When I ran at UVA, everyone believed the course was difficult but short. I don't know if they've changed it since then or remeasured..
The Men's Leader splits by K were 2:40, 3:02, 3:00, 2:55, 2:54, 2:50, 3:05, 2:41. Nothing jumps out at me - could the 2K loop in the middle be 10-15 seconds short? Maybe.
When I ran at UVA, everyone believed the course was difficult but short. I don't know if they've changed it since then or remeasured..
The Men's Leader splits by K were 2:40, 3:02, 3:00, 2:55, 2:54, 2:50, 3:05, 2:41. Nothing jumps out at me - could the 2K loop in the middle be 10-15 seconds short? Maybe.
You could be right. I haven't run the course in over a decade. It's an awesome place to train though.
Sorry Semi...I'm not a grandpa yet, but getting closer and closer...
GPS is not as accurate as a mechanical measure. GPS takes readings at intervals, not constant...and can also be affected by weather conditions. I have a Garmin GPS Watch and run a similar route a few times a week...generally a 5k loop. My starting point is always the same, but my end point can be up to 20 - 30 m difference based on GPS. Other issues that can arise are runners weaving on the course....this can make an inaccurate reading if you are trying to gauge distance.
The chip in the shoe is connected to the mat timers....nothing to do with GPS.
Having said that, I believe the course was fairly close for ACC's...as Seymours watch indicated. If multiple people posted a similar distance, then it is correct. I'm not sure what variance is 'allowed' by the NCAA...but I am very surprised that this is an issue.
So can someone please explain to me how hard this course actually is? If its as difficult a course as some are saying, I would call it very short if people are PRing on this.
The SEC course isn't challenging so thats different.
MY guess is the 6k is more like 5850 and the 8k is 7800.
gps from a runner that ran showed a full 6k distance and only 2-second difference on her official time and moving time, and the splits and gap are making sense while SEC just does not.
the acc race started blazing fast til 2.5k!! they were flying on the hills!! ..the final gap with Katelyn and the ND runners are top 3 21seconds - top7 39 seconds- top8 44 seconds --- the gap makes sense, also katelyn was just with them at the back hill, it was on the last 1.5k that she and kelsey went off
its not like the ND runners are slow, they arent!
nd1 a top 11 finisher at nationals last year
nd2 national u20 xc champ, 2x national junior champ
nd3 15:27 5000m runner
So again, in the womens and mens, 50 ACC runners each ran faster than the Heps champion at Van Cortlandt. And both are a full 8k/6k and the course at ACCs is allegedly very difficult.
This means ACC is going to wipe the floor with the rest of the nation if they are that fast on a slow course.
Also the chip timing doesn't measure distance. They cross preplaced timing mats that are misplaced all the time.
Never ran Stillwater, Van Cortlandt's normal course is moderate to difficult. They sometimes run an easier modified course that avoids hills.
Heps ran the normal course. Original poster made it seem like Panorama is a difficult course. Maybe its closer to the moderate-difficult. I find the idea that this is a difficult course and not short hard to accept. Someone is lying and we won't stop until we get to the bottom of it.
First, the picture provided shows no proof that it is a GPS measurement. That could just be a manual entry.
2nd, if it is an actual GPS measurement, then it proves that the course is short. A 6km should come out as 3.73 miles when rounded to the hundredth of a mile. Also the measurement given by a GPS watch is always longer than the actual distance run. A true 6km course should come up as 6.05-6.1km on the gps watch, or more like 3.76mi-3.79mi at the very least.
I watched the races. The course is not an easy course. The times run for those races do not match up with the difficulty of the course.
Never ran Stillwater, Van Cortlandt's normal course is moderate to difficult. They sometimes run an easier modified course that avoids hills.
Heps ran the normal course. Original poster made it seem like Panorama is a difficult course. Maybe its closer to the moderate-difficult. I find the idea that this is a difficult course and not short hard to accept. Someone is lying and we won't stop until we get to the bottom of it.
Stillwater is supposed to be very, very difficult and the winning times this year are around 30 seconds faster than Ramsden won Heps. Maybe Van Cortland is just that much tougher? I have heard of Van Cortland, never been there. Just shows how difficult it is to compare times between courses.
When I ran at UVA, everyone believed the course was difficult but short. I don't know if they've changed it since then or remeasured..
