English XC Champs called off due to weather - I don't want to hear a peep from Brits saying US XC is soft

They're not longer distance runners. I'm talking our best 5k/10k and over guys.

Take out the Trials Marathon this year- those top guys and the ones who will be competing for the 5000, 10,000 teams this summer.

Look back at the old AAU, TAC results. Bill Rogers was actually in the World Cross as well as Salazar and other top longer distance runners.

They would never do something like organise buses though. People would have to make their own way there. Then can you imagine if some kid was knocked down by a car making their way to the race?

Somebody mentioned up thread that the Scottish Championships aren't cancelled. Thats because its an Scottish Athletics Event and they are a small group of dedicated, sensible people in charge of their national and regional events. But in Scotland, other running events are cancelled all the time. The flakiness extends very far.

I'm now beginning to think that British athletes do well because they are so used to overcoming difficulty that by the time they get to the international stage, the typical athlete problems seem quite small. And they are used to dealing with disappointment and rejection.

I think other countries say it soft because it is basically track on grass for all of our major d1 xc races.

Whatever. uk will probably send max 5 people to World cross in march anyway.

In Florida late last year, they held the AAU national xc races in Tallahassee where there was an absolute deluge all day with most of the waiting area under a foot of water and a pond about two to three feet deep formed near the finish line so the boys were all jumping in and swimming in the mud and water. We were absolutely soaked an hour before the race but it was fun. Most cars parked a quarter or half mile away.

Just curious, because I've seen the figure thrown around several times in reference to the senior men's race from last year, but what's the point of having 1,473 racers all in one race? Seems like it'd be very congested from the get-go, especially on a course with laps. Is there not a masters division to help split it up? Or a separate race the slower competitors can do instead? Genuinely curious because it seems like it'd be a nightmare being stuck in the midpack.

History and tradition. It's an event, on the men's side, that dates back to 1884 (officially) and was originally a "closed" club event. To run you had to be on the club team of 12, no mean feat in my old club, and there are a lot of running / athletics clubs in the UK- England athletics alone has 1600+ clubs currently affiliated. Many of these would send some athletes, hence large fields.

The National was , and still is for many, the culmination of the cross country season, following on from county champs in December, and then area champs (Southern, Northern etc) in Jan/Feb. For many athletes - far removed from the gods that are the posters on this board - making the team was a serious matter and at the National you could line-up, cheek by jowl, with greats from the English athletics scene, current and past and torture yourself over the same muddy 9 mile slog.

From the history books, the senior men's race at Newark 1992 had 2197 finishers with 246(!) clubs managing to finish 6 to score. I ran the junior race that day.

On the subject of laps, yes athletes at the back get lapped but the laps are long so the field gets thinned out and its pretty obvious who's up front and who's vying for the lantern rouge.

The English don't really look down on the Scots, but they do kind of look down on the Welsh.

The bigger divide is between Southern and Northern England.

Southerners think Northerners are all hicks, and Northerners think Southerners are all ponces. It's all very tied up in class politics; the North having a higher percentage of working class people, and the South being associated with London's Metropolitan elites.

This is spot on.

The class system is probably the biggest divider in Britain - more so than race, ethnicity, countries, counties (our equivalent of States) or age.

This isn't really coming out in the wash as London and the South continues to have disproportionate resources thrown at it.

London is the best city in the world.. some Northern towns are amongst the poorest in any development country

English Nationals is very much a club event. It gets decent domestic athletes, and occasionally top stars like Alex Yee, but it's primarily an event aimed at club participation. Some clubs take it very seriously, like Tonbridge, Leeds, and Farnham, but for most clubs, it's just about being there. And the UK has a really strong club system. There's 6 affiliated clubs within 10 miles of where I live.

Also, tradition matters. It's always been a big event. And one that usually goes off in the early afternoon. Most XC races continue to be run at that time because it dates back to when people used to work Saturday mornings and go to church on Sunday. Saturday afternoon was the only free time for a race.

The real top XC event in the UK, which does attract elites and usually acts as the selection race for Euro/World XC is the British Athletics Cross Challenge at Sefton Park in Liverpool in November. But even that gets over 700 for the senior men's race.

And there you have it.

You write so definitively.

I think London sucks asss. Unfortunately I have been there more than a few times.

Have you really though? In London, one sucks arse, not "asss'.

us xc is soft

Every English expat I've met is a tosser. This incident fits the mould.

In theory yes but sucking arse is a phrase rarely bandied about, amongst any class, although it's actually quite apt to sum up the thread title. 'Bummer' vaguely comparable, in both sentiment and body part.

Says a sprinter who goes indoors when it's chilly.

And yet you call yourself "geezer": a now obsolete Cockney (London) term 'guiser' originating from the Middle Ages. It means someone who walks around in disguise, a performer in masquerade. How confusing for you.