An Interesting Proposal To Save The Fall XC Season: Implement Interval Starts

Nordic Skiing is still watched by plenty of people though. Maybe in this version, it amps up the suspense because you never know if someone is going to surprise from behind and knock someone off the podium. I think it is way more interesting to see everyone going all out in the race instead of the top guys jogging the whole way, and kicking the last 400m.

Anyway, saying it would destroy the viewers experience and no one would watch it does not seem to hold any merit, because plenty of people watch Nordic skiing where they already do this. Besides, this is just a way to still have races as opposed to no races.

there are actually several ways this idea can be implemented.

we should probably try them all and then decide which results in the most competitive and fairest event.

1) individual delayed start (seeded with fastest person going last). i ran a road race once which used this method - they called it the " tortoise and the hare". it was interesting. I don't recall catching anyone but i must have (since i ended up winning) and never got caught. there was only 1 runner seeded behind me. my goal was to stay ahead on him. the interval may have been 10 seconds. This can be rather boring way to race, and not too spectator friendly. Time trailers will love it but head-to-head racing will not.

2) team start - since team members travel together to meets having them all start together will not greatly increase the risk of virus spread. it might add something to team tactics. Bike racing uses this some. it keeps the team concept. i actually think for CC i like this one the best. it becomes a time trail. Can teach the team the importance of running/racing as a team.

3) small group start based on ability - put small groups of 10-20 in ability groups = so runners will still be competing head-to-head. This will reduce the congestion on the course and the total amount of passing etc.

4) larger group waves - this is an idea i came up with to help with CC course congestion at the big mega meets. Puts runners in groups of 100 or so (or by time - a sub 25:00 8k group, a sub 26:00 8K group etc. This doesn't do much for reducing virus spread but address more of the congestion issue in CC. but might be worth trying during this time of uncertainty.

I like #2 the best.

#1 the least

#3 could be real interesting (and if CC turns out to be a low risk spreader - it might be workable)

..... wrote:

yes thats a basic relay start with all 1's going then 2's and so on.... But just add times up and fastest time wins.. No real strategy point wise where you put your runners as their times would just be put together with everyone from every race.

No. I mean that it would be scored as 7 different races. You have all the #1’s race and their place is their score. Then the 2’s race and their place is their score. Etc. Then, you add the scores. So, the best score would be a 7 because that means your team won all 7 races. You could just stagger the starts by like 15 min to prevent overlap on the course but still keep the meet length down. The delayed start method still scores all the runners together which this flighted method does not.

dadsfadsfdasfdsafdas wrote:

Dingler wrote:

I actually like this idea better. Strategy comes into play. Do you have each person run their own race? Or do you run as a pack to try and pull the slowest along?

Yeah this would work well. You could even have like 3 mins between teams so there would be no passing.

And interesting question is how do you score it? Cumulative time? Or do you mash all the runners together at the end and do traditional scoring. It would be a bit unfair in that later teams would know the results. I suppose you could split teams up (4 guys go in 1 heat and another 3/4 in the second) which would make for some interesting choice as to when you run your fast guys and how to split people up.

To score it you add the top five times from each team and take the cumulative total. Tie goes to the 6th runner.

Every major college XC course is setup as a 2k loop.

Agreed. This would work very well for the team race. Have them start in reverse order of the rankings, which would give the best lots of teams to chase, but also force them to go around a lot, if the gaps weren't big. For individual qualifiers, it might be more problematic>maybe start them in relation to their individual ranking.

FLupda wrote:

A better idea would be to have each team run together on the course at staggered intervals. They all train together anyways. It would be a great team sport.

Why not follow the scientific data showing that the statistical risk of a bad outcome secondary to this virus for young, healthy individuals approaches zero percent?

The cc season should be run as it always has been.

Bar from the meets nursing home patients, those so sick that they should be in a nursing home,

the immuno-compromised, and those with multiple, serious systemic diseases.

Cap the age for everyone on site, including race officials and coaches, at 29 unless the coaches sign a waiver accepting the 1 in a thousand odds of dying of this virus.

