Colleges are setting minimum times to be recruited, even in XC. Coaches in high school see it, they are just doing anything they can to help the kids, so they create advantageous courses to be able to run fast. Thats the only factor in play at all. If colleges weren't setting time standards for recruiting in XC, courses would have stayed more challenging then they currently are.
Theres a few traditionalists left out there, but they are a dying breed thats for sure.
This is not accurate. College coaches want to know track times and they want to know how you run against similar competition in XC. They realize that XC is about place, not time.
Believe it or not there are still challenging courses out there.
I'm definitely in favor of hillier, more challenging CC courses. Track is for flat, fast running, to test one's mettle on an ideal surface. Cross is different, calling more upon physical and mental strength that one needs to remain competitive on challenging terrain.
For high school anyway, you often have to work with what is available on school property. This is why you end up with start on the right field foul line of the softball field, run around the school's perimeter, a lap around the tennis courts, and finish on the track. Some schools will hold the race at a nearby park, but then poses challenges of transportation, no locker rooms, no indoor space for before/after, etc.
Interesting, I don't remember ever using locker rooms at HS XC meets. It was a while ago though.
XC courses should not be 5000m. That only encourages comparisons across courses and facilitates the downward spiral we’re in to have the fastest course. Courses should be unique, challenging, and interesting. Establish a good route and keep it forever, so we can compare times *on that course* across decades. Make it 4678 meters, or 5231 meters, or whatever distance it turns out to be. And that’s the distance. And no, you really shouldn’t compare times from one course to another.
For high school anyway, you often have to work with what is available on school property. This is why you end up with start on the right field foul line of the softball field, run around the school's perimeter, a lap around the tennis courts, and finish on the track. Some schools will hold the race at a nearby park, but then poses challenges of transportation, no locker rooms, no indoor space for before/after, etc.
Interesting, I don't remember ever using locker rooms at HS XC meets. It was a while ago though.
Same. We always changed before we got on the bus to go to the meet (or run there from our school if it was a home meet).
XC courses should not be 5000m. That only encourages comparisons across courses and facilitates the downward spiral we’re in to have the fastest course. Courses should be unique, challenging, and interesting. Establish a good route and keep it forever, so we can compare times *on that course* across decades. Make it 4678 meters, or 5231 meters, or whatever distance it turns out to be. And that’s the distance. And no, you really shouldn’t compare times from one course to another.
It's ok to mix in a pancake track meet or two into the season, but CC should be CC - over hill, under dales with twists, turns and tough-footing most the way through at the championship level. This should not even be up for debate.
Of course they are. Cross country doesn't mean hills. It literally means a race across the country, which can mean any kind of terrain. Same as road courses, which can include any kind of terrain -- flat, hilly, winding, etc.
Cross country courses with hills > pancake-flat ones. Agree or disagree
There are two seasons devoted to running on perfectly flat, pristine surfaces. There should be one with challenging hills, crappy footing, course elements and varying distances even.
- coming from a guy who sucked at XC for the most part
Problem is that everyone with a say in the matter is incentivized to favor flat courses. Athletes, coaches, ADs, etc. all want to see fast times you aren’t getting that with a hilly course
This is one thing I love about Virginia: the big School Divisions state championship was moved to the toughest mfing cross country course I've ever seen in my life. You have kids that went sub 15 on a flat course a month ago struggling to break 16 in prime fitness for a State title. I absolutely love it.
Problem is that everyone with a say in the matter is incentivized to favor flat courses. Athletes, coaches, ADs, etc. all want to see fast times you aren’t getting that with a hilly course
This is one thing I love about Virginia: the big School Divisions state championship was moved to the toughest mfing cross country course I've ever seen in my life. You have kids that went sub 15 on a flat course a month ago struggling to break 16 in prime fitness for a State title. I absolutely love it.
2 or 3 years ago, in the Class 5 state title race, both the leading boy and the leading girl at 2 miles couldn't even finish the race because hills in the last mile blew out their legs, and they fell and couldn't get up. Absolutely brutal.
The boy was Berkley Nance, by the way. Ran at Footlocker last year and ran sub-24 at Bill Dellinger for BYU this year. I remember waiting at the 200m to go mark at state, waiting for him to come over the final hill. And waiting, and waiting, and waiting, and then suddenly the 2nd place guy who was way behind comes over the hill with the lead vehicle. Nobody knew what was going on.
It’s cross country, not cross track. If anyone here is ever in Southern California go run the Palos Verdes High School cross country course. Hardest course in the nation by a long shot
Colleges are setting minimum times to be recruited, even in XC. Coaches in high school see it, they are just doing anything they can to help the kids, so they create advantageous courses to be able to run fast. Thats the only factor in play at all. If colleges weren't setting time standards for recruiting in XC, courses would have stayed more challenging then they currently are.
Theres a few traditionalists left out there, but they are a dying breed thats for sure.
Ridiculous all it takes for rain to make any time comparison meaningless. Nobody mentions the time runners run at the world xc so why do this at a lower level in America
Colleges should recruit based on track times or maybe xc position
It’s cross country, not cross track. If anyone here is ever in Southern California go run the Palos Verdes High School cross country course. Hardest course in the nation by a long shot
Problem is that everyone with a say in the matter is incentivized to favor flat courses. Athletes, coaches, ADs, etc. all want to see fast times you aren’t getting that with a hilly course
It’s cross country, not cross track. If anyone here is ever in Southern California go run the Palos Verdes High School cross country course. Hardest course in the nation by a long shot
There is a course in the Cuyahoga Valley National Park in northern Ohio that is a home course for a high school in the area and it also hosts an invitational meet. I believe only 3 guys have cracked 17:00 on the 5k course and only one girl has gone under 20:00 in the history of the course going back 20+ years.
Andrew Jordan, a 8:46/4:10 high schooler on the track and a 13:28 guy in college, could only muster a 16:56 there. That same year he ran in the 14:40s for 5k elsewhere. The only girl to break 20:00 on the course is Bridget Franek. After high school Franek went on to Penn State where she was the NCAA steeple champion and also represented the US in the steeple at the 2012 Olympics.
Usually only 5-6 guys break 18:00 and about the same number of girls crack 21:00 in any given year. If there is a more difficult XC course anywhere I would like to know where it is.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.