Official 2018 Foot Locker XC Discussion Thread (Girls 12:15 east, Boys 1 east)

I thought so... wrote:

the sands wrote:

LV ran 15:07 and 14:59 for his two wins.

Thanks for the clarification.

Plus he was a 3:59 miler in high school, which puts todays times in perspective.

They're right in there with the best in history, especially as the course is harder than it used to be.

On the girl's side, the 8th and 9th fastest over 39 years.

Lukas also toyed with the field and literally walked across the finish line. These guys don't hold a candle to Lukas during his senior year

LetsRun.com wrote:

We break down Saturday's race for you below and tell you who is going to win - Sydney Masciarelli and Cole Hocker.

http://www.letsrun.com/news/2018/12/2018-foot-locker-preview-meet-sydney-masciarelli-latest-prep-phenom-can-cole-hocker-bounce-back-nxn-win-san-diego/

Who do you think will win?

Update: We'll have a live stream on the frontpage of letsrun but it should also be available here: (Girls race 12:15 eastern, Boys 1pm)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ATdO7xbIY8

Love the lede for the story: Picture of Hocker, but with Masciarelli as the first sentence.

I wonder if Cole was trying to control the race from the front, since he raced last week. I think the boys race was slower because it was more tactical, which is unusual. It was also warm. The lead runners were really bunched for quite a while.

Actually being bunched up and tactical for most of the way is typical for the boy's race, regardless of the venue.

The girl's are the ones who take it out every year and go for it.

If someone has the time and access to the stats, I'd be interested in a breakdown of the ages (grades) in both NXN and FL for the boys vs. the girls. It seems to me that a lot of the girls are younger while the boys are mostly Juniors and Seniors. To me, there seems to be something in the girls, almost similar to gymnastics, where the younger freshmen and sophomores are more represented in the girls than with the boys. And I think there might be something to consider regarding the appropriate level of training stress, in biological terms, that should be put on the girls. I know this could open up a whole can or worms, but I think the stats might speak for themselves. If the boys get proportionately stronger with age, while the girls are more affected with physical / hormonal changes during the same time, then maybe there is something to consider (or at least, to learn) concerning the differences in their aging process and their training as young athletes.

I thought so... wrote:

the sands wrote:

LV ran 15:07 and 14:59 for his two wins.

Thanks for the clarification.

Plus he was a 3:59 miler in high school, which puts todays times in perspective.

They're right in there with the best in history, especially as the course is harder than it used to be.

On the girl's side, the 8th and 9th fastest over 39 years.

It's true, and notable, that Hart is the fastest second place finisher ever on the Balboa course, which slots her on the all time list right behind Masciarelli, who is only the eighth fastest winner on the course.

As I think about that, though, it causes me to doubt the easy assumption that the course has gotten significantly slower, which one could make if one just glanced at the winning times.

If the earlier course was so much easier, where are all the fast non-winning times that should have filled in behind the winners?

Hart is the fastest second place finisher ever in San Diego by a margin of three seconds. No one else in that position had ever run faster than 17:04 and most were much slower.

Not much support for the "Balboa has gotten slower" theory.

2018 NXN Girls Gr 7/8 9 girls, 2 in top 50, FR 28 girls, 9 in top 50 , SO 44 girls (0 in top 10), 7 in top 50 (1 in top 10), JR 52 girls (4 in top 10), 13 in top 50

2018 NXN Boys FR 5 boys, 0 in top 50, SO 17 boys (0 in top 10), 2 in top 50, JR 69 boys, 16 in top 50 (5 in top 10)

2018 FL Girls FR 3 girls, 2 in top 10, SO 8 girls, 2 in top 10, JR 14 girls, 3 in top 10

2018 FL Boys Jr 15 boys, 4 in top 10

So yes a much younger girls field, and stronger finishes by the some of the younger girls, in both events although the average finishes by grade do not show much of a trend for either boys or girls.

Ms typed- 0 FR girl in top 10 of NXN, 1 SO girls in top 10 if I was not clear

the sands wrote:

...

If the earlier course was so much easier, where are all the fast non-winning times that should have filled in behind the winners?

Hart is the fastest second place finisher ever in San Diego by a margin of three seconds. No one else in that position had ever run faster than 17:04 and most were much slower.

Not much support for the "Balboa has gotten slower" theory.

1983: 7th place was 15:12

1985: 17th place was 15:12

1986: 6th place was 15:12

What was Erin Keogh's (16:43 in 1983) best mile or two mile in HS?

Gggsg wrote:

the sands wrote:

...

If the earlier course was so much easier, where are all the fast non-winning times that should have filled in behind the winners?

Hart is the fastest second place finisher ever in San Diego by a margin of three seconds. No one else in that position had ever run faster than 17:04 and most were much slower.

Not much support for the "Balboa has gotten slower" theory.

