Official NCAA regional XC results thread

mytwocents wrote:

He's not a professional, he's not being paid by Nike, and he's not living this posh life that you all imagine.

He has his own personal coach, does not have to listen to a word the UO coaches say, doesn't practice with his teammates, runs in elite, professional races in Europe, traveled to Boise weekly to run on their indoor track last year, practices on Nike's world campus track, uses an altitude tent, anti-gravity treadmill, and underwater treadmill. Not a professional, posh life? You keep telling yourself that.

cool name here wrote:

does not have to listen to a word the UO coaches say,

Where is this confirmed?

cool name here wrote:

runs in elite, professional races in Europe,

Because he's fast enough too

cool name here wrote:

uses an altitude tent,

So does a blue-collar 24:50 8K guy who runs for the university in my home town. Big deal.

dirty work wrote: Alright, everyone. I just mapped the Stanford course on usatf's map a run. It turned out to be 9.90 kms, so somewhat short. I think the most of the reason it's so fast is that it's pancake flat. Also, the more important thing is that Rupp won by 50 secs, not his time.

Here's my map. I might have done it somewhat wrong (people that were there, tell me).

http://www.usatf.org/routes/view.asp?rID=258643

Finishing straight is parallel to the starting straight and shorter.

By the fact that Salazar is the one who decides the workouts and whether or not a course is too rutty.

I didn't say he wasn't fast, I just said he's living a posh and professional lifestyle.

Obviously not blue-collar if he bought it himself. If he didn't buy it himself then he too is living a posh, professional lifestyle.

Where are your comebacks to these? I'm not saying he's not deserving, I'm just saying he's not an amateur.

no way. he can't even run a solid 10k

In all the years of this debate, no one has ever:

- proved that Rupp has compromised his amateur status in the eyes of the NCAA or USATF.

- explained how Rupp doing his own training is different from other NCAA greats (Goucher, Ritz, McDougal, etc) doing their own training.

- provided more than slimy innuendo about Salazar and his supposed 'dirtiness'

- managed to sound like anything other than a jealous, nitpicking asshole.

What would he need to do to gain your approval? Slow down by 30 seconds or so and grow a beard?

I still applaud the decision to hold Rupp out of the rutty race, though I will admit the excuse used was pretty lame. Getting a good solid workout in, in place of a soft race mid-season, that's a good coaching strategy.

UofO doesn't have an indoor track--so what's the harm in using a neighboring university's track? When I was in college, we'd use other tracks. Don't see what the harm is there.

Rupp isn't the first/only collegian to use the Nike track, or an anti-gravity treadmill. Nike's track, while on a great campus (been there personally) is still just a track. Anti-gravity treadmills are commonplace at major D1 schools. I ran on one when recovering from a stress fracture, and that was 5 years ago.

My issue with most haters (seems you're included in this bunch) is that you complain about things he's got that OTHER D1 ATHLETES HAVE AS WELL. Why give Rupp crap--why not give the guy who runs 25:50 using these things a hard time? Seems to make sense that he's using everything at his disposal to become a better athlete, and I still just can't comprehend why people hate on this. I suppose jealousy is a factor, but that may not be all that's there (and I can't speak for anyone else but me).

At the finish yesterday at Stanford the NCAA roadblocked runnerspace.com and flotrack.com. The security guards prevented fans from shooting any videos of the finish. We came all the way from eastern Oregon to Stanford to be treated like shit by the NCAA, and the NCAA didn't even broadcast the races. The NCAA really sucks.

Anyone who thinks the West Regional course was short needs to stop breeding so the intelligence of the population can go up. I know the kind of stuff they have to go through to approve a regional course because we JUST hosted one, and it is absolutely impossible for a course to be short after all of the checks and precautions they do to make sure its legit. Rupp is impressive.

By the way, from experience, its not at all out of the question to run as fast in XC on a flat course as you do on the track. If the course was flat and hard (which we all know it was) then its not surprising that a 27:30 guy can run 27:50 on it.

And anyone who brings up nationals in an arguement about how fast someone is a brain dead. Nobody up front runs a fast race at nationals. They normally chill the pace and start going around 3-5k.

