JENNA MF HUTCHINS - Runs 15:58 - 1st US HS Girl To Break 16:00 in XC!!

Three girls will run 9:35 for 3200 this spring.

Race to top wrote:

Three girls will run 9:35 for 3200 this spring.

No way, you're not even close to being realistic. Then why are there speed ratings only in the high 1 60s

Basically the only record they have a shot at is the 947-3200. But the only way they'll get it is with a bunch of Pacers

And I'm not sure that it will even count because isn't there a difference between High School records in high school only races and Records run with Pacers which are considered Pro races

Anyway I think Hutchins is the only one with a real shop. I should say with the best shot. What's up with brown I haven't even seen any speed ratings outside of a 165. Sydney thorvaldson Maybe. Anyway if these girls are really running such a hectic times they would have better speed ratings. They're doing really good don't get me wrong and it definitely very good runners

Track and cross country are not the same. My best cross country runner is my third best guy on the track. I have a guy who ran a 9:19 timetrial a week after state but never broke 16 minutes in cross country. My 15:30 guy ran 9:35.

Maybe you forgot that Brown already ran close to 9:35. With all three in the same track race, they will run 9:35.

She ran it in a time trial running in formation with three other runners. Easily 15 seconds faster than could have been achieved in a Solo effort in a high school race. You're being totally unrealistic

One of them may go 9:29 in a pro race.

Brown's been running record breaking times at every meet in Texas. Nothing is wrong with her. Speed ratings are speed ratings, they don't paint a picture.

No injures yet that I'm aware of, so let's hope she gets to run state tomorrow at her best. Should set a course record, judging by how quick times are this year (too quick).

Not sure how you can think she doesn't have a chance. She ran a 9:57 2-mile her sophomore year, a 9:58 her junior year in a solo effort (not even counting the fact it was a very early opener), and of course, the legendary time trial.

I dug through the PRs and track times of some of the guys who ran 15:50-16:10 in the meet. There were 9:30s and 9:40s in the group and many 15:30s.

It was certainly legendary. :)

I do think there is a correlation between speed ratings and track times. So a runner putting up 160 SRs may not be a strong candidate for a national record. Then again Brown is a 9:50s 3200/2 mile runner.

I think these runners target the 3200 record because it is the one they think they have the best shot at. When Tuohy set the 3200 record she said flat out that her training and fitness level indicated that she would run faster and that she was disappointed with the time. She also had a really good shot at approaching Cain's 2-mile 9:38 (which is consistent with the 9:01 3000 record she ran earlier in the season) when she ran the NB 2 mile in 2019 but her duties in anchoring North Rockland's national champion DMR team prevented a full on effort and she got 9:51. Still a heck of a time.

Race to top wrote:

One of them may go 9:29 in a pro race.

Why stop there? What about breaking 9 minutes? What about breaking every track record in the history of track? Seriously I think these girls are going to run such Epoch times that Jesus Christ is going to be forced to return and bring about heaven on Earth

I only hope that he waits to all three of these girls have a chance to break every track record in the history of mankind because if he doesn't it certainly won't be Heaven for me!

All these girls should worry about their long-term Health rather than short-term Glory. It's obvious that it's more and more just about creating a headline story rather than natural races and long term health and growth

Flat souther courses are always fast.

Really 32 guys under 15?

What a joke.

Why do so many US runners have the middle initials 'MF'?

I Can't Count wrote:

Why do so many US runners have the middle initials 'MF'?

If Jenna Hutchins' father is reading this thread I do not approve of this juvenile crap.

This was the only red flag for me. I do believe Hutchins ran 15:58, but this was eye-opening as the coach is experienced and said it was a sort of a joke, but great competition he could not get elsewhere. Looks like just shy of 200m conversion. Or you could argue the State course was long and these are 9:10-9:30 guys for the top 5 and then to 10:00 for the last couple -

Runner A - 15:50 at State / 14:47 at RLXC

Runner B - 15:31 at State / 14:57 at RLXC

Runner C - 16:00 at State / 15:03 at RLXC

Runner D - 15:56 at State / 15:38 at RLXC

Runner E - 16:36 at State / 16:06 at RLXC

Runner F - 16:45 at State / 16:09 at RLXC

Runner G - 17:17 at State / 16:24 at RLXC

Also want to point out that in super muddy conditions in Beaverton last year at NXN there were 68 guys sub-16:00 and 20 sub-15:30.

They won't break 9 silly, unless you mean 3k. Brown has run 9:39. Thorvaldson just broke the Terre Haute course record in terrible conditions. Hutchins just ran the fastest 5k XC race in history. To not predict at least 9:35 from one of them would be a biased move . Vegas would probably put the over/under at 9:33 for the group. Imagine if they were 3 guys on your team. One has run a 9:39 TT. One ran 15:58. The third one ran 10:06 last year on the track and ran 16:19 this year in XC. You would predict all 3 to run slower than the 9:39 TT a year later? You would be the worst coach in the country. Instead, you are just a bad fan.

No one takes that "time trial" setiously. I think the speed ratings we are seeing now prove the point.

Race to top wrote:

They won't break 9 silly, unless you mean 3k. Brown has run 9:39. Thorvaldson just broke the Terre Haute course record in terrible conditions. Hutchins just ran the fastest 5k XC race in history. To not predict at least 9:35 from one of them would be a biased move . Vegas would probably put the over/under at 9:33 for the group. Imagine if they were 3 guys on your team. One has run a 9:39 TT. One ran 15:58. The third one ran 10:06 last year on the track and ran 16:19 this year in XC. You would predict all 3 to run slower than the 9:39 TT a year later? You would be the worst coach in the country. Instead, you are just a bad fan.

You are absolutely clueless. SMH.

Nice that it is a red flag to you. Just not sure what that means. The course designers have explained that the course is accurate. Hundreds of GPS watches averaged 3.15. Some of you don't seem to realize that it was 60 degrees and zero wind and this was by far the deepest field of boys ever assembled in one race. In a year of NXR and Footlocker, these guys would have run regionals and 90% of them would have been eliminated. Some would have had a bad day at regionals but many would have been eliminated just because they were out of the top 5 individuals in a region or top 10 individuals in a Footlocker regional. I looked at some of the guys who ran 15:50 to 16:10 to see how they compared to Hutchins. There were guys who ran 9:30, 9:40, and 9:50 soph year without track last year. There were guys who had run 15:30 in XC. So when she is running in the company of guys who will run in the 9:1x and 9:2x range this year, it gets old to hear guys like you throw up your red flag.

Come on. There are serious red flags about this course. In fact so serious that someone with intimate knowledge about the course's design felt compelled to address them. In doing so he fully admitted that the course was designed to be as fast as possible and had design features that likely make the course a statistical outlier. When I pointed out that the first and third miles are downhill I was accused of misstating this until I quoted and highlighted the actual testimony. By my calculation about 1400 meters of the final 1600 meters of the course are downhill. That is why the splits seem so off with the runners seemingly able to match their fast first mile times during the third mile.

As to the alleged deepness of the field, sure. :).