyzzx to vegas wrote:

Bruh, these were different courses being run. A 29 point jump in speed ratings is like running 1:27 faster on the SAME course. That is absolutely absurd to think a state champion would be capable of doing that and even more asinine to think 2 girls could both improve that much in the space of 2 weeks. It simply does not happen, ever. Period. That likes being able to run your mile pace for 3 miles all of a sudden 2 weeks after the state meet. BS!!!!

The 2001 California State Meet was run in periods of pouring rain and the course was at times a mudbath. Some races also had much worse conditions than others, so I wouldn't put too much stock into any of the time comparisons or speed ratings.

Amber Trotter ran 16:55 at Clovis and then 17:01 at State. Her teammate ran 18:40 at Clovis and then 18:53 at State. Billy Nelson ran 15:10 at Clovis and then 15:22 at State. Looks to have been running about 10-15 seconds slower.

For reference, a 180 at Woodward Park is equivalent to a 15:33 give or take about 5 seconds. No way no how did Trotter run anywhere near that level at Foot Locker Orlando.

I do think Tuohy would go sub-16 at Woodward Park for sure and 15:30s sounds about right. I think Claudia Lane may retire just thinking about that.

Plankton wrote:

Her interview skills seem to have plateaued since that very moment.

She's probably asked the same dumb questions over and over when she really just wants to be asked about Kavanaugh, Tesla, Trump, Global Warming, etc.

Those are good topics but I guarantee that she would ask which schools Kav, Tesla, and Trump run for and would think global warming is some type of warming tent at the finish.

There was something very strange going on in the 2001 Foot Lockers. By region, the National times improvement vs the Regionals in seconds (plus is a lower National time):

West Girls +32 on average; range of +21 to +50

West Boys +11 on average; range of -36 to +29

NE Girls +23 on average; range of +6 to +43

NE Boys -8 on average; range of -39 to +25

MW Girls +16 on average; range of -14 to +45

MW Boys +12 on average; range of -26 to +42

South Girls -38 on average; range of -80 to zero

South Boys -35 on average; range of -64 to -2

Most Boys and Girls from South had a terrible day, other regions had wide disparity but to me the huge improvements by some in the West, NE and MW tells me there is no way the Nationals course was terribly hard, nor the conditions that difficult. I am guessing the large number of bad performances at 2001 Nationals artificially lifted those speed ratings.