JENNA MF HUTCHINS - Runs 15:58 - 1st US HS Girl To Break 16:00 in XC!!

Here is a legit conversation with a D2 coach about this:

Me: Hutchins ran 15:58

D2: Course must be short.

Me: You just had your men do a 2-mile time trial, what do you think would equate for sub-16 in XC?

D2: About 10:10

Me: Okay. She's already run 9:47.

D2: Not all the same. There is a muscular aspect. One of my best post-collegians can outrun my guys over 10k, but they outrun her over a mile.

Me: Got it, so we think 15:58 probably is not representative of her true ability for 5K xc.

D2: Not, it's not the same. I haven't coached a sub-10:00 2mile girl so don't really know.

Wow.

There is no way it’s a “net downhill” as the start and finish are on the big open field next to each other. It’s also not pancake-flat. Footing is great, course is wide with gentle turns and great competition.

I'm sorry but there is no more speculation about whether this was designed to be a fast course. It certainly was, and we got that right from the horse's mouth. The final mile is a again from someone knowledgeable about the course's construction and design a long, 3.5% downhill. That explains the splits pretty well.

Whatever. It goes in the books. But when a record is set or a milestone passed you evaluate its relative merits. I and others are clearly not going out on a limb in arguing that the course and design was significant if not central to the record, and the numbers bear this out.

It's actually the exact opposite. Everyone's looking to find the newest Phenom and say they are the greatest of all time

But you become the goat by doing it for several years and being consistent and setting records along the way

All these girls are really great Runners, they're working hard and doing some great things

But it's a work-in-progress and certainly hasn't out done what Katelyn Tuohy achieved

Let's have them actually set one legitimate track record before we start to say they're going to obliterate past records

9:49 with two pacers. :)

Standard Setter wrote:

Here is a legit conversation with a D2 coach about this:

Me: Hutchins ran 15:58

D2: Course must be short.

Me: You just had your men do a 2-mile time trial, what do you think would equate for sub-16 in XC?

D2: About 10:10

Me: Okay. She's already run 9:47.

D2: Not all the same. There is a muscular aspect. One of my best post-collegians can outrun my guys over 10k, but they outrun her over a mile.

Me: Got it, so we think 15:58 probably is not representative of her true ability for 5K xc.

D2: Not, it's not the same. I haven't coached a sub-10:00 2mile girl so don't really know.

Wow.

A collegiate coach should know comparing a 3200m and a 5k cross country course is a heck of a lot different than comparing a mile and a 10k. And someone who runs 5:05 for two miles is not going to be able to run 5:09 pace a 5k cross country race. But maybe that's why he has a girl beating all of his collegiate runners!

What does John Kellogg think?

Again, just looking at second place, her 3200 from TN in August (her first race) was the equivalent of 16:33 on the track. So, with better fitness & better weather, you would expect her to be able to run sub-17:00. This course was clearly fast, perhaps more like a track 5,000, but, for Hutchins to blow away the field like she did is ridiculously good. She is basically 1:00 ahead of a girl who could probably run damn near 10:00 for 3200 and one of Colorado’s best runners.

GoodStart wrote:

Responding to some posts about Jenna's "shuffling stride"...

I agree. I noticed it as well.

I think unless she's trained to get up on the balls of her feet and PUSH off the ground and have a longer stride with a back heel kick, she'll never go sub-15:00 5k in her career.

However, if she wants to be a marathoner? Game on... She's super fast and super efficient.

I agree about the "shuffling stride" myself. Watched the race in person and reviewed the video. Counting her cadence, I see she is constantly doing 220 steps per minute, regardless if she is going uphill or downhill. The 220 cadence is at every mile, barely changing within a range of +/- 2 steps per minute.

Everything I have read about cadence says that sprinters will usually hit that cadence plus a few steps per minute extra. How is she able to keep that cadence up for 5K? She didn't even look winded crossing the finish line, while the Colorado girls looked winded to me. Even the 4th or 5th place runner from Colorado (i couldn't tell which one crossed first) fell 4 or 5 times within 20 meters of the finish line, and she still finished with a time of 17:16.

I'm totally perplexed about her cadence.

Didn’t Bri Oakley used to run like this?

Guy this isn't rocket science. Cross country you look at speed ratings. 4 track you look attimes for the most part but also take into account if there are Pacers, if it's a pro race or all High School, and the general conditions

COVID shut everything down last spring so track PRs aren't a great gauge this fall. Guys who ran 9:20 last winter or the previous spring would have likely run around or under 9:10 if they continued to progress during a normal track season.

COVID shut everything down last spring so track PRs aren't a great gauge this fall. Many guys who ran 9:20s last winter or the previous spring would have likely run around or under 9:10 if they continued to progress during a normal track season.

It is pretty clear to me that both Hutchins and Thorvaldson are in 15:35-15:45 track 5000 shape. What a great event if all three could be brought together for this, with pacing.

Can't be bothered looking through this entire thread.

Bottom line...... It's cross country! Hasn't the sport been bastardized enough??

Crazy, right? She'll be an unbelievable marathoner someday should she choose that route.

Yep. A record gets set with a relatively pedestrian speed rating, a person knowledgeable about the course design admits that was designed to be very fast with significant downhill sections, including the last mile, all of this out borne out by the race times and the mass sub 15 party, and all manner of equivocation ensues, including things like well the fact that it was a lower speed rating is because the course is so fast, which is the whole point. Goes in the books anyway.

Bruce Denton 2.0 wrote:

I don't know of anyone who constructs a course with all the bells and whistles to specifically produce slow times. The hills are real. The footing is great and in excellent weather with a lot of competition and no congestion on the course people generally run pretty fast anywhere.

Bruce, thanks for taking the time to provide some background on how the course was built. It is an amazing venue and as nice as any xc course in the country. Anyone criticizing the course obviously hasn't been there to see it.

To clarify any question on my previous post on the course makeup, the overall course starts and finishes at the same elevation, but the first mile is a little net downhill, the second is a significant net uphill (though rolling), and the last mile is a nice drop (particularly the 3.5% grade downhill from the approx. 3750m mark to the 4k post) to balance the total gain/loss out.

There is a particularly smart way to run it which we have seen from those who won every significant race the last 2 years there (Southern Showcase, Sectionals, and RXC): honest pace first mile, only losing 20ish seconds on your relative splits the second mile, and tearing it up coming home. Ethan Strand has done this in both his Southern Showcase wins, Parker Wolfe did it to a T, and Jenna Hutchins has done a number of preview loops to get familiar with it. That's also why there have been some spectacular blowups on the course over the last mile, because if you are gassed that hill is just long enough to eat you alive. Terrain that runs fast doesn't necessarily mean that it is easy and comes to you magically. The huge boys pack ran it very smart this weekend...had they all gone with Kamari, I doubt they would have held on as well as he did.