Where can you see the team scoers?
Where can you see the team scoers?
BTW, milesplit results for both gold races are incorrect. Both are missing 4 runners from the results. Milesplit sucks. Don't go there for the results.
From the Georgia track and field course measuring manual: "Do not use GPS as a way to measure a course. There is a margin of error with GPS, as satellites are not always accurately updated, and the accuracy can drop even more due to weather conditions, tree coverage, etc."
hunter wheres the coke wrote:
Shorter Than Frank wrote:
Unless the course is wheeled, it ain’t legit.
If you really believe there are 3 kids better than Dathan, then you’ve drunk the Koolaid.
I'll see you in May when those three kids run 8:25 for two miles
This, so many haters and not a single one of them have run the course. The weather, the competition, and the atmosphere is what made this day special. There was never a moment on that course when a runner would be alone. I'm glad I witnessed it in person!
fatboy slim wrote:
A more rational view would be to look at track times.
Last year, Parker Wolfe ran 14:26 and went on to run 8:43 for 2 miles in the spring.
Last year, Jenna ran 15:58 here and went on to run 15:34 3 weeks later.
You can’t compare Hough’s times on other courses because he won those races so we don’t know much how faster he could’ve gone. Today, he lost to 4 people.
Also this, logic and reasoning. When the Newbury boys gun 8:30 this spring for 2 miles maybe everyone will open their eyes.
not a duck wrote:
SD2TN wrote:
I was going to comment on this too. I know 2 guys that ran today and their Strava said 3.14 and 3.12.
Watches always run long. A proper 5k course is usually in the 3.2-3.25 range, everyone knows this
This is patently false. I've helped my local track club certify dozens of USATF 5ks and a runner who can run the tangents will get measurements of 3.11 or even lower. Gos can clip corners and shorten distance on routes. Nice try buddy.
michimanx wrote:
I don't know if all of the four fastest NP kids will run 13:50 or faster for 5k on the track, but does anyone doubt that all four can run between 8:35-8:45 for 3200 on the track (or possibly for the full 2M)?
I'm actually coming around to the idea that the course is indeed accurate, it's just nearly as fast as a track. I mean, come on, if you have a nearly flat course with long straights, hard surface, good weather, etc., then people can run near-track-PRs on it. All you really need is the Hutchins comparison ... 15:58 here, 15:34 on the track. Do you really need anything else?
Stop using logic and reason , drink the Hatorade!
Makes Paper wrote:
From the Georgia track and field course measuring manual: "Do not use GPS as a way to measure a course. There is a margin of error with GPS, as satellites are not always accurately updated, and the accuracy can drop even more due to weather conditions, tree coverage, etc."
But the event was sponsored by a GPS company!
once a jogger wrote:
hunter wheres the coke wrote:
I'll see you in May when those three kids run 8:25 for two miles
This, so many haters and not a single one of them have run the course. The weather, the competition, and the atmosphere is what made this day special. There was never a moment on that course when a runner would be alone. I'm glad I witnessed it in person!
The course looked wet in spots? Don't you think that the atmosphere at most State Meets is sufficient for quick times?
once a jogger wrote:
michimanx wrote:
I don't know if all of the four fastest NP kids will run 13:50 or faster for 5k on the track, but does anyone doubt that all four can run between 8:35-8:45 for 3200 on the track (or possibly for the full 2M)?
I'm actually coming around to the idea that the course is indeed accurate, it's just nearly as fast as a track. I mean, come on, if you have a nearly flat course with long straights, hard surface, good weather, etc., then people can run near-track-PRs on it. All you really need is the Hutchins comparison ... 15:58 here, 15:34 on the track. Do you really need anything else?
Stop using logic and reason , drink the Hatorade!
To this end, recall Hutchins ran this race by herself, but had first a pacer, then pacing lights for the track 5,000 so it stands to reason she would run a little fast on the track if just for that reason.
once a jogger wrote:
not a duck wrote:
Watches always run long. A proper 5k course is usually in the 3.2-3.25 range, everyone knows this
This is patently false. I've helped my local track club certify dozens of USATF 5ks and a runner who can run the tangents will get measurements of 3.11 or even lower. Gos can clip corners and shorten distance on routes. Nice try buddy.
