3 girls run 16:50s at Benzie Invitational in Michigan

Jonsen wrote:

Yeah, it's called perfect conditions Spanky.

Many runners actually improve in 12 months and set pr's, it happens. Improving one minute from your one year to the next is not out of the ordinary.

Jensen wrote:

I was more defending Jensen than anything else. I think the further back in the results you go the more the course seems fast. Which is fine, we know it's fast and that's ok. Doesn't take anything away from how other worldly fast those 3 went, they are absolute studs, as is Jensen.

Random sampling

10th place - 30 second career PR, 1:15 seconds faster than State Meet

23rd place - 22 second career PR

31st place - 47 second career PR

Everybody must have had a great summer

The course is short. Plain and simple. If someone wanted to run a statistical analysis on the course, it would be clear as day. Just look through results from EVERY meet that has ever been held there. It isn't rocket science.

With that said, all three girls are studs and have the potential to be in the top half of the field at footlocker. Go Michigan!

No, it's not short. Measure it with a wheel and then get back to us with your apology. You're simply jealous that 3 girls could run that fast on a flat, fast, hard packed course in weather that rarely occurs in August in Michigan. I live here, it's not short. p.s. Don't worry, your girl's will still be ranked, though not as high.

GBohannon wrote:

Jonsen wrote:

Yeah, it's called perfect conditions Spanky.

Many runners actually improve in 12 months and set pr's, it happens. Improving one minute from your one year to the next is not out of the ordinary.

The course is short. Plain and simple. If someone wanted to run a statistical analysis on the course, it would be clear as day. Just look through results from EVERY meet that has ever been held there. It isn't rocket science.

With that said, all three girls are studs and have the potential to be in the top half of the field at footlocker. Go Michigan!

It's widely known that the State Meet course at MIS is fast right? That's understood by everyone?

I will make the following statement and then come back here and bump this when it is true.

Less than 15% of the girls who trained so hard in the last 12 months and had monster PRs at Benzie will run faster at MIS.

If that is true what is you argument then? They had a great 12 months but then sucked for 3 months? Or is it more likely that train like normal people, probably fairly hard but got huge PRs because Benzie is otherworldly fast.

Randall McNally's Ghost wrote:

No, it's not short. Measure it with a wheel and then get back to us with your apology. You're simply jealous that 3 girls could run that fast on a flat, fast, hard packed course in weather that rarely occurs in August in Michigan. I live here, it's not short.

p.s. Don't worry, your girl's will still be ranked, though not as high.

GBohannon wrote:

The course is short. Plain and simple. If someone wanted to run a statistical analysis on the course, it would be clear as day. Just look through results from EVERY meet that has ever been held there. It isn't rocket science.

With that said, all three girls are studs and have the potential to be in the top half of the field at footlocker. Go Michigan!

Jealous of what? I am not even coaching this fall. Adelyn Ackley has close family ties to my training partner and I have always rooted for her and always will. I root for all Michigan runners to succeed. This is obvious from anything I've ever posted on any HS thread. I am just trying to stick with facts.

I know 4 coaches who have wheeled it and all 4 say it's short (granted, I've never been there). Why would they lie? Their teams ran there; you'd think that they would want to believe it's accurate. Every GPS watch reading from those coaches' teams (over 20 in total) came up short. The Tully speed ratings suggest that it is short. I'm not sure what more evidence is needed.

I don't know why people are defending this so much. I am not upset about the course. It is just known to be short. All available data (at least that I've seen) corrarobrates this. It's really not that big of a deal.

Nope, I now know 5 people as of this morning who have personally wheeled it the "proper way", including myself. Sorry, I agree with the others as well, it's not short.

Russell Alton wrote:

Nope, I now know 5 people as of this morning who have personally wheeled it the "proper way", including myself. Sorry, I agree with the others as well, it's not short.

Well, that settles it. 5-4.

It's accurate.

Sucks to be wrong, eh?

GBohannon wrote:

Russell Alton wrote:

Nope, I now know 5 people as of this morning who have personally wheeled it the "proper way", including myself. Sorry, I agree with the others as well, it's not short.

Well, that settles it. 5-4.

It's accurate.

Yeah, it's obvious you have skin in the game or are simple jealous of the effort those 3 made. You come off as obsessed over proving it's short. How embarrassing it must be for you?

GBohannon wrote:

Russell Alton wrote:

Nope, I now know 5 people as of this morning who have personally wheeled it the "proper way", including myself. Sorry, I agree with the others as well, it's not short.

Well, that settles it. 5-4.

It's accurate.

TruthSquadCommander wrote:

Yeah, it's obvious you have skin in the game or are simple jealous of the effort those 3 made. You come off as obsessed over proving it's short. How embarrassing it must be for you?