The only time I recall the last day of the Tour de France as truly gripping was when they did a time trial where Greg Lemond came back from a long way back to catch Laurent Fignon to win the Tour. (1989).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWyfb3H7LEg

I run in a HS meet every year that's a flighted start, where everybody declares their #1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 runners for both the boys' and girls' side, and then all the #7s run, then #6, all the way down to the "championship flight" with the 1s running together. For the small-school division that we run in, a meet with like 20 teams isn't small, but with each team only putting one girl and one boy in each field, the total number of runners in each race is only 40, instead of 140 in a regular race. Like regular xc races then, each finish gets the number of points for their place, but unlike regular xc races, the perfect score is 7 instead of 15. Last year, for example, my team and one other HS were far better than all the other teams in the field, and we ended up losing 12 to 13, but the flighted race made it exciting, because it came down to the top runners from each team running against each other, and the winner won the meet (they were in 4th and 5th, but there were seven guys at that meet that ended up all-state).

The point being, it makes for some really exciting racing, plus it keeps the exposure to other people at a minimum, and would be a good alternative to a regular race because people would only be exposed to two runners on every team.

New Queen wrote:

Every major college XC course is setup as a 2k loop.

Plenty of big courses that aren't 2k loops, and it wouldn't be hard to convert to a longer loop in most places.

Bigger problem is that seemingly a ton of colleges aren't going to be on-campus or are going to do a weird staggered schedule, so it's not clear how fall sports are going to work.

Rocket Mann wrote:

Nordic Skiing is still watched by plenty of people though.

YEAHHHHHH!!!!!!!!

Sure it's interesting, but I proposed this to the IAAF two months ago so it's been circulating.

Why don't we wear masks for the next couple of months and stop being idiots.

Best way to save the xc season

I hear what you are saying, but disagree with how you want to score it. The relay format is fun and scoring it your way would be fun for a one time special meet ( we actually host one like this in the pre season every year) but if we are talking an entire season and championship races, I think you should score it the normal way with all times put together regardless of how you do wave starts, flighted starts etc...just my humble opinion

Which ones? Every major college course is 2k. Staggered starts will not work.

That does the opposite by slowing the spread. Everyone is going to be exposed so why would you want it to happen this fall instead of this summer?

None of this is necessary. Our conference was told yesterday that all athletes would be tested on-site prior to the championship. Anyone testing positive would not be eligible to compete. Problem solved. Mass start race resume.

rojo wrote:

This is a pretty interesting idea that comes from guest contributor JD Downing.

https://www.letsrun.com/news/2020/06/the-case-for-interval-starts-as-an-emergency-option-for-fall-2020-xc-racing/

PS. One bonus of the plan not mentioned in the article is that it would end the snooze-fest starts we've seen in recent years at the start of so many big xc meets where the big stars jog around for like half the race before getting after it.

I'm pretty sure I wrote this idea out in some detail on a cross country thread about 5-6 weeks ago. I know Rojo was on that thread too

college coach wrote:

None of this is necessary. Our conference was told yesterday that all athletes would be tested on-site prior to the championship. Anyone testing positive would not be eligible to compete. Problem solved. Mass start race resume.

A member of Enormous State University's XC team teats positive right before the race (assuming that an on-site testing facility is available, infallible test kits, and can process all athlete tests within hours of race start) and is not eligible to run that day. The problem is, he rode in a van/motor coach with his entire team. The team had dinner and breakfast together in the past 12 hours, and he shared a hotel room with at least one teammate. This means that there are potentially multiple carriers on the ESU squad that could pass the virus.

Even is testing was carried out several days prior to competition, an athlete can become infected in the days leading up to the race (another student in class, girlfriend, roommate, professor, coach, training room staff, fellow airline passenger, etc.) and pass the virus to others.

So, in the interest of safety and conference C.Y.A. against litigation, do you boot the entire ESU team and any other squad with a COVID positive? If the test turns out to be a false positive, what recourse does the athlete have against conference official because he was wrongly denied the opportunity to compete? What happens if that athlete was a shoo-in for Nationals and he misses the regional qualifier due to serving a 14 day quarantine due to the bad conference test result?