The unofficial results for the women had Florida State first, Georgetown second.
The unofficial results for the women had Florida State first, Georgetown second.
Unofficial word has
Florida State crushing
Georgetown 2nd
Michigan over Colorado in a surprise.
Thanks. Individual women?
men's and women's results
http://www.gosycamores.com/ViewArticle.dbml?ATCLID=205075162
Why did Bayer run pre-nats but not Wisco with the rest of the team?
times were much slower for the women this year....weather?
Good question. And I would have thought he would finish higher!
Indiana fielded two teams this weekend.
At Wisconsin:
5. 271 Indiana ( 24:29 2:02:23 0:41)
=================================================================
1 23 Andrew Poore SR 24:13
2 27 Ben Hubers SR 24:16
3 35 Adrien Dannemiller SR 24:22
4 68 Andrew Weatherford SR 24:38
5 118 Desean Turner SR 24:54
6 (216) Yoshi Shimizu SO 25:44
At Pre-Nats:
8. Indiana 259
Top 5 Times: 2:05:31--- Average Time: 25:06
10 Andrew Bayer Indiana 24:27
29 Zachary Mayhew Indiana 24:48
38 Benyam Bizuneh Indiana 25:02
64 Nate Morrow Indiana 25:20
126 Jr Ricker Indiana 25:54
Course must be running slow this year. Anyone know what the conditions were like?
Windy and a more conservative start w/ the lack of depth this year plus the course wasn't in great shape i didn't think..very bumpy
Throw Bayer into the Wisconsin race and they drop maybe 80-90 points off their team score, finish not too far behind Stanford. Weird team racing strategy. Any informed guesses as to why?
.
stack79 wrote:
Throw Bayer into the Wisconsin race and they drop maybe 80-90 points off their team score, finish not too far behind Stanford. Weird team racing strategy. Any informed guesses as to why?
Maybe they had some kind of academic obligation? If they had an exam on Thursday or Friday they wouldn't be able to make the Wisco meet. Idk, just a guess
Pretty impressive FSU women putting 5 ahead of Georgetown's #2.
joalturn wrote:
.
stack79 wrote:Throw Bayer into the Wisconsin race and they drop maybe 80-90 points off their team score, finish not too far behind Stanford. Weird team racing strategy. Any informed guesses as to why?
Maybe they had some kind of academic obligation? If they had an exam on Thursday or Friday they wouldn't be able to make the Wisco meet. Idk, just a guess
yeah, who knows but probably something like that. Pre-nats were only an hour from IU so Bayer could have driven over that morning if he had to. I could see Indiana top 5 at nats if they can pull everyone together for the same race. haven't been able to do that real well in the last few years.
it was incredibly windy
Here is the data from Wisconsin from 1pm to 4pm (GMT = Madison - 5):
Time.......................... Temp Dew Point Wind Gusts
2011-10-14 15:53:00 GMT 53.6 39.2 15.0 33.4
2011-10-14 16:53:00 GMT 55.4 39.2 16.1 27.6
2011-10-14 17:53:00 GMT 55.4 39.2 11.5 26.5
2011-10-14 18:53:00 GMT 57.2 35.6 16.1 26.5
Indiana (I think that the race went off at 9:30 or 10 or maybe an hour later:
Time... Wind/Gusts.. Temp Dew Point
8:53 SW 13 G 21 59 40
9:53 SW 14 G 20 63 42
10:53 SW 18 G 24 68 44
11:53 SW 16 G 25 72 45
12:53 W 17 G 31 73 46
So in Madison the temperature was cooler, dew points about the same as in Indiana (thus 63 is very comfortable). The wind was a couple of miles an hour faster and the gusts substantially stronger in Madison.
These conditions would indicate that Madison would run a little slower, but a smaller field at PreNats might have given less shelter in the pack.
standby wrote:
Windy and a more conservative start w/ the lack of depth this year plus the course wasn't in great shape i didn't think..very bumpy
Yep, probably 20mph winds if not slightly higher, which was definitely a factor as it was blowing in the direction of the long straightaway at the start (as in the runners were running straight into the headwind). The course felt very slow too. I usually run no slower than 6:50 pace, but we did our pre-race run saturday at 7:20 pace. Long grass and very bumpy. I've never run on the course before so I have nothing to compare it to, but if it'd be short manicured grass I think I'd have run at least 30 seconds faster. The wind was probably another 10-20 seconds. Coming around the last turn and trying to kick hard into the wind made things pretty tough. Considering the winning time was barely under 24:00 by a guy who's beaten Chelanga (who ran 22:52 on this course), I think it's fair to say the course was slow that day for whatever reasons.
redhatter wrote:
standby wrote:Windy and a more conservative start w/ the lack of depth this year plus the course wasn't in great shape i didn't think..very bumpy
Yep, probably 20mph winds if not slightly higher, which was definitely a factor as it was blowing in the direction of the long straightaway at the start (
Given the weather data above it is highly unlikely that the wind was blowing at 20 miles an hour; the was the speed of the gusts. Note that wind speeds are measured 10m above ground level in an area generally free of obstructions. While the course is generally free of obstructions, they were not running ten meters about ground level and thus the wind speeds were likely closer to 10-12, with gusts of 15-18.
It is surprising how much trouble people seem to have parsing weather reports.