What Happened To The West Girls At Footlocker?

Curiosity's Sake wrote:

It appeared they all got off the line really slow and never got back into the race. Most of the top talent went to NXN, but Fahy was about 30-40 seconds back from where she ought to have been and several others appeared to have a rough go of it too. Maybe it was too tough racing 5-6 weeks in a row?

Mt. SAC is so physically draining. Most west athletes said they were still sore Wednesday and even some Thursday. That could have been a part of it.

Mt SAC sucks and should no longer be the venue of the West

SAC Sucker wrote:

Mt SAC sucks and should no longer be the venue of the West

Worked out just fine in the past. Claudia Lane picked up a few titles after smashing it at Mt SAC. Plenty of athletes from the West have run well at FLN. The fact that the girls from the West got out so slow the first 200 meters makes me think whoever talked to them as a group must have told them to pace themselves or something, maybe? Running a half dozen races in five or six weeks probably doesn't help.

I just don't think the girls from the west were as good as those from the other regions. Fahy said her first mile at 5:20 or so was much faster than she was used to. Well, welcome to a championship race with the top girls. Could they have had bad days on top of that? I guess. There is something wrong if a high school kid can be sore 3 days after running a race. Must not do any hill work in training. I note Claudia Lane did ok at FL twice.

Lots of Cali kids have been racing for 5-6 weeks straight and Mt. Sac doesn't help. Most of the top West foot locker people in the past couple of years took it easy to be ready. This year no-one was far ahead enough of the competition to be able to take it easy. Examples Rocha getting 2nd in the region then 2nd at NAT, Tamagno getting 4th in the region and Claudia running nowhere near her fastest despite both being course record holders on that course, with Tamagno going on to get 5th and Claudia winning it all.

Curiosity's Sake wrote:

.... Most of the top talent went to NXN....

Problems is the Cali and NW girls did exactly light up NXN either... West and California girls just not strong right now in XC for whatever reason (even though California has the best track times) Also Several runners picked FL over NXN

West Girls wrote:

I just don't think the girls from the west were as good as those from the other regions.

Perhaps it is an off year(s). I remember the early 2000s when the West girls were extremely dominant; a few of those years had CA winning against the nation.

I don't think it has anything to do with NXN as none of the CA girls there were at the top.

The West is not just CA. Anna Martin, Lexy Halladay, and Allie Janke underperformed as well. These things just go in cycles.

oiuyl wrote:

The West is not just CA. Anna Martin, Lexy Halladay, and Allie Janke underperformed as well. These things just go in cycles.

Did they also have to run MSAC the week before to qualify? oh, yes, I thought that might be the case.

btw, when it comes to the real running... college and beyond,,, Fahy will beat most all of those who beat her at FLN.

Down in the West wrote:

Curiosity's Sake wrote:

.... Most of the top talent went to NXN....

Problems is the Cali and NW girls did exactly light up NXN either... West and California girls just not strong right now in XC for whatever reason (even though California has the best track times) Also Several runners picked FL over NXN

Yes/no ... mostly no.

Yes, the California and Northwest girls didn't place many individuals in the top 10 at NXN, similar to how they didn't place any in the top 10 at FLN. I agree that the West didn't have any US Top-10 girls this year (though I think if Sydney Thorvaldson of Wyoming ran closer to her normal race at NXN Nationals, she might have been up there).

No, in that the FLW girls had 8 finishers in the top 21 at NXN, which was the deeper field.

It is blatantly fake news that "Several runners picked FL over NXN (from the west)" The only California girl to decline her invite was Fahy, who is from San Diego and probably wanted to run nationals in front of her friends and family. The only other athlete who didn't try to qualify was Anna Martin from Utah. All the rest either didn't qualify out of California, or didn't qualify out of the Northwest, but every single one of them competed for a spot to NXN Nationals and came up short. CA #1, 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7 were all at NXN (the five individual qualifiers plus a team runner). Aside from Fahy and Martin, the entire FLW roster on the girls side were athletes who are very good athletes, but weren't All-American caliber athletes and came up short in their bid to qualify for NXN. Out west, as is the case most years, the vast majority of top athletes were at NXN.

If all of the best athletes were at FLN, it would have absolutely been a MW vs. NE dual meet at the top, even moreso than we saw at FLN (because more of the Northeast girls could actually be included, while the MW had six that ran both meets). I just looked at what I would have as the combined order of FLN and NXN (using the best performance from those lucky enough to be able to run both), and those two regions swept the top 13 (FLNE winning 25-30). The West was similarly dominant over the South, scoring 87 with six runners in the top 25 overall, while the South's first three were #21, 22 and 23 with the south region's team scoring 111.

