I can also see the two spots you are talking about. It's not a lot but when done twice it could add the distance by maybe 40-50 meters
Thanks for posting the available strava data for Foot Locker 2024 and 2023 ... They are actual measurements ... Even though strava measurements are not perfect, they indicate the course was longer in 2024.
I was hoping somebody with experience measured the course with a wheel in both 2023 and 2024 and would post those results.
The actual distance of the Foot Locker race does not matter to me and what I do ... But I have already heard that the final times do matter to some of the runners and/or their connections.
I believe the Boys winning time in 2024 (15:23.9) is the slowest winning time in the history of Foot Locker Balboa ... I previous slowest was in 2004 (15:22, Kenneth Cormier), and that year a storm hit the course earlier in the week and knocked down a couple of trees causing some minor course changes ... a San Diego guy at the meet said it added some minor distance to the race, but the new footing was not good (plus it nearly 80 degrees and humid) ... The Girls winning time in 2004 was 17:31, and Elizabeth Leachman ran 17:31.1 this year (which might be slowest-ever winning time?).
yeah strava data is great but we really do need a large sample of watches for a more accurate reading on the distance (which we don't have). Also I wouldn't trust what that san diego guy said about the weather being 80 degrees and humid. https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/US/CA/92104/date/2024-12-14
Footlocker started in 1979 and was the sole national championship for the next 25 years.
In 2004, Nike started the team national championship.
In 2006, Nike added a second race for individuals but not many top people participated because Nike did not pay any expenses for them, only for the teams.
In 2008, Nike thought they could bury Footlocker by changing the format to include both teams and qualifying individuals, paying the expenses for all. They assumed they could simply give the runners more "stuff" and get them to all go to Portland rather than San Diego.
Sixteen years later, Footlocker is still going strong.
Nike failed at destroying Footlocker. But they succeeded at destroying a true national championship in cross country.
When Nike added the open race in 2006, which still exists, it wasn't trying to attract the top individuals in the country. At that time, Nike brought in 8 athletes per team and the 8th man/woman ran in the open race. Also, Nike and FL had a brief agreement where the top finishers in the championship race were given an invitation to FL the following week. Nike tried to convince FL to merge into one meet with FL retaining naming rights, but FL declined and that was the start of Nike adding individuals in 2008. FWIW, FL has always given their qualifiers as much "stuff" as NXN.
Finally, a "true" national championship in XC should have teams and individuals. And, no, the regional scoring done at FL is not the same thing. Should the NCAA go to a national championship with only 40 runners and no teams? Would that make it a "true" national championship?!
Rumors of Footlocker's death have been greatly exaggerated.
If you just look at the boys/girls winners of the two races since NXN introduced a true individual championship in 2008, here's what you get:
Boys: Footlocker can lay claim to 3 Olympic medals (2x Grant Fisher, 1x Cole Hocker). NXN claims 1 Olympian (Nico Young).
Girls: Footlocker can lay claim to 1 Olympic medal (Molly Seidel), another Olympian (Weini Kelati), and a 3x WMM medalist (Jordan Hasay). NXN doesn't have anyone approaching those credentials on the girls side (though Tuohy or others may yet change that).
Put in this light, isn't this a good argument for the continuing prestige (at least at the top of the ticket) for Footlocker?
This is silly, as it omits the fact that Cole Hocker ran at NXN, finishing in 2nd place before winning FL a week later. So NXN can just as much "lay claim" to his Olympic medal. And as a Nike athlete, guess which event he attended! ;)
Historically, even after NXN added individuals, you could definitely argue that FL attracted the top talent, but that is no longer the case. The shift is gradual, but NXN is the race to win at this point.
Thanks for posting the available strava data for Foot Locker 2024 and 2023 ... They are actual measurements ... Even though strava measurements are not perfect, they indicate the course was longer in 2024.
I was hoping somebody with experience measured the course with a wheel in both 2023 and 2024 and would post those results.
The actual distance of the Foot Locker race does not matter to me and what I do ... But I have already heard that the final times do matter to some of the runners and/or their connections.
