Official RunningLane National Championships thread

How long before the gold race?

God I love being right. Victory lap time. I knew a superfast course when I saw it, and the details the course designer provided last year clinched it. I think Angelina Perez, who was the top rated girl this year would have had a great shot at sub 16. Perez top speed rating was 163 and she ran Holmdel twice, getting in the low 17s. It would have been a good data point in comparing the times on this course.

Prok is having a bad year, don't count her for analysis

Course may be short but it’s (relatively)longer than the D3 8km they ran in Louisville a few weeks ago. Just check GPS data of finishers. Both courses measured accurate using the GPS watches (which means they are both quite short)

4.94 vs. 3.09 from what I have seen. Both courses were short, but running lane was relatively longer.

How many guys/girls will replicate these times on the track next summer?

Bets on first mile split?

Sub 4:30 for sure (silver race went out in 4:39)

I say 4:28

$0.02 wrote:

CIF track history wrote:

128 girls under 18 minutes, 20 under 17 minutes

Nothing to see here, people! Course was measured by certified bama xc-milesplit specialists.

Yeah, and it appeared that many girls didn't run the tangents because of the softness/mud on the inside turns along the painted lines. It would be nice if someone would have the actual distance, measured correctly...

4:20 blaze it, NP will do it for the memes

That's the trick. Maybe none. But the bigger trick is getting out of high school unscathed. So far that has proven much harder to pull off on the women's side.

Anyway, rest in peace to Ritz's record. Well not really, because in XC you cannot reallt compare times on different courses. But RIP anyway.

I also assume that the top 10 HS list was re written today on the girl side. Correct?

20 girls ran sub 17 in one race. Quite a few sub 16:30.

chiichvlvh wrote:

I also assume that the top 10 HS list was re written today on the girl side. Correct?

This will set some people off:

Tuohy's H.S. PR was 16:06.87 for 5K XC.

So now she's 3rd on the list..............

astro wrote:

That's the trick. Maybe none. But the bigger trick is getting out of high school unscathed. So far that has proven much harder to pull off on the women's side.

Anyway, rest in peace to Ritz's record. Well not really, because in XC you cannot reallt compare times on different courses. But RIP anyway.

For some perspective, the 2nd best time on the MHSAA course behind Ritz’s 14:10 (held there since 1996), is 14:49 by Hough in 2020. This includes a couple national champions as well- Grant Fisher (14:52 at MHSAA) and Tim Moore (15:06). Hobbs ran low-14:50s as well.

Isn’t the Cali state meet course considered a bit faster than MHSAA MIS course?

Watchin' with interest wrote:

chiichvlvh wrote:

I also assume that the top 10 HS list was re written today on the girl side. Correct?

This will set some people off:

Tuohy's H.S. PR was 16:06.87 for 5K XC.

So now she's 3rd on the list..............

For the millionth time, you cannot compare times across different XC courses. There is nothing wrong with runninglane. Compare the track 5k times if you want to be accurate. It's not that hard to understand.

Assuming NXN happens in 2022, it will be interesting to see where top programs and athletes choose to compete with 3 viable options. Despite no NXN in 2020 and 2021, I wouldn't write it off. In the SW, almost all the top Utah and CO programs still attended NXR-SW this year despite the travel/costs to AZ. Do you you think those teams that finish 1-2 next year in the SW will turn down a trip to Portland? In reality, across the country, many top programs still competed in their respective regional NXR meet.

RL is attractive for a lot of teams/individuals in that your race placement is based on your season and not one day (Nike or EB regionals). And it is apparently fast. Is it really a full 5k???

As other have posted in the various high school threads, I'm also concerned with the HS-level obsession with times. Maybe it's where the sport is heading at this level, but I don't like it. Did anyone really care how fast Mantz or Orton ran last month?

Not really. Because times on different courses are not interchangeable. What this race showed again is that this course is extremely fast and less difficult than other courses. Which is fine. If you put stock in such things a runner whose top SR all year was 160 ran 16:03.

Yes, really you can compare times on different courses because that 14:10 from Ritz has lasted for years. You may not think it matters but whoever breaks it will be remembered and will likely be very very good. If any kid runs sub 14:10 on a legit measured course, comparisons will come in floods. Guys will keep yelling the course is short til they have a seizure.

So idiotic for people to seriously talk about an all-time top 10 XC list. Completely misses the point about XC courses.