Here's the merge I came up with: (times set to Footlocker Nationals)

16:50.8 - Katelyn Touhy NY (NXN) - FLNE #1

17:00.3 - Sydney Masciarelli MA (FLN) - FLNE #2

17:01.0 - Katelynne Hart IL (BOTH) - FLMW #1

17:08.0 - Kelsey Chmiel NY (NXN) - FLNE #3

17:14.0 - Abby VanderKooi MI (FLN) - FLMW #2

17:20.1 - Taylor Ewert OH (BOTH) - FLMW #3

17:23.6 - Emily Covert MN (BOTH) - FLMW #4

17:26.7 - Claire Walters NY (NXN) - FLNE #4

17:30.0 - Jaden Theis MI (FLN) - FLMW #5

17:32.2 - Kate Wiser CT (FLN) - FLNE #5

17:32.7 - Brooke Rauber NY (NXN) - FLNE #6

17:38.9 - Alexis Morris IL (BOTH) - FLMW #6

17:41.3 - Ericka VanderLende MI (BOTH) - FLMW #7

17:41.9 - Mattie Geddes ID (NXN) - FLW #1

17:42.0 - Grace Connolly MA (FLN) - FLNE #7

17:42.1 - Abi Archer AZ (NXN) - FLW #2

17:42.6 - Fiona Max OR (NXN) - FLW #3

17:42.6 - Charlotte Bednar NJ (NXN) - FLNE #8

17:42.7 - Sydney Thorvaldson WY (NXN) - FLW #4

17:43.1 - Lauren Ping MN (NXN) - FLMW #8

17:43.4 - Jenna Hutchins TN (FLN) - FLS #1

17:43.5 - Sasha Neglia TN (NXN) - FLS #2

17:46.7 - Allison Wilson TX (BOTH) - FLS #3

17:47.0 - Tori Gaitan CA (NXN) - FLW #5

17:47.3 - Tiahna Vladic MT (NXN) - FLW #6

17:48.4 - Abby Loveys NJ (FLN) - FLNE #9

17:49.0 - Samantha Schadler AZ (NXN) - FLW #7

17:51.5 - Ember Stratton MT (NXN) - FLW #8

17:51.5 - Jenna Schulz NY (NXN) - FLNE #10

17:53.2 - Tsion Yared FL (NXN) - FLS #4

17:54.4 - Lianna Surtz IL (NXN) - FLMW #9

17:54.9 - Marlee Starliper PA (FLN) - FLNE #11

17:54.9 - Ashlyn Hillyard TX (NXN) - FLS #5

FLN makes it appear that the West is weaker than it is, because the VAST majority of the region's top athletes are at NXN. The Northeast also appears notably weaker than it is at FLN, because the athletes are fairly split (slight edge to NXN). The Midwest athletes can do both, and the Footlocker contingent is often a little stronger (because Michigan seems to lean heavily towards FLN while the rest of the states seem to either run both or lean NXN). The Texas athletes in the South can do both, but the rest of the South doesn't - and that's the only region that strongly leans towards FLN over NXN - which makes the South seem much stronger than it is at FLN, and much weaker than it is at NXN.

Oh?

Much appreciated. Nice work.

Oh? wrote:

Here's the merge I came up with: (times set to Footlocker Nationals)

NICE! I had estimated the exact same order as well for the top 7

That is what the data says, but just recognize the 2 races are very different because 1) Tuohy was in one of them and went out very fast as always dragging the field along and 2) the much larger field at NXN requires a sustained fast effort for about 400 yards to get the best runners positioned ahead of the first turn. The start at FL seemed to be at a much more reasonable pace, and the field of course far smaller. This data also basically says that Balboa Park is ~13 seconds slower than Glendoveer. The data for the runners in common for the last 2 years shows an average time differance of only ~5 seconds - but with a huge scatter in the numbers both ways so it is hardly conclusive. The 13 seconds is what Hocker did, but he looked like he was loafing for most of FL while he was barely hanging with the leaders at NXN. If this 13 seconds is real, then what Hart did is unreal improving by 30 seconds. But some of that could be the early pace.

I agree that the difference in races create a difference in performances. No comparison between two races are going to be perfect.

I don't think the difference between Balboa and Glendoveer is a simple 13 second difference. I would certainly refrain from comparing multiple years worth of Glendoveer -> Balboa performances unless you know it was good conditions every year (and even then, it's questionable).

FWIW, I used the same correction I seem to use every year for Footlocker (+/- 3 seconds), but conditions vary greatly enough in Portland that it isn't so static (have to calculate those new every year). While I found a 13 second difference seemed to fit between what Glendoveer ran for the NXN Girls and what Balboa typically runs (using a multiplier rather than a straight +/- system, meaning it's a greater difference the slower you run), it would be much different for boys. It was slower (muddier) for the boys at NXN since the girls went first this year, meaning that the difference between the two courses would be much smaller for the boys race. I don't have the data in front of me right now, but IIRC I had estimated a difference of only about 3-5 seconds. To your point about Hocker, that would suggest that his NXN race was about 8-10 seconds better.

I totally agree that is is very hard to put a number on the "right" time difference between the 2 races. The data I looked at was for both boys and girls for the last 2 years so we get both going first, and second at NXN. You still see huge time differences in both directions so it is not just who went first vs second. On Hocker, I guess I would say his FL race was "easier" or NXN was "harder" as opposed to saying one race was better or worse. One other note, a lot is being made of that NXN conditions were so much better this year. I guess it was not raining during the event this year, but the ground was still saturated. This video (it is not mine, for the record and granted there are parts you may want to skip) shows the ground conditions including a sand trap full of water before the race. Some girls interviews post FL included a response when asked about the course "it wasn't soft" or "it wasn't muddy" like NXN was.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikLyp3uKsNk

As bad as NXN was last year, Hart still improved her time last year by 20 seconds when she ran FL. Maybe that course just fits her strengths well, I don't know. I do see that she struggled some in the mud at FL regional this year too.