Lahanna said it was updated for NCAAs next year. If it is a short course, that would indeed be a screw up since it is the site of the next championships.
I think you are referring to the 10k. 8k is very close
8k is 7,930m at Franklin and 10K is 9,855m. Further reasons why the obsession with XC times are misguided. Compare times run on the same course fine, but comparing across courses that are often different distances is misleading.
When I walked up to this course it just looked rough and painful. Big hills, high grass, sharp turns. It was exhausting watching the runners slug thorough that course.
After being hosted at courses like Apalachee Regional Park at FSU and the Greiner Family Course at OSU, Panorama Farms looks like a high school course by comparison. Very poor markings, horrible footing, and narrow lanes in multiple areas made it seem like a far cry from other recent sites that have hosted NCAA's.
I attended the meet. The course was gently rolling in most place with one exceptions on the 3k Loop. Very few turns, ground was firm and footing was decent. Probably more difficult than many courses, without being truly a bear.
Never ran Stillwater, Van Cortlandt's normal course is moderate to difficult. They sometimes run an easier modified course that avoids hills.
Heps ran the normal course. Original poster made it seem like Panorama is a difficult course. Maybe its closer to the moderate-difficult. I find the idea that this is a difficult course and not short hard to accept. Someone is lying and we won't stop until we get to the bottom of it.
Stillwater is supposed to be very, very difficult and the winning times this year are around 30 seconds faster than Ramsden won Heps. Maybe Van Cortland is just that much tougher? I have heard of Van Cortland, never been there. Just shows how difficult it is to compare times between courses.
Could be that much tougher. It certainly isn't the toughest course I have run on, but the middle of the country in the plains tends to have different definitions a tough course. Tough footing and energy sapping hills are pretty normal in the northeast. Oregon once came out to Franklin Park and complained it was a "really difficult" course. FP is average difficulty and slightly short.
Just baffling that people are claiming 50 men ran under 24 minutes on a difficult course that's a full 8k.
You can watch the ACC race videos youtube. The course doesn't look hard at all. Nice short cut grass, no mud, wide turns, long straights, even footing. There's really only one hill worth mentioning on the entire course. You guys should like at some courses up in Canada if you think the ACC course was "challenging".
You can watch the ACC race videos youtube. The course doesn't look hard at all. Nice short cut grass, no mud, wide turns, long straights, even footing. There's really only one hill worth mentioning on the entire course. You guys should like at some courses up in Canada if you think the ACC course was "challenging".
ha ha....relative to the SEC course (among other NCAA courses) those hills are mountains....to me what would be the hardest part was the numerous times runners wet from uphill to downhill, or vice versa ( since the hills were run in both directions). As far as how big the hills were the runners often had to hold themselves back when descending, so they were more than just a very gentle slope. And I agree, for the course the times look too fast.
I should add, any course where you have guys (especially guys who are not close to being podium favourites) running sub 23 for 8k indicates either an easy course or a short course (or both).
You can watch the ACC race videos youtube. The course doesn't look hard at all. Nice short cut grass, no mud, wide turns, long straights, even footing. There's really only one hill worth mentioning on the entire course. You guys should like at some courses up in Canada if you think the ACC course was "challenging".
ha ha....relative to the SEC course (among other NCAA courses) those hills are mountains....to me what would be the hardest part was the numerous times runners wet from uphill to downhill, or vice versa ( since the hills were run in both directions). As far as how big the hills were the runners often had to hold themselves back when descending, so they were more than just a very gentle slope. And I agree, for the course the times look too fast.
Yeah, if a course has no hills (like the PAC 12 course), then the ACC course will be tough-er, since it has one hill, but it's not "tough" in general. Did the runners find it "tough"?
ha ha....relative to the SEC course (among other NCAA courses) those hills are mountains....to me what would be the hardest part was the numerous times runners wet from uphill to downhill, or vice versa ( since the hills were run in both directions). As far as how big the hills were the runners often had to hold themselves back when descending, so they were more than just a very gentle slope. And I agree, for the course the times look too fast.
Yeah, if a course has no hills (like the PAC 12 course), then the ACC course will be tough-er, since it has one hill, but it's not "tough" in general. Did the runners find it "tough"?
maybe a journalist should reach out to some pro who formally ran the course and see what they say? just sayin.....