I'd like my NY folks to do well but I'm thinking Princeton FTW on both sides.
But Columbia's men have a *great* shot at winning and actually deserve to be the favorites, going in to the meet.
The splits from the race show a very slow pace through 5k, so starting in the back must have made it very difficult for the Big Green to move up. The course is very narrow for a field with 25-30 competitive teams, so I would not regard their loss to Columbia as particularly telling. I actually think Dartmouth, Princeton, and Columbia are on quite equal footing going into this one and the deepest team will win.
Barry Harwick wrote (in the alumni newsletter):
We had one runner fall, another fall over him, and still another lose a shoe; all before the mile mark.
I'm surprised there wasn't more discussion about people falling given on how long the entire field stayed as a pack. I hope the athletes weren't hurt.
lone_sequoia wrote:
Another interesting bit of knowledge about Dartmouth's mediocre result at the Wisconsin Invitational:Barry Harwick wrote (in the alumni newsletter):
We had one runner fall, another fall over him, and still another lose a shoe; all before the mile mark.
Boom!
lone_sequoia wrote:
Rojo, you really think the the toughness of the VCP course is overrated? Look at the times! It runs a good 30-45 seconds slower despite the fact that things tend to get more tactical at Princeton. The back hills put you in a world of pain within the first 5k, whereas the first 5k of Princeton feels like a tempo. I really do think the Columbia men have a nice advantage from training in the park, but I still think there #4 and #5 are going to hurt them. If they are relying on freshmen with good high school mile/two-mile times they are taking a huge risk.
I think Dartmouth is going to put 8 guys in front of Columbia's #5. Thats how many guys they have that have been consistently cranking 100+ mile weeks for at least a year (some for over two years now). And those miles are not stopping at crosswalks in Manhattan. We are talking about hills twice the size of Cemetery that they climb every day. Beantown was good but the truth is we haven't seen what the Big Green are capable of when they are tapered and fresh. Apparently they had two guys fall at Wisconsin and one lose a shoe so that is not the race to judge them by. They will dominate the last 3k and bring the trophy back to Hanover!
I scored your predictions through 3 runners.
donkeyriding wrote:
Time for some predictions. I would guess that the top 20 will look something like this:
1. Thomas Awad of Penn
2. Curtis King of Dartmouth
3. Tom Purnell of Harvard
4. Ben Rainero of Cornell
5. Kevin Dooney of Yale
6. Joey Chapin of Dartmouth
7. James Randon of Yale
8. Michael Sublette of Princeton
9. Jack Boyle of Columbia
10. Aubrey Myjer of Columbia
11. Brian Masterson of Dartmouth
12. Noah Kauppila of Princeton
13. Tait Rutherford of Columbia
14. Dominic DeLuca of Cornell
15. Brian Eimstad of Cornell
16. Steven Sum of Princeton
17. Cameron Stanish of Yale
18. Nicholas Tuck of Penn
19. Brendan Shearn of Penn
20. Ben Huffman of Harvard
I have no idea how the 4's and 5's will shake out. Team-wise I think Columbia, Dartmouth, and Penn are the deepest ones. Princeton always seems to run well but they lose their home-course advantage. The hills could really break things up, which would probably favor Cornell and Dartmouth given their locations.
I scored the teams using these individuals through 3 runners and think these picks are much better. Here is what I got:
chaserofsteeples wrote:
Some definite Cornell and Penn bias, but I did my best to disentangle my picks from my loyalties. Here goes:
1. Ben Rainero, Cornell
2. Thomas Awad, Penn
3. Nick Tuck, Penn
4. Curtis King, Dartmouth
5. Michael Sublette, Princeton
6. Tait Rutherford, Columbia
7. Dominic Deluca, Cornell
8. Brian Masterson, Dartmouth
9. Kevin Dooney, Yale
10. Connor Herr, Cornell
11. Tom Purnell, Harvard
12. Brian Eimstad, Cornell
13. Jack Boyle, Columbia
14. Brendan Shearn, Penn
15. Aubrey Myjer, Columbia
16. Joey Chapin, Dartmouth
17. James Randon, Yale
18. Noah Kauppila, Princeton
19.Cameron Stanish, Yale
20. Steven Sum, Princeton
The way Rainero's running right now, it's hard to see anyone besides Awad taking him down, and Awad hasn't exactly been performing up to par yet this season. Rainero has the speed (4:01 mile to outkick Oregon and Stanford at Penn Relays last year) to hang with Awad and anyone else for that matter. The way Tuck's been running makes me think he's poised to break out big at XC Heps, and other heavy hitters from past years (Purnell, Dooney) have not been themselves this season either. I erred on the side of giving the edge to guys with proven postseason credentials (King, Sublette, etc.) and I think the mid-distance-oriented Princeton in particular will suffer on the VCP back hills. As for Myjer, I was impressed by his performance at Wisconsin but his lack of consistently strong performances keeps him farther back in my books.
As for the team race, I'm gonna be bold and say that Columbia will be fourth behind Cornell, Dartmouth, and Penn. No idea what the order will be in front of or behind them. If that call holds up, Princeton finishing no higher than 5th would be the first time since 2004 they finished that low. We'll see.
I think the course isn't a total non factor but generally I think the best runners win regardless of the course. At a meet this tight, it might make a difference. I think VCP is a legit course so it might hurt a 1500 guy who is barely hanging on for 8k but I had plenty of milers rock VCP. I had a 1:48 guy get 2nd at VCP. Courtney Jaworski also did just fine at VCP.
lone_sequoia wrote:
Rojo, you really think the-toughness of the VCP course is overrated?
I think Dartmouth is going to put 8 guys in front of Columbia's #5. Thats how many guys they have that have been consistently cranking 100+ mile weeks for at least a year (some for over two years now). And those miles are not stopping at crosswalks in Manhattan. We are talking about hills twice the size of Cemetery that they climb every day.