I believe the Boys winning time in 2024 (15:23.9) is the slowest winning time in the history of Foot Locker Balboa ... I previous slowest was in 2004 (15:22, Kenneth Cormier), and that year a storm hit the course earlier in the week and knocked down a couple of trees causing some minor course changes ... a San Diego guy at the meet said it added some minor distance to the race, but the new footing was not good (plus it nearly 80 degrees and humid) ... The Girls winning time in 2004 was 17:31, and Elizabeth Leachman ran 17:31.1 this year (which might be slowest-ever winning time?).
yeah strava data is great but we really do need a large sample of watches for a more accurate reading on the distance (which we don't have). Also I wouldn't trust what that san diego guy said about the weather being 80 degrees and humid.
Thanks for posting the available strava data for Foot Locker 2024 and 2023 ... They are actual measurements ... Even though strava measurements are not perfect, they indicate the course was longer in 2024.
I was hoping somebody with experience measured the course with a wheel in both 2023 and 2024 and would post those results.
The actual distance of the Foot Locker race does not matter to me and what I do ... But I have already heard that the final times do matter to some of the runners and/or their connections.
I believe the Boys winning time in 2024 (15:23.9) is the slowest winning time in the history of Foot Locker Balboa ... I previous slowest was in 2004 (15:22, Kenneth Cormier), and that year a storm hit the course earlier in the week and knocked down a couple of trees causing some minor course changes ... a San Diego guy at the meet said it added some minor distance to the race, but the new footing was not good (plus it nearly 80 degrees and humid) ... The Girls winning time in 2004 was 17:31, and Elizabeth Leachman ran 17:31.1 this year (which might be slowest-ever winning time?).
yeah strava data is great but we really do need a large sample of watches for a more accurate reading on the distance (which we don't have). Also I wouldn't trust what that san diego guy said about the weather being 80 degrees and humid.
Yes….” Going strong “ is very debatable…..when I was involved FLNE had about 2900 entrants….this year they had, I am told, 530 finishers through ALL races…..whereas NXRNYNE had 2800…” going strong”?.? Not really..
been to both events..both great fun for the kids…hard to beat a Nike party…
yeah strava data is great but we really do need a large sample of watches for a more accurate reading on the distance (which we don't have). Also I wouldn't trust what that san diego guy said about the weather being 80 degrees and humid.
Apparently it was written by Rich Gonzalez for DyeStat and he said "The time was the slowest winning time ever at FootLocker Nationals in San Diego, where temperatures in the high 70s ...".
I can also see the two spots you are talking about. It's not a lot but when done twice it could add the distance by maybe 40-50 meters
Thanks for posting the available strava data for Foot Locker 2024 and 2023 ... They are actual measurements ... Even though strava measurements are not perfect, they indicate the course was longer in 2024.
I was hoping somebody with experience measured the course with a wheel in both 2023 and 2024 and would post those results.
Foot Locker didn't measure the course this year with a wheel. If they had, they would know that the course was longer this year than last year. Foot Locker maintains that this year's course was the same exact course as last year even though they are obviously wrong.
You would think that for a national championship race someone would have measured the course with a wheel.
Apparently it was written by Rich Gonzalez for DyeStat and he said "The time was the slowest winning time ever at FootLocker Nationals in San Diego, where temperatures in the high 70s ...".
The weather report says it was a high of 62 degrees in San Diego the day of the 2004 race (Dec 11, 2004). Not sure where Rich Gonzalez came up with "high 70s".
Apparently it was written by Rich Gonzalez for DyeStat and he said "The time was the slowest winning time ever at FootLocker Nationals in San Diego, where temperatures in the high 70s ...".
The weather report says it was a high of 62 degrees in San Diego the day of the 2004 race (Dec 11, 2004). Not sure where Rich Gonzalez came up with "high 70s".
Although I really enjoyed going back to San Diego again, I did not run my best during the race. I\\\'m not exactly sure why I didn\\\'t run as well as I had hoped, because I had really thought that I was ready beforehand.
