NAIA: Eastern Oregon now #1

have you personnaly raced there??? Have you personally walked the course??? Have you measured it??? This conversation comes up often and it is quite funny to think that the Willamette coach would make his course short. Why would it matter to him??? Watch the times from Sundodger to Willamette...Compare them...Yes they will be faseter, the course has only on major hill in it...But the times will be faster because it is two weeks later and there are 400 runners in the race...Could make me want to nut up and run well...

The Willamette course is short, just like Stanford's track is short.

That's crap. People just run faster there. I don't think an invitational that has been around for such a long period of time and is so huge is going to come up that much short of 8km. You finish on a track and there's quite a bit of running on asphalt. The hills on the course are all asphalt allowing people to generate a little more speed than on a grassy hill.

I have run that course about 12 times. Sometimes twice in a season and I ran faster at the invite than our regional/conference meet because the field was larger and the competition was better. Just like Stanford. You get in a big race, you get pulled along and you run fast.

Word Up thank you...Excellent points made...see ya there on the 5th...

:o)

No, Those teams are that GOOD!Trust me on that one!@#$%

Actually, using the course ratings sheet that a prior coach has give me willamette's course is rated a 1, which is as low as it can possibly go. Therefore it is a very easy course and the times shouldn't be looked upon as a pr or something like that. And i have the nike triax sdm 100, which is the watch that tells you how far and how fast you've run and everytime i have used it on the course it comes up short, one time it was like almost .2 miles short the other it was .13. and i have ran there before and i completely disregard the time, run a course like stanfords 8k or some other "real man's" course then see what your time is.

Maybe their cross-country course is just making up for the fact that their track used to be about 406 meters long. For being such an expensive school with lots of "scholastic prestige" you'd think that someone would have bothered to have measured that track out when it was first made.

Sounds like you are from Warner Pacific RUnningFreak. Well I agree that your region is fairly tough and stacked, but it seems that ALL teams that are ranked in the region are slightly or greatly over-ranked by the results of the first races. By the way why did Clancy run 29:00? Is he injured, sick, or did he have a bad race? I believe that Simon Fraser didn't look at all like their ranking in their race up in Seattle, but again rankings don't mean much, they just help you get to nationals, help you make people nervous, and give your school something to brag about. The only rankings that matter are those that get printed as the final race results from Kenosha on Nov. 23rd. That's when you see who choked, who nutted up, and who peaked out at the right time.

I like T-bone's IDEA!!! NOV. 23rd!!!! Its on!!! [quote]t-bone wrote:

"only rankings that matter are those that get printed as the final race results from Kenosha on Nov. 23rd. That's when you see who choked, who nutted up, and who peaked out at the right time."

hey great point about rankings, it is funny how we tend to forget about how they are an arbitrary number. As for me yes I got to Warner, I am a bit biased about our region, Clancy...Well I don't even know, Something mental was going on in his head that day. The day before the meet he was not himslef and same for race day. The week of intervals before he did not run with any heart or fire. I don't think this will happen again though, he ran like a madman on tuesday leaving all of us in his wake.

Hey where you from BTW....I always like to meet the poeple we connect with online if I can in person.