And even if you think that .1% difference is enough to declare Cain the winner.... it's not. The difference between their times last year was greater than .1%, so that's not enough improvement on Cain's part to definitely make her the clear winner.
And even if you think that .1% difference is enough to declare Cain the winner.... it's not. The difference between their times last year was greater than .1%, so that's not enough improvement on Cain's part to definitely make her the clear winner.
If you take the top end of Baxter's improvement and add the top end of what rabbitting might be worth, yes, you get something comparable, which means there's a best-case scenario where the improvement is similar. If you go mid-range on each - 1% for rabbitting, which is all I happen to think it's worth, 2% for Baxter's improvement year-over-year - you have Cain 1.7% ahead. If we go back to our 17 flat starting point, 1.7% = about 17 seconds.
In going through all these numbers, what stands out for me and makes me think Cain would now beat Baxter at 5k XC is this:
2011 NXN: Baxter beats Cain by 18 seconds; Cain & Baxter come into the race with similar 3000m / 32000m track PRs.
2012 NXN: Baxter beats Cain by 4 seconds; Cain & Baxter again come into the race with similar 3000m / 32000m track PRs.
fall 2013: Cain now has a 3000m PR that Baxter can't approach. [9:02.10 for 3000m is basically Baxter's 1500m PR pace for twice the distance. You can give Baxter perfect pacing all the way to the finish and she stil isn't going to come close to that time.]
Let's take a step back: a race between Cain & Baxter would be a fun and interesting event for fans of competitive running; fans of Cain and Baxter [you and I included] seem to be WAY more interested in such a matchup than Cain and Baxter themselves; in a few weeks time we'll all probably know more about Baxter's progress and Cain's plans.
dkny64 wrote:
If you take the top end of Baxter's improvement and add the top end of what rabbitting might be worth, yes, you get something comparable, which means there's a best-case scenario where the improvement is similar. If you go mid-range on each - 1% for rabbitting, which is all I happen to think it's worth, 2% for Baxter's improvement year-over-year - you have Cain 1.7% ahead. If we go back to our 17 flat starting point, 1.7% = about 17 seconds.
all the way to the finish and she stil isn't going to come close to that time.]
Rabbiting and competition is easily worth more than 1%. Do you not watch many track meets? In a 10:00 2-mile, 1% is 6 seconds. When have you ever seen a 10:00 or sub 10:00 girl run 10:06 or respectively faster on her own?
Even amongst the all time great males, they need rabbits. Why has no one broken the men's 3000m record or come close? Rabbiting. Why does no one run mid 12:4x 5000m races? Rabbiting. Why does no one run sub 27:45 10000m races? Rabbiting.
Clearly, rabbiting and competition can be worth as much as 1-5%. There is no sensible way you can dispute this. So once again, there is no way you can say that Cain would definitely win. Every race she was in was rabbited THROUGH the finish line. Even world record holders aren't rabbited that far (except for El G's 1500m record).
Cross country and track are different, especially if the cross country course is muddy and hilly.
But out of curiosity what kind of track times do guys who run just under 16 at the woodbrige meet run on the track?
If Cain does not run cross country in it is silly to say she was a better cross country runner in high school based upon her track races.
lsl wrote:
dkny64 wrote:If you take the top end of Baxter's improvement and add the top end of what rabbitting might be worth, yes, you get something comparable, which means there's a best-case scenario where the improvement is similar. If you go mid-range on each - 1% for rabbitting, which is all I happen to think it's worth, 2% for Baxter's improvement year-over-year - you have Cain 1.7% ahead. If we go back to our 17 flat starting point, 1.7% = about 17 seconds.
all the way to the finish and she stil isn't going to come close to that time.]
Rabbiting and competition is easily worth more than 1%. Do you not watch many track meets? In a 10:00 2-mile, 1% is 6 seconds. When have you ever seen a 10:00 or sub 10:00 girl run 10:06 or respectively faster on her own?
