Derrick runs 52:44 10 miler

Mr. Derrick is indeed a badass, but 52:44 on its own is not really such an amazing time. Taking into account the weather, his mono, who he beat, the course, etc., then I'm sure it's much better than it looks. But 52:44 for 10 miles is something I would equate to low-15's in the 5k. In 13:55 shape, he could definitely run way under 50 minutes.

If it is any comparison, Little Centro ran 55+ at the Annapolis 10 miler a year or two back. Not sure of the course contrast to Derrick's.

you have no idea what you are talking about. he didn't have a very serious case of mon- he is fully recovered and running this event in no way negatively impacted his health

Brimley wrote:

Why is this thread here?

That's a mediocre time, even on a tough course.

Who is the kid? And do I need to start visiting Dye Stat more often to understand why someone would post an entire thread about someone running 5:20 pace for 10 miles?

good post Brimley. I agree, back in the 70's, 5:20 pace for 10 miles would not have impressed many people at all. A lot of people seem to think this Derrick kid is better than Craig Virgin at a similar age, but Virgin would have been several minutes faster in a race of this distance.

not noteworthy wrote:

give me a break. i'd say any 14:45 5k runner which is the majority of d1 runners could run 52 minute 10 mile and feel like it is a tempo. i understand that this was probably just a tempo effort for him also, so its nothing bad. but still, it doesn;t deserve to be treated as anything special

Nice try. No way in hell to average 14:45 college kid could run 52 for 10 miles unless he's going all-out. Maybe the average 14:45 road whore, who's done dozens of marathons, halfs and 10-milers, but the average college track guy? No, sorry. That's a pretty legit time for a 17-year old in hot weather.

I was there watching the race at Waterfall Glen. The weather was sunny and hot, not unbearably so, but enough to affect anyone running a race, and the trail isn't terribly well shaded for a lot of long stretches.

Anyway a little over 7 miles into the race Derrick passed by and you could barely tell he was in a race based on how easy and comfortable he looked. There was minimal effort being exerted there. He was even acknowledging/waving hi to the non-racers as he passed. You have to take his total time with a grain of salt.

that would have put you about 7th man at Arkansas if you did that in a training run

what what in the butt wrote:But theres a HUGE difference between Renato Canova and a letsrunner's assessment of a runner's status. Thats like comparing Tom Landry with the average drunk fan in the stands yelling out orders to players on the field.

I agree. But I gather you're referring to the typical letsrunner (as opposed to all letsrunners) since Renato Canova has been known to post on occasion.

what what in the butt wrote:So, he made a perfectly logical and valid point.

I disagree. He made an illogical, invalid point. The poster to whom I initially replied did not suggest that many letsrunners aren't qualified to advise more accomplished runners, he suggested that less accomplished runners aren't qualified to advise more accomplished runners. See the difference?

I am indeed a very poor runner and probably would make a worse coach. What of it? When have I posted advice in this thread?

gorney wrote:

Brimley wrote:

Why is this thread here?

That's a mediocre time, even on a tough course.

Who is the kid? And do I need to start visiting Dye Stat more often to understand why someone would post an entire thread about someone running 5:20 pace for 10 miles?

good post Brimley. I agree, back in the 70's, 5:20 pace for 10 miles would not have impressed many people at all. A lot of people seem to think this Derrick kid is better than Craig Virgin at a similar age, but Virgin would have been several minutes faster in a race of this distance.

Go back to your precious '70s, old man Gorney. Here's why Derrick is better than Virgin:

13:51.9, 3.00-mile Detweiller course > 13:50.6, 2.97-mile Detweiller course

13:55 5,000m in April alone > 13:58 5,000m in June against top Russians

If he had remained healthy, he would have gone under Virgin's 8:40.9 (maybe even at his state meet, like Fernandez almost did with Nelson's record) and been right with Fernandez at NON as well.

I mean no disrespect to Virgin either -- he's one of my favorite runners and one of the greatest Americans ever -- the only American world cross-country champion. But so far, Derrick is a step ahead -- and my disrespect is for those who can't recognize that and think no one can ever surpass the best of their generation.

andre dawson wrote:

having run that course nearly every weekend its not one you get fast times on. a good minute slow with all the winding turns and hills.

Yea like the guy in the $6300 dollar suit is gonna hold the elevator for the guy who doesn't make that in three months, C'mon!

Seriously though, as someone who also runs this loop quite often, it's certainly not hard to run fast times out there at all. The hills are not very daunting, and the 5th or 6th mile is mainly downhill. I'd describe myself as an average D1 runner at best with very modest PRs, and out of shape it's not difficult to run sub 6 pace for the loop without pressing much at all.

I think Chris is a good kid and has the potential to have quite the running future ahead of him, and at this point in the year this shows that he once again has his fitness coming along quite nicely, but lets not try to build this trail up to be something its not to impress those who have never and will never experience it. It is not flat and not a track, but it is not a difficult course and it doesn't have many if any 90+ degree turns.

As usual half of all of this is plain bull shit.

A 17 year old just out of HS kid , who had mono less than three months ago running 5:16 per mile for 10 is a good day.

Anyone who thinks diferently is full of shit.

