Your being native.
Your being native.
In a big field like that you have to go out hard for the first few k if your goal is to finish high
DaysThatWere wrote:
In a big field like that you have to go out hard for the first few k if your goal is to finish high
why?
DaysThatWere wrote:
In a big field like that you have to go out hard for the first few k if your goal is to finish high
Absolute rubbish. That course is at least 12 feet wide the whole way around. It is VERY easy to pass about any time you want.
Matt Johnson passed 155 runners after the 2k split.
3 things to consider:
1) A Cross Country course is not a track. The fast spilts that the downhills create balance out the slow splits the uphills create. Trying to run exactly even splits is going to be very difficult. The race strategy needs to be based around the course, not the desired time.
2) Even on the track, splits vary. People fatigue as races go on and very few runners will run completely even 10k's. I haven't seen a thread pop up on LRC here because "XXX dropped 3 seconds on his 20th lap, XXX shoulda gone out slower to not do that" because that's silly. People will slow at points. It happens.
3) You're putting 200+ of the best guys in the country on the same line and saying "Go". The majority of the guys out there, save for the exceptionally talented guys up front, are very very similar in terms of their ability levels. They're all jockeying for the same position, so they would rather surge just that little bit to edge ahead of that guy near them then follow along behind. Multiply that small surge by the 120 or so guys that are doing it at the same time, sometimes trying to surge ahead of a guy who's also trying to surge ahead of a guy, and there's your recipe for a fast beginning.
I won an NAIA Conference meet using the OPs strategy one year. I HATED leading the last mile. It killed!
That said, I regret using that strategy so often because I think it was a fear-filled one. I feared the distance. Imagine if I had at least once just gone bonzos at the start, fearless. Who care if I bonk, just go-o-o-o-o! I've seen guys win that way. Fearless.
I don't know if you know this, but the first mile is downhill
Few years ago I ran this course, I was an individual qualifier and for the first time at Terre Haute. I was a bit naive and not prepared ( I was very lucky to even make it, kind of unexpected). I went through the first k in 3:00 flat and was sharing the last spot with 3 guys. I stayed around there until 2 k (6:05 ish) and then gradually picked up runners. I ended up finishing in 31 flat which was good for around 120th spot (I don't remember exactly).
In my case, this was the best strategy (I think). My coach later told me I was running like an idiot. But I had fun out there. And I think, given my credentials I placed where I ought to have placed. It's hard to say really. Around 100th spot the field is so deep, you have 2 off minutes during the race, it could cost you 30 spots.
NCAA's always go out too fast. Don't know why - its counter productive. Especially the women. In fact, thats true of track and roads too. The girls are far more prone to big positive split times.
Interestingly, the women that ran most even were the first 5. I believe Reid and Hasay negatively split.
Thread Follower wrote:
I agree with you totally! Leaders were at 2:04 at 800m!!!
Could you imagine seeing that on the Track at the NCAA level?? Often times it's slower than that in the 1500!
Overall poor coaching that continues year after year.
Pre used go out hard all the time. It's called guts.
And he lost to Viren who ran smart.
i think mentally it is much more difficult to run a race intending to pass gobs of people. mentally, if you're aiming for a certain place, it's more comforting to be in/near that place early in the race. you're running confident in your position, rather than worrying if you're going to be able to pass all the people you intended. while from a time perspective, going out slower makes sense, from a race 'psychology' perspective, going out where you want to finish place wise may be more beneficial.
You need more confidence to go out slow. The problem with running even splits is that most aren't confident enough in themselves and start doubting themselves. Once you teach an athlete to do this, it is very effective.
IF you're a really confident and introverted runner who can zone out everything happening around you, running even splits is an easy way to beat stupid or mentally weak runners. The trouble is, that there are too many well prepared runners to stand out with that strategy unless you're going to be near the front with any strategy.
I ran with this strategy at the DII national meet and performed fairly well. I was only in the 15-20 place range in my region (the west) and ended up around 60th at the national meet so I did have a better performance. Just the look on my coaches' faces at 3k was worth it. They were in between pissed and confused as I just gave them a thumbs up with probably only 5-10 guys behind me. By 5k I was starting to move up and seeing familiar people and by 8k I was flying by folks. I even went by my team's #1 guy in every race that year right at the very end. But like I said, it only worked because I was totally comfortable letting everyone go at the start and I was only at the level of the mid pack. If I could contend for All-America, I would have to put myself with those guys at the start. They are just too strong to fall off the pace significantly.
The Pace Maker wrote:
224 runners were at or under 6:00 for 2K. That is 30 minute 10K pace. Only 32 runners finished at or under 30 minutes for 10K. Further, of these 32, only 3 runners ran 5:50 or slower for the first 2K.
Even the slowest runners in the field ran 6:08 for their 2K split, which is 30:40 pace. 169 runners finished slower than 30:40.
My first year ever running cross country, at D3 regionals I told my coach I was aiming for 5:15-20 through the first mile on a pretty hilly course. I hit 5:18, was 15 seconds behind the leaders, just maintained the pace throughout, no speeding up, and won the race by 9 seconds. I never had to speed up, just passed 30+ people the last four miles. The next week, I hit 5:08 through the first mile at D3 nationals, was second last in the whole field, but passed about 150 people the next four miles just chugging along at the same pace...really bizarre, considering you'd think distance runners would be better at pacing themselves.
[quote]Rulesofficial wrote:
No watches are allowed at NCAAs, let alone Garmins.
quote]
oh really? where is that section in the rule book? next you're going to tell me jewelry is banned.
http://www.letsrun.com/photos/2011/ncaaxcmen/imagepages/image52.php
#222 should be dq'ed then!! scandal!
70s Duck wrote:
Thread Follower wrote:I agree with you totally! Leaders were at 2:04 at 800m!!!
Could you imagine seeing that on the Track at the NCAA level?? Often times it's slower than that in the 1500!
Overall poor coaching that continues year after year.
Pre used go out hard all the time. It's called stupidity.
Corrected for you. You are very welcome.
i ran at d1 nationals a few times and always thought the same as the op. Of course, I didn't have good days so it didn't matter for me anyway :)
Those saying you can't move up are totally wrong. You can easily pass as quickly as you want at any point on the course. It is not like track where you can get boxed or there is a big chance of getting tangled in a fall.
Those who attribute it to downhill vs. uphill are not totally correct. Even on flat courses nearly the whole field goes out balls to the wall, and it's ridiculous. It's not running with guts...it's running like a chicken with your head cut off.
Athletes feel too embarrassed to start at the back in view of the spectators and a few of the idiot coaches who think that's a bad race plan. What about Colorado especially in some of their good old days? Even when I was a back-of-the-packer at that level, I would see a good number of their guys right back there by me at the start.
This has nothing to do with being afraid of the distance. If that were the case, weekend warriors should be starting out their marathons at 2:15 pace. Hey, at least they went for that first mile! As much as some of the talented superstars and messageboard slow guys want to believe it, it's not all about "guts". Running smart is smart.
The Vanderbilt women's team showed that you can get really good results starting farther back in the pack and running even splits. They were all between 100th and 107th at 3k, and moved up from 15th to 6th in the team standings. Their top girl ended up passing 60 people the last half of the race and being 39th, grabbing an All American spot, and their 2nd girl was right with her. It's probably a bit tougher to race that way if you're trying to win individually, but as long as you keep a level head it seems to be the sensible thing to do as far as team tactics go.