Cut out this nonsense. It still needs to be understood by the ignorant that the way the cross-country season is scheduled, California runners are at a great disadvantage going into the postseason because
(1) they don’t get a week off, pre-nats, unlike most of the rest of the country;
(2) the racing schedule right up to Natty’s is typically brutal, with brutal competition.
You're an idiot who has poor reading comprehension. All 4 of the girls that I was talking about are from California.
You should spend more time reading and understanding the comments you respond to and less time calling other people "ignorant" when it's actually you who have no idea what you're talking about. Learn how to read!
I guess it went over your head that obviously, being California runners, even those “national champions” have all run the esteemed Woodward Park course, but none of them ran it as fast as Englehardt did. 🙄
H'm. I know the usual downvoters are at work, but Chmiel was definitely on the high school all decade team. Four top 5 nxn finishes. Twice a convincing runner-up to Tuohy. Won the 2018 Great Edinburgh race against the top junior European runners, beating the likes of Battolcletti, Keith, Lau, as well as Americans such as Claudia Lane. Went on to be an 11X all-American and finished 3rd at the Ncca xc championship.
Footlocker has historically been the high school National Championship, until Nikeee had to put their grubby paws on it, setting up the case where years were in effect, watered down.
Sadie took down Claudia Lane’s Woodward Park record; nuff said.
Cross country is much more about winning races than it is about times. Winning a national xc championship is much better than setting a course record.
There is no longer a legit National Championship because of the splittage between races; we see it on the track, too, with New Balance Nationals, Nikeee Nationals, etc.
But anybody setting the esteemed Woodward Park course record is a legit cross-country runner, which is obvious, unless you are heavily biased, and/or obtuse.
why does every thread about high school cross country need to devolve into petty mudslinging between clowns trying to score argument points? winning a national championship is an incredible accomplishment. so is setting a course record. to try to denigrate one while touting the other is a joke. and this thread is about Jane Hedengrens accomplishment last weekend not some "yeah but" opportunity to try to convince everyone that some other athlete that graduated years ago was more impressive. why does that seem to be the only way people here can talk about anything?
The poster you responded to was comparing Sadie to other CA runners. Is she any at any more of a disadvantage than Lane, Baxter and Hasay were - all of whom won 2 national titles?
Sadie may end up being the greatest female HS miler of all time, but she will never be considered among the all-time XC greats without a national title.
You are right.
It's ironic that she has about the same resume as German Fernandez, who also never won a national xc title.
...but since he has Woodward Park record, ran the crazy double at State meet, and then went 3:55 indoor, as a college freshmen, he is always in the all time discussion.
Cross country is much more about winning races than it is about times. Winning a national xc championship is much better than setting a course record.
But anybody setting the esteemed Woodward Park course record is a legit cross-country runner, which is obvious, unless you are heavily biased, and/or obtuse.
Yet another example of your inability to read correctly. Nobody is saying that Sadie isn't "legit". But several of us are saying that Sadie is NOT the best girls California xc runner of all time.
why does every thread about high school cross country need to devolve into petty mudslinging between clowns trying to score argument points? winning a national championship is an incredible accomplishment. so is setting a course record. to try to denigrate one while touting the other is a joke. and this thread is about Jane Hedengrens accomplishment last weekend not some "yeah but" opportunity to try to convince everyone that some other athlete that graduated years ago was more impressive. why does that seem to be the only way people here can talk about anything?
Because listening isnt required in cyber world. These aren't people here to be talked to but rather talked at.
I watched a video on the race (TRP, I believe) and they gave mile splits. I think they were 5:04, 5:11 and 5:02; that's 15:17 en-route.
Running the numbers (after converting to 1600m equivalents) through a pace optimizer only had her 4-5 seconds faster with completely even pace.
Watching Hedengren’s recent race, that Mesa Arizona golf course may very well run faster than Woodbridge, considering Woodbridge had tighter turns, which can make a difference where the athletes are wearing high stack shoes (cornering stability) in both races.
Anecdotally, I find the Mesa course to be legit. My daughter ran an 18 second PR but had a solid race and ran exactly what I thought she'd run based on her state championships performance on a slow course. Her previous PR was in about 20 degree hotter weather and she'd run within a few seconds of that time on 3 different courses, with hot conditions. Some of the other top girls in our state ran slower than their PRs and almost nobody ran faster. From this group of girls, most ran Woodbridge, and everybody ran equivalently faster at Woodbridge. My daughter was 3 seconds per mile slower than Woodbridge at NXR, whereas some others had much faster paces at Woodbridge than at Mesa, so generally the Woodbridge times were measurably faster, even accounting for 3 miles vs 5k. Finally, the one local girl I'm aware of who ran both Desert Twilight and NXR ran 5 seconds slower at NXR (it's my understanding that it was the same course).
