Big East men's 10K -- won in 33:06!!!?!

It was a tactical race. It is not pathetic. You do not race for times in championship meets. You race to win. The pace is generally slow for all races 800m and up. I agree that setting a faster pace might have been a smarter move for some of the runners, but still... give the guys a break! The slow pace set it up for a good race at the end. Congrats to Dennin on the win!

They raced to the finish, that is an honest effort. There is no push the pace early in the race clause.

over reaction ? wrote:

For what it's worth, I have run a LOT of conference 10ks, so I do know what I am talking about. But that is completely beside the point.

The bottom line, no matter how you slice it, is that 18:06 is pathetic. I don't care if it is 100 degrees and windy as hell. 18:06 is insulting. No one here is arguing that these guys should have been hammering and trying to run 29 low. But 18:06? Come on, that is an easy run. What shocks me even more is that no one, NOT ONCE, decided to drop a quick middle lap just to throw everyone off their game. That is racing. I don't give a **** if you wanna run an 85 second lap, but you better be throwing in some 62s in the middle to make it a race. Fartlek racing = racing. Jogging 90 second laps = a joke.

U mad bro?

People who are blasting these runners are morons. Rojo, your idea for minimum standards is idiotic and you know it. There were probably a handful of sub-29 guys in this race. For them what's the difference between 31 and 33? There are also 3k guys, 5k specialists, steeplers, and even mid-d guys running for points. This might be the only 10k of their careers. Why should they push the pace? Then there are always a few guys who sneak in under the conference q-time and are 30:30 - 31 guys. The conditions are terrible for a pr and they already have the IC4A time. If they lead they'll just blow up or get smoked. Their best chance is to hold out and hope for a good kick that could steal a point.

Please explain to me how any of these guys, doing what is best for themselves and their team is pathetic.

Sorry, but your logic fails -- every strategy would be a poor strategy for non-winners. A fast pace would be poor strategy for all but the winner, too. As a previous poster said, the point of conference meet is to score points for your team. The runners were not a bunch of pussies, but made a calculated decision to not push the pace thinking their chances of scoring or winning were better by waiting. And back to logic: the comment about the women's race is totally irrelevant.

113 wrote:

sotiredofthis wrote:

The point of racing is to win.

So even by your own logic, this was a poor strategy for the 20 men in the field who didn't win.

The women's 10k, held before the men's, was won in 34:37. That's really all you need to know.

Track cycling must really piss some people off here.

Awesome post.. I would love to see more track races like that cycling race.

The Big East is kind of a dud in distance running right now. Don't even talk to me about Rutger's distance running.

Chris Brown wrote:

Awesome post.. I would love to see more track races like that cycling race.

Races like that would have no merit at all - absolutely none.

They didn't race to the finish. They raced AT the finish. 18:06 through 5k isn't even a tempo pace, even considering the temperature. Which wasn't as crazy as many seem to be claiming. I live in Florida. It wasn't 90 degrees at that time in the evening and it certainly wasn't close to the stiffling humdity that we can experience here in Florida.

I had the unfortunate experience of doing a conference championship 10k in hot, humid conditions. I knew coming in to the race I would not reach the provisional mark I was hoping for coming into the meet. It was mid 80s and humid, so a little hotter than it was in Tampa the other night. I placed, ran 32:30s and was about 16:10 at the 5k. I wasn't a sub 30, or even sub 31 10k runner. The winner went around 31:50. Several of my fellower competitors that finished ahead of me doubled back the following and "gasp", still scored points in the 5k. They weren't sub 31 10k runners at that point either.

Nobody is suggesting that these runners should have clicked off the the opening miles at a personal best pace. Tactical racing happens all time. Slower times due to weather happens all the time. But if you are soooo worried about the 5k the next day because it's 80 degrees or so for the 10k that you open with an 18:00 plus 5k and finish in the 33s... then you shouldn't be doubling to begin with. Have some pride, this is for a championship!! Nobody is calling for a meet record in a distance race in hot weather. Jogging 2/3rds of a race isn't being tactical. It's simply not racing. It's sandbagging. It's a waste of everyone's time.

Old School Coach wrote:

Chris Brown wrote:

Awesome post.. I would love to see more track races like that cycling race.

Races like that would have no merit at all - absolutely none.

I am glad you were not my coach. It is still 10 points for first.

The good 10,000 guys still have to run two hard 10,000s; having them run harder than they need to here is BAD COACHING.

If I was a coach and races like this were frequent, I'd throw my 800m runner in and catch everyone off-guard at the finish! :)

Just looking at the results from this race. David McCarthy from providence couldn't handle the pace at the end.

This guy ran 3:55 indoors a few months ago! Anyone know if he's been injured or what?

Big East 10k runners join Big 10 milers as the biggest jackwads in Division 1 Conferece running. To all of you saying "Oh it's tactical blah blah blah" 31:00 is a tactical race for guys of this level. It will lead to an exciting last mile which is always fun to watch, I agree much better than a time trialed line of dudes going after a time. Going out in much slower than what a high school girl can average for a freaking half marathon isn't tactical, it's straight up stupid and quite honestly embarassing.

This looks like the stats from a 1957 10k race. Wow!!!!!!!!!!!

First let me say I won my conference championship in a race like this. It was over a decade ago now but it remains one of my best racing memories.

I should not have won. There was a 28 min runner in that race I was in the 30's. I wanted to dip under but the 100 degree day never seemed to cool down much, even for the 10 pm start time. But when the race started and I found myself in the lead the first 400 in a sluggish 75 I surged to a 72 for two laps. I looked behind and saw a train of 10-12 guys just sitting on me. I remember at that moment thinking. Do I want to lead and go for time or do I want to win?

I slowed down, do did the pack. I think that next lap was 90+ because we crossed in 5:18 for the mile. I pulled out to land 3 and waived to the pack to share the work. After another slow lap, maybe 85 this time a deal was struck to share the pacing duties. Two laps each until mile 4.

Didn't work out. Someone would lead then the next guy didn't take over. The fast-slow pace changes were brutal on the legs. Long story short I had the legs the last 1k and somehow won in an awful 32 minutes.

I could care less about the time, but man that win still feels good.

Your race sounds nothing like the Big East one. Your laps fluctuated. Leads were exchanged... it was a chess match. Jogging 18:06 with relatively even splits is, like has been stated several times, just dumb.

It was not that hot or humid when they ran the men's 10K. It cooled off considerably by race time which was at night and it was 77/78 degrees. It was so bad a kid lost his shoe, stopped to put it back on and caught up with the pack within 200m. This race proved why distance running sucks in America.

what do you want? one guy to take over pace making responsibilities? then he stays out front, everyone goes right with him and he fades to 12th place in the last 800m. no. in a slow race everyone thinks he has a shot in the sprint.