Even amongst the all time great males, they need rabbits. Why has no one broken the men's 3000m record or come close? Rabbiting. Why does no one run mid 12:4x 5000m races? Rabbiting. Why does no one run sub 27:45 10000m races? Rabbiting.
Clearly, rabbiting and competition can be worth as much as 1-5%. There is no sensible way you can dispute this. So once again, there is no way you can say that Cain would definitely win. Every race she was in was rabbited THROUGH the finish line. Even world record holders aren't rabbited that far (except for El G's 1500m record).
Great back to the nike muddy buddy 2012 debate again I see.
kwfihweuih wrote:
Picking off runners in a relay when you get the stick far behind is also a way to run a great time. Baxter ran 4:54 in the 4x1600 when this happened. This spoke volumes. She is a XC runner and she peaks for XC. When they bring XC into the Olympics get back to me.
Why do I need to get back to you when they bring xc to the Olympics? What does that have to do with any of what I said?
It's also silly to think Cain could beat Baxter when she failed to do so not once, but twice.
Dorkus is mightus wrote:
Cross country and track are different, especially if the cross country course is muddy and hilly.
But out of curiosity what kind of track times do guys who run just under 16 at the woodbrige meet run on the track?
If Cain does not run cross country in it is silly to say she was a better cross country runner in high school based upon her track races.
Alright...I'll get in on the fun.
I gather from the general opinion on LR that Sarah Baxter will do better than Mary Cain at longer distances.
I look at this video of last year's NXN finish,
http://nxn.runnerspace.com/eprofile.php?event_id=13&do=videos&video_id=77474
Cain is closing in fast and Baxter is totally spent as she crosses the line. I say that if this race would would have been 100 to 200 yards longer Cain would have overtaken Baxter. And if it had been the standard 6K collegiate distance her margin of victory would have been even greater.
J0R wrote:
Cain is closing in fast and Baxter is totally spent as she crosses the line. I say that if this race would would have been 100 to 200 yards longer Cain would have overtaken Baxter. And if it had been the standard 6K collegiate distance her margin of victory would have been even greater.
Just like Rui Silva would have won the 2004 Olympic 1500 if only it were 100 to 200 yards longer.
XC pr's don't prove but suggest better shape, because the course layout and conditions may change, in addition to the comp, whereas track pr's are for the same distance and usually are run in dry conditions--making them easily comparable. Was that not obvious to you?
Cross country isn't track. Throw Cain onto a course like Mt. SAC and the gap between Baxter and Cain shrinks considerably. I'd pick Baxter over Cain on any day on a hilly or muddy course like Mt. SAC or NXN. A flat, fast course like Woodbridge is an entirely different story though.
Baxter is a GREAT xc runner, has won NXN twice and has been setting course records. Why she has been a little less so on the track is a mystery to me. She does have another year and she could have a big brakeout on the track.
Then there is Cain. We all know what she has done this year. Cain has not run after the WC and from what I can find is not going to run xc this year. Cain is more of a 800/1500 runner but can run at great for a HS level at 3/5 K.
If Cain and AlSal wanted to win NXN they could train for it. Let Baxter be the pace maker and out kick her at the end. It would be no contest.
Cain I think wants to race the best in the world at 1500/mile indoor. That is the focus, not some HS race.
The margin of victory would have been greater? Wouldn't there have to be a victory on Cain's part first? I am sure a girl who ran 16 at MtSac was sure tired after her 19:xx run at NXN. Losers.
J0R wrote:
Alright...I'll get in on the fun.
I gather from the general opinion on LR that Sarah Baxter will do better than Mary Cain at longer distances.
I look at this video of last year's NXN finish,
http://nxn.runnerspace.com/eprofile.php?event_id=13&do=videos&video_id=77474Cain is closing in fast and Baxter is totally spent as she crosses the line. I say that if this race would would have been 100 to 200 yards longer Cain would have overtaken Baxter. And if it had been the standard 6K collegiate distance her margin of victory would have been even greater.
jjjjjjjjj wrote:
XC pr's don't prove but suggest better shape, because the course layout and conditions may change, in addition to the comp, whereas track pr's are for the same distance and usually are run in dry conditions--making them easily comparable. Was that not obvious to you?
