CLAUDIA MF LANE

A girl running 15:49 at Mt. Sac is like a boy running 14:20 at Balboa Footlocker. Simply unreal. I'm not convinced she's not cheating.

You guys are retards. Just pull her splits from 1 mi, 2 mi, and 3 mi. There you go.

kh wrote:

You guys are retards. Just pull her splits from 1 mi, 2 mi, and 3 mi. There you go.

Isn't it a 3 mile race? I think that we know what her 3 mile "split" is.

Hubhubbuh wrote:

kh wrote:

You guys are retards. Just pull her splits from 1 mi, 2 mi, and 3 mi. There you go.

Isn't it a 3 mile race? I think that we know what her 3 mile "split" is.

It is actually a little short of 3 miles. 2.9x mi.

OnAnotherLevel wrote:

Remember she ran in the 16:32 last year, won Footlocker in the low 17s and went sub 10 in the 3200m in the following track season.

Last year she was competing in races left and right, but this year she is taking a smarter and more long term approach.

Her progression has been very impressive so far. As a Freshman she ran 19:42, 16:32 the next year, and now 15:49 as a junior at Mt. Sac.

!

On the flip side, if you look at Tuohy, she was running 10:00.3 for 3000m in grade 7, 10:00.1 in grade 8 and 9:42.6 in grade 9. If you look at both progressions, you would think that Lane has a greater chance to improve further next year than Tuohy has. But then, progression charts sometimes do not work. Let's hope that both of them can continue improving in the next couple of years.

What would that mean for Lane next year? Sub 15:30 on that course as a senior? It's tough to believe. Maybe.

Land is kinda of a shuffler in her running style. I also hope that puberty doesn't slow her down

pert wrote:

Land is kinda of a shuffler in her running style. I also hope that puberty doesn't slow her down

"Kind of"?? Brooks PR last spring was the "Shuffler Showdown" between Lane and Oakley. It was phenomenal how two girls could be so fast with absolutely no knee lift and wonky arms, etc. .

Tuohy on the other hand has outstanding form, and it shows when she moves down to the 1500, where she is ten seconds faster than Lane (converted mile). Lane has a future in the marathon, or race walk lol.

Ann G wrote:

Doesn't matter what race it is? It can be anywhere. Just beat Claudia, simple as that. Unless one is a chicken s...!

Mommabear wrote:

Miss Anne you seem to have some very strong opinions, but using this forum to cyber-bully a child is Dispicable. We should celebrate our HS stars not out hide behind our phones and lash on message boards. Proud of both these ladies and excited to see what they can do this fall.

Ann G is sticking up for Claudia.

You should apply your discourse to yourself.

Don't delude yourself.

I think it’s so funny how when someone runs a ridiculous time or breaks an impressive record, people on here have to downplay it as much as possible.

Are you new here? Runners eat their own, especially on this board. Any kid who shows promise is torn to pieces. After all, this is the place where a high school kid was once referred to as a 'running fetus'.

This girl has marathon written all over her!

Baxter was the best girls HS XC runner ever, and I did not expect to see any of her records broken so soon. This is an absolutely monster performance.

If she is serious about her running she will stay in high school and turn pro before she loses ground to the African's.

Life is hard.

not a moron. wrote:

Smarter Than Frank wrote:

Doubt there's an advantage to running on flat asphalt versus dirt, grass and a hill? What planet are you from?

The difference between the two courses is less than a second. Seriously.

Having compared footage of Austin Tamagno's run versus the D3 sweepstakes this past Friday we can see it takes Tamagno (14:23 - 2014) 31-32 seconds to finish the last section, where the new course has diverged, while it takes Moises Medrano (2nd place @ 14:55 in 2017 D3 sweeps) 24-25 seconds to finish the new final section.

One would expect Tamagno, gunning for the course record, would run the last section faster than Medrano, who can no longer win his race and is 9 seconds ahead of the next guy behind him.

New course was 1% faster. Top boys would need to add 9 seconds to their 2017 times to be equivalent with the previous editions. Claudia Lane would need to add 10 seconds to her 15:49 to get the equivalent time on last year's course.

Final verdict?

Claudia Lane's 15:49 is no more than 1 second better than Sarah Baxter's 16:00

Great Oak's 2017 boys team time of 74:31 is equal to 75:15

Great Oak's 2017 girls team time 87:46 is equal to 88:38

You can see Medrano's finish below and Tamagno's at the bottom

How could the meet directors screw that up so bad? Why would they make it short?

I always take times run in different years as +/- 10 seconds, since simply the condition of the course (this year the conditions were ideal at Mt SAC, which can be very hot) can affect the times by more than that. All we can say with surety is that Lane is in very good shape, as is GO.

If you want to compare times with accuracy, there is this thing called "track".

Everyone is talking about the course differences but the much cooler than normal weather was a bigger factor. There are many years when fast times are just not possible.

What does it convert to a flat 5000 on the Track? is lane in sub 15 for 5000 shape now?