GBohannon wrote:

Well, that settles it. 5-4.

It's accurate.

This word "obsessed" got me thinking that I could do better. Here is a quick statistical analysis of the all of the D3 boys who ran 2017 Regionals at Benzie and then ran at MIS for the state meet the following week. I was going to do girls, but then I realized there times would be way off compared to the flying fast ladies that this thread is about. Feel free to draw your own conclusions.

Different conditions, different course. As others said, measure it. Sounds simple enough, then you'll know versus guessing. There will always be a meet that's faster than others. Benzie has no hills. MIS has had crappy weather several years with high winds and freezing cold. Were you there Fisher's senior year? Brutal!

GBohannon wrote:

TruthSquadCommander wrote:

Yeah, it's obvious you have skin in the game or are simple jealous of the effort those 3 made. You come off as obsessed over proving it's short. How embarrassing it must be for you?

This word "obsessed" got me thinking that I could do better. Here is a quick statistical analysis of the all of the D3 boys who ran 2017 Regionals at Benzie and then ran at MIS for the state meet the following week. I was going to do girls, but then I realized there times would be way off compared to the flying fast ladies that this thread is about. Feel free to draw your own conclusions.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-Wl5fv2bATbQAt912_nm4GX3zAk4njw4Q0pkjrZWJUU/edit?usp=sharing

[quote]Track Coach West Side wrote:

Different conditions, different course. As others said, measure it. Sounds simple enough, then you'll know versus guessing. There will always be a meet that's faster than others. Benzie has no hills. MIS has had crappy weather several years with high winds and freezing cold. Were you there Fisher's senior year? Brutal! [quote]

Thanks for the real and rational response. You are, of course, correct and someday I probably will make it up there to measure if I'm in the area. I can't stress enough that I really do want all of these girls to succeed and would love nothing more than to see them go 1-3 at Footlocker. I was just trying to put the times into a more clear perspective as the course is, at the very least, the fastest accurate course in the country (and, at the very worst, 30 seconds too short).

Fisher's senior year was brutal, as was Goethals' senior year (2009). Megan was probably good for sub-16:30 at MIS under "normal" conditions (whatever that means...). I assume Grant could have threatened 14:30s with better weather.

Russell Alton wrote:

I now know 5 people as of this morning who have personally wheeled it the "proper way", including myself.

And all of them purposely measured it short, around 4900 meters, with NO calibration. The course is short, and for you to argue otherwise is ridiculous.

Short course

Indoor? wrote:

the only rule is that it can't be more than 5k.

Indoor? wrote:

the only rule is that it can't be more than 5k.

So measure it as a 5k then, not 4900 meters.

Marathons can't be more than 42,195 meters, but there's a factor built into measurements to ensure the courses aren't short. Measuring courses as 5k's means you have the factor built in the same way, not that they're 4 or 5 or 2 miles.

Wrong, is means they just have to be 5k or less. The NFHS doesn't say how far they have to be, just how far they allowed to be. There is no guideline for how to measure or any kind of factor. Some states still run less. Now if you are calling something a 5k it should be pretty dang close.

Intelligence is not your forte, is it? I too have measured it, as I live in Traverse City. It's accurate, you're just not from here and have no clue how good these girls are. As someone beat me to it, purely jealously.

Argue with yourself wrote:

Russell Alton wrote:

I now know 5 people as of this morning who have personally wheeled it the "proper way", including myself.

And all of them purposely measured it short, around 4900 meters, with NO calibration. The course is short, and for you to argue otherwise is ridiculous.

Dude if it's 10 seconds short, it's within reason. LOTS of courses are within 10 seconds, they're just tougher courses and usually without the weather that they apparently had in Michigan that day. I bet it's a lot closer to what people believe. Forsyth is a tough cookie with great leg speed. Btw, comparing it to San Diego is beyond unfair. Picture someone running up and down those hills and picture someone of the same ability next to them on flat ground. They will gain major Realestate on each loop on the runner going up those hills. The downhills will not make up for it either. But you can believe what you'd like. I'm not from there, but I've researched the winner and she's got great leg speed and strength with great pedigree as well. 30 seconds, I don't think so.

Indoor? wrote:

Wrong, is means they just have to be 5k or less. The NFHS doesn't say how far they have to be, just how far they allowed to be. There is no guideline for how to measure or any kind of factor. Some states still run less. Now if you are calling something a 5k it should be pretty dang close.

NFHS amended the high school cross country rules a few years back with:

The cross country course shall be 2,500 to 5,000 meters (1.5 to 3.1 miles) in length as determined by the meet director or games committee. Further, measurements shall be taken along the shortest possible route a runner may take.

Previously, course measurement was mid-course, so courses that were exactly 5K by this procedure became shorter than 5K by the updated rule.