Kate Niehaus was a runner in both the 2003 and 2004 Foot Locker Nationals ... Quoting her from the article ... "The race was on Saturday (9:15 for the girls in 2004). Although last year it had been warmer in San Diego than in Columbia (S Carolina), this year it was a lot warmer, and the course was muddier."
Miller runs his \\\"best race\\\" of the year at Foot Lockers to earn 2nd All-American - His 15th place finish is the best by a Pennsylvania runner since Council Rock runner Danny Coval\\\'s 7th place in 1999.
Craig Miller ran in the Boy's race ... quoting from the article, "Miller, who doesn't seem to ever be surprised by anything in his races, was surprised at the slower than usual times in the Finals. The weather was warm.. but Miller said many considered it a result of "all the dew" every morning."
So four people at Balboa Park all said it was warm ... Rich Gonzalez reported upper 70s degrees ... a guy who told me he lives within walking distance of the course said 80 degrees and described the course during the week and race ... and two runners in the race also said it was warm.
The race was broadcast tape delay on the Fox Sports Network ... I looked but could not find it ... I remember watching it because NY had some good girls in the race including the winner (several Saratoga girls did not race well).
Photos and some limited video I could find showed many people in short sleeve shirts and shorts ... so I tend to believe it was warm and humid.
The weather report says it was a high of 62 degrees in San Diego the day of the 2004 race (Dec 11, 2004). Not sure where Rich Gonzalez came up with "high 70s".
Kate Niehaus was a runner in both the 2003 and 2004 Foot Locker Nationals ... Quoting her from the article ... "The race was on Saturday (9:15 for the girls in 2004). Although last year it had been warmer in San Diego than in Columbia (S Carolina), this year it was a lot warmer, and the course was muddier."
Craig Miller ran in the Boy's race ... quoting from the article, "Miller, who doesn't seem to ever be surprised by anything in his races, was surprised at the slower than usual times in the Finals. The weather was warm.. but Miller said many considered it a result of "all the dew" every morning."
So four people at Balboa Park all said it was warm ... Rich Gonzalez reported upper 70s degrees ... a guy who told me he lives within walking distance of the course said 80 degrees and described the course during the week and race ... and two runners in the race also said it was warm.
The race was broadcast tape delay on the Fox Sports Network ... I looked but could not find it ... I remember watching it because NY had some good girls in the race including the winner (several Saratoga girls did not race well).
Photos and some limited video I could find showed many people in short sleeve shirts and shorts ... so I tend to believe it was warm and humid.
weather history reports are often not accurate. I don't know how they work but I know they can sometimes be way off. The most accurate you can get is actually from the strava watches that the kids run with.
they get their weather reports from national weather service which does show a high of 62 on 2024 12-11 - https://www.weather.gov/wrh/climate?wfo=sgx. I believe the san diego weather report is only a few minutes from balboa park.
honestly it doesn't make sense to me because everyone way saying how hot it was at mt sac west regionals. I check watches it all says 67 degrees that feels like 71. Weather always confused me
Do you think moving it to Boston instead of VCP in the Bronx affected numbers? Seemed like NY was a much more central location for the FLNE race vs Boston.
You do know the CIF-SDS holds their championships there don't you? And they do have more than 60 runners on that course. Plenty of room.
That's totally different. Those San Diego Section races have kids finishing 5 or more minutes apart so they are very spread out.
60 national caliber runners all running a similar pace would make it very tight in some spots.
What a joke of a statement. You've obviously never been there. The only real concern would be the start maybe down to the bottom of the hill at the dog park where it turns to the right. Immediately from there the longest hill on the course starts to around the pool area. I've measured it with a wheel and a GPS. Not the steepest..the longest. Things usually spread out there. When as 60 kids at NXN ever run the same pace? Go visit Morley Field sometime. 5 or more minutes apart...your talk in extremes sounds like you dig drama. Just stop. Plenty of room to put 60.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.