NEW Atlantic Region XC *2009* thread

Brockports 2-5 at Oberlin (insanely fast course under dry conditions)

36 Ryan Gilmore, Jr 26:04 5:15

98 Greg Selke, So 26:54 5:25

103 Josh Coon, Fr 27:07 5:28

111 Brad Frink, Sr 27:11 5:29

Oneontas 2-5 at SPAC (under slower course and torrential downpour)

11 Greenberg, Tim Oneonta 5:19.1 26:26.00 11

12 Madison, Nick Oneonta 5:19.2 26:26.78 12

14 Hollister, Chuck Oneonta 5:19.9 26:30.00 14

16 Pfaffenberger, Frank Oneonta 5:21.2 26:36.44 16

just for clear insight..

Runner at SPAC wrote:

Brockports 2-5 at Oberlin (insanely fast course under dry conditions)

36 Ryan Gilmore, Jr 26:04 5:15

98 Greg Selke, So 26:54 5:25

103 Josh Coon, Fr 27:07 5:28

111 Brad Frink, Sr 27:11 5:29

Oneontas 2-5 at SPAC (under slower course and torrential downpour)

11 Greenberg, Tim Oneonta 5:19.1 26:26.00 11

12 Madison, Nick Oneonta 5:19.2 26:26.78 12

14 Hollister, Chuck Oneonta 5:19.9 26:30.00 14

16 Pfaffenberger, Frank Oneonta 5:21.2 26:36.44 16

just for clear insight..

oberlin was anything but dry... ask anyone who was actually there

SPAC is fast, just not as fast as it would've been.

Spac is actually not fast, it is fair. Comparable to slu.Oberlin on the other hand is the fastest course around.

oberlin is flat which makes it fast but at the interregional rumble it was quite muddy throughout the course. the way the course is designed though it does not slow down as much as other courses. who are kidding spac is not fast. it is quite fast. its hard to compare times though but spac is mostly packed gravel. although you can somewhat judge times from teams it is rather pointless if they are as close as brockport and oneonta / fredonia and plattsburgh. neither of the groups have gone head to head this year. they way we will find out is if they go head to head and what do you know they are this weekend.

Honeywell wrote:

Spac is actually not fast, it is fair. Comparable to slu.Oberlin on the other hand is the fastest course around.

I would half agree. SPAC is faster than SLU (what I consider to be of average difficulty, depending on the weather), but not too fast.

Would I be too far off saying that SPAC is about 20 seconds faster than SLU, and Oberlin is about 30 seconds faster than SPAC?

Either way, Oneonta won't be 3rd or 4th. Those spots will be Plattsburgh/Fredonia. I also tend to put Plattsburgh ahead of Fredonia due to a) Heymann and b) I think they'll show up ready to race, unlike their last couple.

1. Cortland

2. Geneseo (10 points back)

3. Plattsburgh

4. Fredonia

Also, what about Saratoga this weekend? SLU and RIT finally meet. I personally think that SLU will take it by about 15-20 over RIT.

Big Will wrote:

1. Cortland

2. Geneseo (10 points back)

3. Plattsburgh

4. Fredonia

should be a dick of a race then

Big Will wrote:

Would I be too far off saying that SPAC is about 20 seconds faster than SLU, and Oberlin is about 30 seconds faster than SPAC?

yes, because XC isn't about times.

xc is about times. The fastest time wins. However, it is quite stupid to try and convert times between courses.

norkinforkin wrote:

xc is about times. The fastest time wins. However, it is quite stupid to try and convert times between courses.

no, what you just described is known as "place." whoever crosses the line first wins, regardless of time.

atlanticregionteammember wrote:

norkinforkin wrote:

xc is about times. The fastest time wins. However, it is quite stupid to try and convert times between courses.

no, what you just described is known as "place." whoever crosses the line first wins, regardless of time.

Congrats on post #1111!

Big Will wrote:

Would I be too far off saying that SPAC is about 20 seconds faster than SLU, and Oberlin is about 30 seconds faster than SPAC?

No full 8k, save a road race or a course with a massive net downhill, is 30 seconds faster than SPAC. It runs like a road race in dry weather. Oberlin may be 20 or so seconds faster than the specific SPAC race this past Saturday, but in general... no sir-ee.

atlanticregionteammember wrote:

norkinforkin wrote:

xc is about times. The fastest time wins. However, it is quite stupid to try and convert times between courses.

no, what you just described is known as "place." whoever crosses the line first wins, regardless of time.

lol bro. If you run a course in less time then everyone else, you will surely win. noobster.

Making sure you're ahead of everyone else is far more important than how fast you're running... your time is irrelevant. First place gets one point, Second place gets two...

Stop arguing over whether finishing in first place or finishing in the fastest time is most important, they are obviously mutually exclusive and you can't do one without another so this argument is worthless.

zoo wrote:

Making sure you're ahead of everyone else is far more important than how fast you're running... your time is irrelevant. First place gets one point, Second place gets two...

so how about them rankings?

Nothing really changed too much...

How about this weekend...SUNYACs obviously. What else is going on?

However if you consider teams, it is possible for a team with a slower time average wins against the time with faster time average.

moving on... wrote:

so how about them rankings?

brockport women got bumped up to fourth from sixth, just missing out 3rd by one vote. ithaca falls from third to sixth.