Way more info about the John Hunt course available than any state meet or any other national meet.
Way more info about the John Hunt course available than any state meet or any other national meet.
bald loser wrote:
Way more info about the John Hunt course available than any state meet or any other national meet.
I totally agree and it has probably already been measured more then any of those other courses as well.
bald loser wrote:
Way more info about the John Hunt course available than any state meet or any other national meet.
Yes, very nice description of the course, but zero details on who, how and with what it was measured.
Which version?
Does it really matter, were there any PRs ever set there? I don't recall any of the NXN courses labeled as "fast".
There were coaches all over the place with wheels the day prior to the meet. How many have you heard from questioning the course length? They all said it was accurate.
bald loser wrote:
Way more info about the John Hunt course available than any state meet or any other national meet.
The ol UC Davis coach???
bald loser wrote:
There were coaches all over the place with wheels the day prior to the meet. How many have you heard from questioning the course length? They all said it was accurate.
We have yet to have a credible report of someone who has wheeled the whole course and came up with "accurate".
Unless 4925, and 4935 fits your description?
One if the coaches last year had it a 4995. I heard several this year say they wheeled it and it was accurate. I didn't get numbers but that was more than enough for us to use for our records.
blue man wrote:
One if the coaches last year had it a 4995. I heard several this year say they wheeled it and it was accurate. I didn't get numbers but that was more than enough for us to use for our records.
So, why do you think it runs so fast?
Ghost of Ward Cleaver wrote:
bald loser wrote:
There were coaches all over the place with wheels the day prior to the meet. How many have you heard from questioning the course length? They all said it was accurate.
We have yet to have a credible report of someone who has wheeled the whole course and came up with "accurate".
Unless 4925, and 4935 fits your description?
We have yet to have one credible report of someone who has wheeled it short. If you have one please post names.
You have heard it all already. Best competition ever assembled in one race. Perfect surface. Perfect conditions. Wide sweeping turns. Net downhill of a few feet. Longer downhills and shorter steeper uphill.
GPS and wheels aren't perfect but we have hundreds of readings here that compare favorably to other courses.
coachy wrote:
Ghost of Ward Cleaver wrote:
We have yet to have a credible report of someone who has wheeled the whole course and came up with "accurate".
Unless 4925, and 4935 fits your description?
We have yet to have one credible report of someone who has wheeled it short. If you have one please post names.
Neal Baumgartner -
He was in the LR article about the course.
https://www.letsrun.com/news/2021/12/was-the-course-at-the-runninglane-cross-country-championships-short-well/blue man wrote:
You have heard it all already.
Yep, but I was hoping for something new.
Best competition ever assembled in one race.
Even for those in the back?
Perfect surface.
Others have said the ground was soft from the rain earlier in the week and that morning?
and Perfect conditions.
What was perfect about the conditions?
Wide sweeping turns.
Which adds distance to the vast majority that can't run the inside, right?
Net downhill of a few feet. Longer downhills and shorter steeper uphill.
So... not a flat course like some are saying? Would a track be faster with some steep uphills and longer downhills than a flat track?
replies in bold
Ghost of Ward Cleaver wrote:
coachy wrote:
We have yet to have one credible report of someone who has wheeled it short. If you have one please post names.
Neal Baumgartner -
He was in the LR article about the course.
https://www.letsrun.com/news/2021/12/was-the-course-at-the-runninglane-cross-country-championships-short-well/
I do believe you said that you need to know their methods before you will take the measurement. Maybe that only is important when it’s in your favor?
bald loser wrote:
Way more info about the John Hunt course available than any state meet or any other national meet.
That is not true.
coachy wrote:
Ghost of Ward Cleaver wrote:
Neal Baumgartner -
He was in the LR article about the course.
https://www.letsrun.com/news/2021/12/was-the-course-at-the-runninglane-cross-country-championships-short-well/I do believe you said that you need to know their methods before you will take the measurement. Maybe that only is important when it’s in your favor?
Correct! Why do you think I believe his measurement? None of those that have measured have defined the SPR measurement and only one has mentioned calibration and it was done on a different surface that may not have been steam rolled, right?
bald loser wrote:
We got our tape measure out yesterday and certified the course at 5003.46 meters.
We’re going to need real names and faces for anyone claiming to have measured the course. Pics too.
If you are not willing to provide that info, then we have to weigh your claim accordingly.
They should use 12”/30cm from the inside turn. We can recalculate the length if they use a different clearance radius based on the total number of turns but it adds small error that we should try to avoid. As long as the clearance is consistent.
The only ones who have to prove anything are the ones questioning the meet directors and course designers.