These complaints about Rupp get REALLY tiresome. He's extremely talented, he's been an Olympian, he could turn pro anytime he wants, yet he wants to run collegiately and has loyalty to the U of O. Somehow, people have trouble with this. You're just children, I swear.

think about your life wrote:

In all the years of this debate, no one has ever:

- proved that Rupp has compromised his amateur status in the eyes of the NCAA or USATF.

- explained how Rupp doing his own training is different from other NCAA greats (Goucher, Ritz, McDougal, etc) doing their own training.

- provided more than slimy innuendo about Salazar and his supposed 'dirtiness'

- managed to sound like anything other than a jealous, nitpicking asshole.

What would he need to do to gain your approval? Slow down by 30 seconds or so and grow a beard?

Good points. I would add that the long tradition of Kenyans at Washington State did all of their own personalized training. They got a free education and used their world class talent (lagat & rono included) to dominate younger american runners while often training apart from those american guys on the team.

Yet nobody every complains about this. Has anybody kept a record of how often Chelenga is training with his team? Has anyone demanded his bones to be carbon dated to confirm his age?

I personally don't really care about this stuff. I just accepted these runners in the NCAA and used them as a chance to get better. Some of you sissies need to stop complaining and just get tougher. Stop using Rupp for an excuse as why you suck and the "great" runners are so far ahead of you. The irony is that your jealousy is derived from your feelings of being weak of worthless, but by looking for an excuse (i.e. Rupp's "great and unfair advantages" you make yourselves weaker and less likely to be successful. Take your own situation and improve upon it. Most likely the biggest reason that you are not achieving your potential is right between your ears and not the surfaces that you run on. One thing you have to realize is that you do have a physical limit, that doesn't mean you have reached it. You may be capable of being decent or even really good runners. But don't be so arrogant to assume that if you had all of Rupp's advantages that you would ever be withing 60 seconds of him over 10K. That is just ignorant and arrogant.

I'd love to spend a life in the day of you haters, driving down the road and complaining about some dude with a brand new BMW 751 because he most likely was born with a silver spoon in hand. Yet little do you know he earned everything he has with his mind and hard work. His ability to learn from mistakes, not make excuses and rise above his own downfalls. But you'll continue to search for reasons that you're stuck with a '97 nissan sentra with a dent that you couldn't afford to fix.

Pitiful stuff.

Picky wrote:

These complaints about Rupp get REALLY tiresome. He's extremely talented, he's been an Olympian, he could turn pro anytime he wants, yet he wants to run collegiately and has loyalty to the U of O. Somehow, people have trouble with this. You're just children, I swear.

Just so you know... it was obvious by my post that I was not complaining about Rupp. Hence me saying that you're stupid if you thought the course was short.

Rupp is great. There is no doubt that he should have left college to train pro full time (since that is essentially what he's been doing since high school anyway), but that is not anyone's choice but his and he chooses to stick around. He is an olympian racing against mere kids and I hope he wins this year so he can bow out on his terms and hit the professional game this summer.

So what is more likely: that every single runner ran around a minute faster over 10k than would be predicted by the 8k times ran two weeks earlier at Pac-10's, OR someone f-ed up the course measurement and it was short?

The two courses are pretty similar is how fast they are, as a look at the women's times shows the Regional times are about equal to the Pac-10 results - some runners a bit faster, some a bit slower, but there certainly aren't any general negative or positive trends. Thus, you can't simply say the Stanford course was significantly faster than the Pac-10 course. There is no way to account for everyone running faster times at Regionals except that the course was short.

The Pac 10 course is slow. Look at last years regionals times, which were run on that course.

Dumbasses wrote:

Anyone who thinks the West Regional course was short needs to stop breeding so the intelligence of the population can go up.

He ran 27:41. 8 seconds slower than his track pr. Look I can understand people who don't think the course was short, but this just makes me mad. It is extremely reasonable to think the course is short and yet you're insulting the intelligence of the people who believe this as if it's an unreasonable opinion. It's not just Rupp running 8 seconds slower than his track pr in an xc race. Everyone was running times that are virtually unheard for xc. I mean Rupp went through 8k in 22:09. Come on, this stuff just doesn't happen in cross country. Not even Henry Rono ran even close to this fast.

Do you have reading comprehension issues? The womens times from Pac-10 correlate almost exactly to the Regional times. How does that suggest that the Pac-10 course is slow?