I don’t know…this is crazy for high school, but she’s basically a grown woman and essentially trains like she’s already at BYU…Not that it takes anything away from her time, but just sayin’…
I don’t know…this is crazy for high school, but she’s basically a grown woman and essentially trains like she’s already at BYU…Not that it takes anything away from her time, but just sayin’…
She definitely looks like an adult. It's really obvious here:
But there's no doubt in my mind she has a lot of room to improve. She looks like a machine out there. Just very composed, smooth, and runs within herself very well.
Blade will be battling Holly Barker hard at Woodward Park this weekend. Maybe she ought to bail on NXN and save it for FootLocker
Why in the world did you think that Blade, who is a member of the Nike Elite program, would skip a Nike meet in order to run a meet sponsored by Hoka? That makes no sense.
The poster you responded to was comparing Sadie to other CA runners. Is she any at any more of a disadvantage than Lane, Baxter and Hasay were - all of whom won 2 national titles?
Sadie may end up being the greatest female HS miler of all time, but she will never be considered among the all-time XC greats without a national title.
Sadie took down Claudia Lane’s Woodward Park record; nuff said.
Sadie ran 4 national cross country races and she never finished higher than 10th. No way you can put Sadie up there with the all time xc greats.
Those three other girls each won two national xc championships. Sadie has never finished higher than 10th. Course records are nice, but what really matters is winning championships. Sadie still has a way to go to be considered the "best ever" xc runner from California.
Cut out this nonsense. It still needs to be understood by the ignorant that the way the cross-country season is scheduled, California runners are at a great disadvantage going into the postseason because
(1) they don’t get a week off, pre-nats, unlike most of the rest of the country;
That makes no sense. No, California runners aren't at a disadvantage just because they ran a race the week before NXN. Lots of the top runners ran a Foot Locker regional race the week before NXN. Garces and Leachman both ran Foot Locker regionals the week before NXN and they finished 2nd and 3rd at NXN.
Stop calling other posters ignorant when it's actually you who are ignorant. Learn more about the sport so you don't keep making ridiculous posts that make no sense.
Cut out this nonsense. It still needs to be understood by the ignorant that the way the cross-country season is scheduled, California runners are at a great disadvantage going into the postseason because
(1) they don’t get a week off, pre-nats, unlike most of the rest of the country;
That makes no sense. No, California runners aren't at a disadvantage just because they ran a race the week before NXN. Lots of the top runners ran a Foot Locker regional race the week before NXN. Garces and Leachman both ran Foot Locker regionals the week before NXN and they finished 2nd and 3rd at NXN.
Stop calling other posters ignorant when it's actually you who are ignorant. Learn more about the sport so you don't keep making ridiculous posts that make no sense.
…yes, having nationals be on the fifth week of racing is a disadvantage. CA racing schedule, for southern section, for consecutive weeks: league finals (most top athletes can jog), section prelims at mt sac, finals at mt sac, state, and then nxn.
that’s 3-4 weeks that athletes need to worry about peaking for so they can even qualify, skipping major tune ups, going down on mileage early, and missing sleep (state could be at 7 am, and a 5-6 hour drive for most athletes). for nearly all the other states, all they have is NXR in this time frame, and the rest they can use to perfect their physical state. not saying engelhardt would beat hendengren, but i think it’s fair to say that all ca runners have been disadvantaged.
“Stop calling other posters ignorant when it's actually you who are ignorant. Learn more about the sport so you don't keep making ridiculous posts that make no sense.”
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
Reason provided:
added conclusion
But there's no doubt in my mind she has a lot of room to improve. She looks like a machine out there. Just very composed, smooth, and runs within herself very well.
That is what I thought as well. She looked like a college athlete racing HS kids. I would have guessed she was from an entirely different "league" than the other runners. They looked like a bunch of 9th and 10th graders. Hedengren looks like a much more developed athlete (and also much physically stronger).
I watched the race (online) with my own kid and she commented the same thing.
That makes no sense. No, California runners aren't at a disadvantage just because they ran a race the week before NXN. Lots of the top runners ran a Foot Locker regional race the week before NXN. Garces and Leachman both ran Foot Locker regionals the week before NXN and they finished 2nd and 3rd at NXN.
Stop calling other posters ignorant when it's actually you who are ignorant. Learn more about the sport so you don't keep making ridiculous posts that make no sense.
…yes, having nationals be on the fifth week of racing is a disadvantage. CA racing schedule, for southern section, for consecutive weeks: league finals (most top athletes can jog), section prelims at mt sac, finals at mt sac, state, and then nxn.
i think it’s fair to say that all ca runners have been disadvantaged.
Give me a break. Top runners like Sadie Engelhardt practically jog their league meet, their section meet, and their section final meets. You pathetic California complainers like to make excuses for California runners. How about their coaches teach them how to run better in NXN conditions? How do you think Californian Jaelyn Williams finished 7th at NXN last year? Her coach figured out how she needed to run at NXN and she went to NXN and executed really well. It's very doable.