This was a tempo run from a 13:55 HS 5K guy in an all HS race.

really jackass...Derrick ran a 14 mile tempo run during spring break...bout a month later he comes down with Mono. My point is the kid is a talent but trains VERY hard. So if he has to end his track season early because of mono...why is he back doing long tempo runs now? Also though it has never been proven, some people say post mono you can be prone to chronic fatigue syndrome.

I'm not bashing him...just making an observation.

If it was warm and hilly, 52:44 is very good for a H.S. kid who is not focused on setting records in a 10 mile. Although many H.S. studs have run similar times, it is still very good.

Btw - I was told a couple of years ago that a H.S. kid ran 45x in the Philadelphia Broad Street Run; granted, Philly generally has mild temps in May and Broad Street is completely flat, but a 45x 10 miler is world class.

Dan Onymous wrote:

Go back to your precious '70s, old man Gorney. Here's why Derrick is better than Virgin:

13:51.9, 3.00-mile Detweiller course > 13:50.6, 2.97-mile Detweiller course

13:55 5,000m in April alone > 13:58 5,000m in June against top Russians

If he had remained healthy, he would have gone under Virgin's 8:40.9 (maybe even at his state meet, like Fernandez almost did with Nelson's record) and been right with Fernandez at NON as well.

I mean no disrespect to Virgin either -- he's one of my favorite runners and one of the greatest Americans ever -- the only American world cross-country champion. But so far, Derrick is a step ahead -- and my disrespect is for those who can't recognize that and think no one can ever surpass the best of their generation.

it's all very laughable, what you are contending. Were Derrick and Virgin to race on any given cross-country course as 17-year-olds, it would be GAME OVER for Derrick. No one in Illinois came within 30 seconds of Virgin in cross-country during his junior and senior years, and the competition was much deeper.

the same is true on the track. Virgin was under 9:00 just about every weekend during the spring of his senior year.

According to you, IF the Detweiler course had not been altered slightly, IF Derrick had not caught mono, IF Derrick hadn't raced NTN and only Footlocker, IF Derrick would have enhanced his resume by being state champ in cross-country or in any event in track his junior year, IF Derrick had been in that NON race with Fernandez ....

Fortunately, track is based on results and not "ifs".

to bad derrick's 5K PR was better than Virgin\'s, in one of his first meets of the season

gorney wrote:

[quote]Dan Onymous wrote:

it\'s all very laughable, what you are contending. Were Derrick and Virgin to race on any given cross-country course as 17-year-olds, it would be GAME OVER for Derrick. No one in Illinois came within 30 seconds of Virgin in cross-country during his junior and senior years, and the competition was much deeper.

the same is true on the track. Virgin was under 9:00 just about every weekend during the spring of his senior year.

According to you, IF the Detweiler course had not been altered slightly, IF Derrick had not caught mono, IF Derrick hadn\'t raced NTN and only Footlocker, IF Derrick would have enhanced his resume by being state champ in cross-country or in any event in track his junior year, IF Derrick had been in that NON race with Fernandez ....

Fortunately, track is based on results and not \"ifs\".

Please..get your head out of your ass and realize some facts. Derrick ran 13:55 ALONE in April. Virgin didn\'t. If you wanna talk about sub 9:00 2 miles, Chris\'s last 2 miles at Arcadia were 8:49. I love how people in the 70\'s refuse to except reality and the fact that somebody ran faster than they did. Get over yourself.

when Derrick puts together a string of races that Virgin ran his senior year (pulled from an old thread originally posted by bridge13 way back long ago) get back to us, Dan Ononomous. This is from a thread where you were all gah-gah over Derrick's 8:48/4:14 metric double, remember?

Virgin ran the USA-USSR Junior meet as a HS junior and senior. Those were always tactical races. As a junior, Virgin ran 14:14.6 and got beat by both Russians who out-kicked him in the final 300 meters. Not bad considering it was 106 degrees that day in Sacramento. Does that time equate to Derrick's 13:55 in much more agreeable conditions on a spring evening at Arcadia?

Yeah, it probably does.

gorney wrote:

it's all very laughable, what you are contending. Were Derrick and Virgin to race on any given cross-country course as 17-year-olds, it would be GAME OVER for Derrick. No one in Illinois came within 30 seconds of Virgin in cross-country during his junior and senior years, and the competition was much deeper.

the same is true on the track. Virgin was under 9:00 just about every weekend during the spring of his senior year.

According to you, IF the Detweiler course had not been altered slightly, IF Derrick had not caught mono, IF Derrick hadn't raced NTN and only Footlocker, IF Derrick would have enhanced his resume by being state champ in cross-country or in any event in track his junior year, IF Derrick had been in that NON race with Fernandez ....

Fortunately, track is based on results and not "ifs".

Yeah exactly. Track is based on results and not ifs. That's why it's kind of weird for you to say that if Virgin and Derrick were to have raced Virgin would have won easily. Their respective results indicate that Derrick and Virgin were of very similar abilities in high school and it's impossible to say that one is better than the other. Before you make baseless claims about how badly Virgin would have beaten Derrick I think you should open your eyes and see how impressive Derrick's performances really are.