Are you sure you haven't been helping set up other short courses? What is your primary method of course measurement in your club?
I thought Hutchins ran better on the track than at Runninglane even with all the pacing help. The 166 SR was accurate. This time a runner whose best prior SR was 160 ran 16:03. At least Hutchins had a 170 SR earlier that season, Bill"s covid disclaimer aside.
Steel Tapeless wrote:
once a jogger wrote:
This is patently false. I've helped my local track club certify dozens of USATF 5ks and a runner who can run the tangents will get measurements of 3.11 or even lower. Gos can clip corners and shorten distance on routes. Nice try buddy.
Are you sure you haven't been helping set up other short courses? What is your primary method of course measurement in your club?
Steel tape, Jones counter. We know what we are doing, good try.
A lot of you are missing the point here in your defensiveness. It’s not as if the NP guys ran ~14:05 and beat the other contenders by :30. That would be reason to be defending them the way you are. There were two guys right amongst them at the finish. Hough’s 2M PR is right around 9:00. He ran a very surprising 4:07 mile in the post-season last year, but besides that run, his best 1600m was like 4:13. They beat Riley Hough by :5-6 yesterday.
It’s not about the NP guys. They’re incredible. Its about thinking that Hough is a 14:10 5K XC guy. It’s about the course being the reason why THE ENTIRE FIELD PR’d by :20-:40 on average. It’s silly.
coachy wrote:
not a duck wrote:
Good one. You don’t know what you’re talking about.
Ok so let’s set the scenario. a BRAND NEW course gets built and the draw of it is that they’re going to hold a meet that’s a “national championship” when NXN is cancelled. How do they draw athletes? They make the course as fast as possible. Lots of flats and downhill and a bit short.
If this was a BRAND NEW meet in some random state (like Alabama) that was a mid season meet, and you have a bunch of 16:20 kids suddenly running 15:40-50, this wouldn’t even be a discussion. Everyone would accept it’s short. Only reason people don’t is because this is a “national championship” so that somehow makes it legit.
This course and the organizers have no more credibility than any other. Stop just taking things at face value and ask some questions. When you look at the data you’ll realize it’s short
Ok first it’s a fixed course and not just for HS. They also have a 6K, 8K and 10K out there with fixed permanent signage. Do we think they just randomly placed everything and didn’t measure it? I measured it twice with GPS and both were slightly over 5K. They know everyone is going to come out and measure their permanent course do you really think it’s going to be short? Not all watches measure things long or short, depends on the type of watch, how you wear it and your ability to run tangents are all factors.
I’ll say it louder for the people in the back—WHEELS AND GPS WATCHES ARE NOT APPROPRIATE METHODS TO MEASURE A CROSS COUNTRY COURSE.
once a jogger wrote:
Steel Tapeless wrote:
Are you sure you haven't been helping set up other short courses? What is your primary method of course measurement in your club?
Steel tape, Jones counter. We know what we are doing, good try.
Great! Just surprised you are so trusting in gps then.
I'm hoping you are thinking steel tape?
Has anyone thought about the starting line configuration?
FastTuohy wrote:
once a jogger wrote:
Stop using logic and reason , drink the Hatorade!
To this end, recall Hutchins ran this race by herself, but had first a pacer, then pacing lights for the track 5,000 so it stands to reason she would run a little fast on the track if just for that reason.
Justin Wachtel finished 4th last year in 14:36 and then ran a 14:15 on the same track and same day as Hutchins ran her 15:34. In both races he was following other runners.
Ugh! All this quibbling about times. Times are MEANINGLESS in XC except for instances in which a course has existed for a very long time (the course in Van Cortland Park comes to mind) and even then the race times should be taken with a grain of salt since environmental conditions change from year to year and even from hour to hour on a given race day.
Now that I got that out of my system, I want to ask what I came here to ask:
Does anyone know why Saratoga didn’t participate in any post season competition? I noticed that FM didn’t either— and for that matter, NO New York team did. If fact— scouring the listed of runners in RXC and Eastbay, I didn’t see any individuals from NY anywhere either. Kind of strange, I thought.