Best State for Cross Country and Track

Dude, your numbers are way off!

What a turd wrangler.

California and New York are the clear cut favorites. I think Ohio is a near follower there after for a few reasons.. 1. Maybe not as deep as the other top two states, but also much less populated than them (I'm pretty sure). 2. They're pretty topheavy with Borchers (3:46-1500) leading the way. Also the small but talented school of Woodridge. Also consider the great Caldwell that won 9 state champioships in the 70s-80s dominating the state. 3. Ohio is a football dominated state, most athletes play football.

However, I may be a bit biased lol. But I vote New York and California. Colorado may be another state to consider.

last year i was wondering the same question... so i tallied the stats for the top 50 in the 800, mile, and 2 mile. Then I divided the population of each state by the total # of runners in the top 50 lists. I know, I'm a nerd.

The results were: SURPRISE!

1. Wyoming!

which is obvious because the state only has around 500,000 people.

I don't have the spreadsheet anymore, but I remember the Midwest and the Northwest being strong. I believe Oregon was 2nd and Wisconsin 3rd...

The south was weak. I figured the Northeast would do well, but their populations made the scores go down.

Keep in mind, this was only track, not XC... interesting though

BTW... North Carolina was the best state on the East Coast, i just remembered

While I may be slightly biased because I grew up and competed in both XC and track in Northern Michigan. While I was running XC, I and my H.S. of Charlevoix Mi (8 time state champs in the 80's with coach Spieles), had to deal with the following runners quite often....A certain Mcmullen from Cadillac Mi, olympian. Ryan, Casey, and Sean Shay, from podunk central lake. Danthan from Rockford, not to mention several "B" schools like Walled lake western, Petoskey (John Goble-Olympic XC skier). On the ladies side, anyone remember Kelly Smith? From Petoskey, used to run the girls races, crush everyone, then get in the boys races and consistantly drop 4:50+/- for her second mile race of the day, after 2:12-15 800. She tore it up @ CU. Maybe Michigan isn't the best or absolute fastest running state, but we used to run in Crap in October, mud, snow, always raining. My H.S. 4x8 team ran 7:53 at states and got 8th. (early 90's) That would kill all AZ, and most Cali times today. I live in AZ now, and the times most H.S. guys run are laughable. Most MI H.S. guys from Michigan would have owned Cali or AZ guys. I don't think in 4 yrs of h.s. XC, i ever once wore road racing flats, it happens at EVERY meet in AZ, and a bunch in Cali. Conditions have a lot to do with the times you see S.W. guys running... let the bashing begin...

http://www.angelfire.com/ca5/runningman4/hslists.html

here are some results...

RunDaddy wrote:

If you're talking HS Cross, no way is Massachusetts in the top 3 over California. What statistical criteria are you usuing to draw that conclusion?

To have an intelligent debate on the subject we really need to agree to a common measuring stick.

You'd be surprised. Remember, this is a reference to cross, not track. Apply a Worshmitz-Dmitro algorithm to national data from the last decade and you'll see.

I don't know much about high school. But for college, Wisconsin has to be toward the top with Madison, LaCrosse, Oshkosh, Platteville. They have solid programs in WI that produces awesome runners.

WHILE IN HS

Sub 9:00 2-Mile

CA 124, IL 26, WA 22 NY 21, OH 14

Sub 4:10 Mile

CA 133, IL 38, NY 31, WA 30, OR 30, TX 27

Sub 1:50 800m

CA 32, TX 13, IL 11, NJ 9 NY 7

Foot Locker stats

http://www.dyestat.com//?pg=us2006FootLockerFinalssullysstats

POST HS – based on where the athletes attended HS

sub 4:00 Mile

CA 38, NY 27, OR 19, IL 15, TX 15, WA 15

2006 NCAA Mens XC

Scoring/places is for U.S. runners only and is based on where each runner went to high school.

1. Utah 144

2. California 187

3. Oregon 200

4. Illinois 268

5. New York 282

6. Texas 392

7. Washington 403

8. Virginia 427

9. Indiana 479

10. Pennsylvania 480

11. Michigan 498

12. Connecticut 500

13. Florida 583

14. Massachusetts 594

15. Arizona 700

No other state had 5 finishers. Colorado and New Jersey had 4.

California is top 5 for last 6 years with next best being Illinois top 5 for 5 of last 6 years and Texas in top 6 (including four 6ths) all 6 years.

It is difficult to argue track times. Obviously, the best kids compete at nationals, but the kids that make the competition and depth of a state do not get to run in the nationals. I think weather plays a major role in this debate. The northeast has a major indoor season, which i think hurts the outdoor season, esp. for distance runners. In many of these states, weather also plays a MAJOR role in training. When it snows, it is hard to do anything of great quality on a consistant basis. I know in Jersey the weather goes from cold and windy to 90 degrees and humid in a matter of 2-3 weeks. The window for racing fast in good weather is very small and some year non-existant. The weather is so unpredictable here as well. Set up a race in May and it could be cold and rainy or 90 degrees and humid. Cali has ideal weather for training and racing year round. You can't argue that. Some mid-west states have a more mild climate in the early summer. I could not imagine training in the southern states at times.

Just some thoughts.

There are NY teams that didn't qualify for the state meet let alone the Federation Meet that, according to tullyrunners speed ratings, could beat some of the teams that went to nationals. NY takes 1-2 two years in a row and no doubt Toga would have been top 5 this year.

Girls XC- NY hand down. Cali is overrated in everything.