1983: 7th place was 15:12

1985: 17th place was 15:12

1986: 6th place was 15:12

What was Erin Keogh's (16:43 in 1983) best mile or two mile in HS?

Yes, one can find fast non-winners on the boys' side, but the absence of such on the girls' side, in all seven of the races that had a sub-17 winner, is notable and has to be considered statistically significant.

The breadth of data is more significant than any one runner.

I raced yesterday in the boys race. It was insanely hard. The ground was soft everywhere except in the dog park. The entire course seems to be hilly. There’s no way Reuben Reina would’ve broken 15 minutes if he ran on what we did. And that makes Sydney and Katelynn race that much more impressive because Balboa Park is freaking hard.

Gggsg wrote:

1983: 7th place was 15:12

1985: 17th place was 15:12

1986: 6th place was 15:12

What was Erin Keogh's (16:43 in 1983) best mile or two mile in HS?

Yes, one can find fast non-winners on the boys' side, but the absence of such on the girls' side, in all seven of the races that had a sub-17 winner, is notable and has to be considered statistically significant.[/quote]

The depth of girls cross country is much greater now than it was 30 years ago. Likewise for 2 miles / 3200m on the track. The course is harder now because it is harder now than it used to be, which is not a theory but a fact.

DumpsterDiver wrote:Lukas also toyed with the field and literally walked across the finish line. These guys don't hold a candle to Lukas during his senior year

Nobody cares about LipshitsLukas. Dude couldn't handle running so caked his swimtrunks and now does the doggiepaddle. What a loser

Fairchild FL 16:39, 2 mile HS PR 9:55.9

Stamps FL 16:41, 2 mile HS PR ?

Keogh FL 16:43, 2 mile HS PR 10:01.3

Smith FL 16:43, 2 mile HS PR ?

Schiro FL 16:48, 2 mile HS PR ?

Cuffe FL 16:53, (2010), 2 mile HS PR 9:54.2

Hart FL 17:01, 2 mile HS PR 9:55.4

Hasay FL 17:05, 2 mile HS PR 9:55.5

It feels at least 15 slower (more?)

Hhhhhhhhh wrote:

Fairchild FL 16:39, 2 mile HS PR 9:55.9

Stamps FL 16:41, 2 mile HS PR ?

Keogh FL 16:43, 2 mile HS PR 10:01.3

Smith FL 16:43, 2 mile HS PR ?

Schiro FL 16:48, 2 mile HS PR ?

Cuffe FL 16:53, (2010), 2 mile HS PR 9:54.2

Hart FL 17:01, 2 mile HS PR 9:55.4

Hasay FL 17:05, 2 mile HS PR 9:55.5

It feels at least 15 slower (more?)

I don't really have an opinion one way or another about if the course has slowed down, but I do feel that track PRs for a lot of athletes these days are a bit inflated due to the presence of meets like Brooks PR (as well as improved depth on the national level). If you put some of these past athletes into modern races I have a feeling they might have been able to run a bit faster. It's also possible that the depth of the field has an effect on the willingness of top athletes to really go for broke.

no point in comparing time, it's a race not a time trial. Masciarelli is the national champion in one of the greatest races in high school XC history.

very hard course wrote:

I raced yesterday in the boys race. It was insanely hard. The ground was soft everywhere except in the dog park. The entire course seems to be hilly. There’s no way Reuben Reina would’ve broken 15 minutes if he ran on what we did. And that makes Sydney and Katelynn race that much more impressive because Balboa Park is freaking hard.

For your information, when Reina ran the course, the ground was soft in the dog park as well. It's only in the last 5 years or so with the formal creation of the dog park and loss of grass that the lower section got packed down. That section used to be known locally as the "fruit loop". Someone else local can tell you why.

The course is not slower, the course is the same. Unless you are thinking that a 40 yr. old course would run slower than a twenty year old course. I do agree that usually masters competitors are not as fast as younger athletes.

One problem facing todays runners is that almost all of the courses they run on are flat and faster than those old timers. Add the to the fact that back in the hay day, kids ran more mileage.

Track times are faster now because of set up time trial on much nicer tracks. The Indoor scene is something the old timers wouldn't even recognize.

No, the course is the same. It does not run, does not move, has not been altered.

stop watcher wrote:

The course is not slower, the course is the same. Unless you are thinking that a 40 yr. old course would run slower than a twenty year old course. I do agree that usually masters competitors are not as fast as younger athletes.

One problem facing todays runners is that almost all of the courses they run on are flat and faster than those old timers. Add the to the fact that back in the hay day, kids ran more mileage.

Track times are faster now because of set up time trial on much nicer tracks. The Indoor scene is something the old timers wouldn't even recognize.

No, the course is the same. It does not run, does not move, has not been altered.

Incorrect. The course has been altered. See the post directly above yours...or just go back and watch some old race videos from Footlocker. It used to be ALL grass, but now it has a lot of dirt.