Nothing has changed has it? Same course as last year so it does prove better shape. Is that not obvious to you?
hold your horses wrote:
Cross country isn't track. Throw Cain onto a course like Mt. SAC and the gap between Baxter and Cain shrinks considerably. I'd pick Baxter over Cain on any day on a hilly or muddy course like Mt. SAC or NXN. A flat, fast course like Woodbridge is an entirely different story though.
There is quite a misconception about Mt. SAC here.
Running is a strength:weight sport. That means, on flat ground you must increase your strength:weight to run faster. Going uphill the strength:weight ratio becomes even more important.
The gap between Baxter and Cain would in fact stretch out considerably on a course like Mt. SAC.
Going uphill, Cain has the advantage. Going downhill, Cain has even more advantage with her phenomenal basic speed. Even if they ran together the entire time, the distance Cain would put on Baxter once they crested Reservoir would make for an anti-climactic race finish. Baxter thrives in an environment with zero changes of pace, whereas Cain is the exact opposite.
Beyond that, you don't know what their limits are when placing them in a HS female race. You need them in a sub-elite boys race, where they could finish top 10-20 at best. Then we would see some clear differences.
Anyway, they are very different runners. Cain has 800-1500-5000 WCs potential.
Baxter is perfect for the marathon. She has no fast twitch fibers so loses almost no speed as the distance stretches out, and she is tiny so has a better skin surface area to body mass ratio, which is needed for heat dissipation over the marathon.
D3 + K2 wrote:
hold your horses wrote:Cross country isn't track. Throw Cain onto a course like Mt. SAC and the gap between Baxter and Cain shrinks considerably. I'd pick Baxter over Cain on any day on a hilly or muddy course like Mt. SAC or NXN. A flat, fast course like Woodbridge is an entirely different story though.
There is quite a misconception about Mt. SAC here.
Running is a strength:weight sport. That means, on flat ground you must increase your strength:weight to run faster. Going uphill the strength:weight ratio becomes even more important.
The gap between Baxter and Cain would in fact stretch out considerably on a course like Mt. SAC.
Going uphill, Cain has the advantage. Going downhill, Cain has even more advantage with her phenomenal basic speed. Even if they ran together the entire time, the distance Cain would put on Baxter once they crested Reservoir would make for an anti-climactic race finish. Baxter thrives in an environment with zero changes of pace, whereas Cain is the exact opposite.
Beyond that, you don't know what their limits are when placing them in a HS female race. You need them in a sub-elite boys race, where they could finish top 10-20 at best. Then we would see some clear differences.
Anyway, they are very different runners. Cain has 800-1500-5000 WCs potential.
Baxter is perfect for the marathon. She has no fast twitch fibers so loses almost no speed as the distance stretches out, and she is tiny so has a better skin surface area to body mass ratio, which is needed for heat dissipation over the marathon.
Idiot post of the day.
ray wrote:
Sunken Meadow pre Sandy vs post Sandy = not even close to the same course
Hold up hold up. Forget all this other nonsense. Tell me what has happened to my precious Sunken Meadow course (living in PA now and haven't been back to LI in over a decade)?
Cain has NEVER beat Baxter. Until that day comes, Baxter should be ranked #1 in cross country until proven otherwise. Case closed.
Giving me a cardiac wrote:
ray wrote:Sunken Meadow pre Sandy vs post Sandy = not even close to the same course
Hold up hold up. Forget all this other nonsense. Tell me what has happened to my precious Sunken Meadow course (living in PA now and haven't been back to LI in over a decade)?
Don't know the specifics, but read on a site that large portions of the trail have been washed out and the loops are going to be different this year. But hey, it's still 5km and it's still Sunken Meadow so all the times are comparable right???