California definitely has a huge advantage, not only in terms of the sheer number of kids that go out for cross country, but also in terms of climate. I ran in high school in a mountain state, and we frequently had snow that prohibited any kind of fast running and sometimes running altogether. I remember hearing about a kid named Bryan Dameworth in California who won Arcadia in 8:50-something and being super impressed, that is, until I heard he was running over 90 miles a week, a lot of it quality I'm sure. That's one of the major disadvantages of altitude, aside from the fact that the absolute times of races are simply going to be slower by about 10 seconds per mile. You can not train your body to run fast like you can at low altitude. Faster intervals = faster times.

cali and Utah.

Steel Reserve wrote:

BTW... North Carolina was the best state on the East Coast, i just remembered

When did New York, New Jersey, Florida, Virginia, and Pennsylvania move from the east coast? Was this due to plate tectonics? I'm going to have to go buy a new map of the United States before I go on my next vacation. I think I need to drive south to go to Florida, but with all the geographical changes on the east coast I'm not really sure anymore.

florida rules at everything!!! basketball, football, and even cross country and track!!!!!!

Exactly. If you go by Footlocker Champions, for example, my state, MINNESOTA, sucks. No national champions, but lots of good performances there and all-around performances at state meet levels (8:50s-9:10 3200m guys; girls are also pretty good,) Also, factor in the following have come from the "GOPHER" state and have done "okay" collegiately and beyond for Track and Roads,(in no particlar order): Ron Daws,Garry Bjorklund, Steve Plasencia, Steve Holman, Van Nelson, Buddy Edelen, Bob Kempainen(U.S.A OLYMPIC Teams); Mike Slack, Dick Beardsley, Mark Nenow, Don Timm,.............................etc.,etc. Women: Carrie Tollefson,(Villanova/NCAA star,U.S.A. OLYMPIC team), Cathy Twomey (world class in the late '70s,) Jan Arenz(national/world class marathoner in the '70s..........some very good young females just starting college now: Elizabeth Yetzer, Bria Wetsch, just to name a couple.

A couple of the above names are just about as good as it gets in U.S distance lore. Haven't heard of Van Nelson? Try 1967 Pan Am Games 5 AND 10,000m Gold, as well as Drake Relays 3m/6m double champion 3 straight years!! Van also beat the likes of Gerry Lindgren, Dave Ellis, Billy Mills,etc. at 2M-10K!! If you haven't heard of Van Nelson, you are either too young or are not really a hardcore fan of U.S. distance history. Get out the "Track and Field News" from 1962-1982; Minnesota will look pretty good!! If this was a state the size of California or Massachusetts, NY or NJ, it would be impressive enough. All these greats coming from a state with a population of about 4 million, is mind-boggling. On a per-capita basis,Oregon and Washington MIGHT be considered #1 but I still say, MINNESOTA rules!!

These stats are all nice and fun to look at, but there is a direct correlation with a state's success in all high school sports and it's population. This is all by memory, but CA has about 50M people, NY has 25M or so, TX, IL, OH, VA and FL, etc are all the most populated states……South Carolina has about 2 M people in the entire state, of course they would not even be able to compete with say an Atlanta, GA that has about 5M in the metro area. FL does have 21M +, but remember the age shift due to retirees.

Now the interesting thing would be for one of you geeks to adjust these numbers for per capita…..

[quote]>>>>>> wrote:

These stats are all nice and fun to look at, but there is a direct correlation with a state's success in all high school sports and it's population. This is all by memory, but CA has about 50M people, NY has 25M or so, TX, IL, OH, VA and FL, etc are all the most populated states……South Carolina has about 2 M people in the entire state, of course they would not even be able to compete with say an Atlanta, GA that has about 5M in the metro area. FL does have 21M +, but remember the age shift due to retirees.

Now the interesting thing would be for one of you geeks

a

yes, a computer geek would come in handy. Someone who could weigh (all-time) high school,or college,or post-college distance performances based on the population of each state. Many have an interest in current H.S. performances (e.g. number of National F.L. champions) to determine a state's ranking. I think it would also be fair to weigh the pop. of the state to determine how good it is. California, and Illinois, for example,SHOULD have more champions than North Carolina!! Being "older" myself, I would like to see how each state ranks in ALL-TIME Distance performances, PERIOD. E.g., how many Olympians in distance running (800m-Marathon?), or just top all-time PRs of a state: 800m-Marathon. This is more of an indicator of a state's prowess in distance running over the years. The number of Footlocker champions is interesting to look at, but hardly an indicator of a state's overall distance accomplishments, over a long period of time.

We have actually tried to do this (at my running store in Minneapolis during the slow winter months!!), and it's interesting. The biggest challenge is what do you base one's residence on: born and raised in the state?, h.s in the state,? college,? or where living when training and making the accomplishment. E.g. what state should claim Frank Shorter: NY, CT, FL, NM....CO?? Frank lived in all those states at one time or the other. Which state should claim Frank in the calculations? Could be fun, it's a long winter!!

jsully wrote:

2006 NCAA Mens XC

Scoring/places is for U.S. runners only and is based on where each runner went to high school.

1. Utah 144

2. California 187

3. Oregon 200

4. Illinois 268

5. New York 282

.

But if you take out people over 23, Utah can't field a team.

But if you take out people over 23, Utah can't field a team.

WAHHH WAAHHHH WAAHHHHH... cry about it. they are good and theres nothing wrong with it.