Men's FINAL PROJECTION with Mountain results included. Utah State and Colorado State only getting 8th and 9th in the Mountain definitely shook things up.
Men's FINAL PROJECTION with Mountain results included. Utah State and Colorado State only getting 8th and 9th in the Mountain definitely shook things up.
old owl. wrote:
Bonkers wrote:
Yeah...so the training they did in the 2 weeks leading up to Pac-12's probably didn't help them at that race, but helped them today...see how that works?
Ok bud, look at the racing strategy in each race, notice the difference. Any good HS kid knows to run even paced or negative split is the most effective way to race. Guess the Stanford crew learned a lesson from Pac-12's. How much of a performance incentive do you think Stanford gives for a conference championship? Do you think training through one of the most important races of the season is a good plan, especially at the collegiate level where you only run 4-5 races anyways.
Gotta be honest, I don't have an opinion on any of this conference/race strategy stuff. I just thought it was ridiculous to say "you don't gain fitness in 2 weeks". Yeah, maybe that's true if you're starting from absolute zero. But over a 2 week stretch you're for sure absorbing the training from the previous 2 weeks, so it's certainly possible they're just in much better shape than they were at Pac-12's.
7empest wrote:
south run wrote:
You won't. Steelman, yes. Starliper hasn't run all season. Clairmonte hasn't been in usual form, so iffy.
There is a reason why Starliper was not on one starting list all season but was on the regional!!!!! What’s your argument, that NC State was just drawing names out of a hat?????
Maybe they put that list together earlier in the season when they thought she might be running. Who knows? Last I heard she had a stress fracture.
Happens all the time in the Mountain Region. You could probably put the top 9 from the Mountain into the national championship each year and they'd almost all finish in the top 25. But instead we get 5 teams in. It's a crazy system.
One major factor for Stanford at PAC-12 is the race was at altitude. Teams like Colorado and Utah will always have an advantage when Pac-12 is run at altitude. At going out fast at altitude for a sea level team is a recipe for disaster.
Coach Kedge wrote:
/Users/kedge/Desktop/IMG_2924.HEIC
Stunning.
Bonkers wrote:
old owl. wrote:
Ok bud, look at the racing strategy in each race, notice the difference. Any good HS kid knows to run even paced or negative split is the most effective way to race. Guess the Stanford crew learned a lesson from Pac-12's. How much of a performance incentive do you think Stanford gives for a conference championship? Do you think training through one of the most important races of the season is a good plan, especially at the collegiate level where you only run 4-5 races anyways.
Gotta be honest, I don't have an opinion on any of this conference/race strategy stuff. I just thought it was ridiculous to say "you don't gain fitness in 2 weeks". Yeah, maybe that's true if you're starting from absolute zero. But over a 2 week stretch you're for sure absorbing the training from the previous 2 weeks, so it's certainly possible they're just in much better shape than they were at Pac-12's.
Gotta be honest, I wouldn't get into it with anyone who starts their reply "OK bud"
That's an instant red flag that you are debating a dooshbag.
Such said dooshbag wouldn't know the difference between mytochondria response time vs VO2 max response time vs threshold response time vs speed endurance response time.
FWIW, there is plenty of fitness to top off in the last two weeks.
Dooshbag gonna be dooshbags.
Can't change that!
rocky mtns wrote:
Bower Man wrote:
Yes.
Early season issues now resolved.
Trained through Pac-12s to get back into top racing condition.
At Pac-12s, ladies went out hard then all faded at the end to finish 5th.
Today, a more conservative approach worked very well, especially given their collective increased level of fitness.
We know JJ Clark can recruit, especially mid-d women.
This race certainly substantiates his abilities to coach longer distances.
In case my post is misinterpreted, I'm not trying to argue, just curious as much as anything. So, in essence, they didn't really sacrifice Pac-12s, but ran poorly compared to today?
Some Stanford thoughts. With the quarter system they get into their training schedule later than most schools. Ie. They arrive at school 9/1 and start day1 with their rust buster first meet, and only then leave for their off site training camp. They are back at school around 9/15 for start of classes. The semester schools are basically a month ahead of them. Add in this year that Dudek was returning from injury, and Heymach was looking for a slow start after Olympic trials, and there was even more reason for slow buildup. My guess is they trained right through the entire meet schedule, only looking to this week's meets. I don't think they tanked conference, but it wasn't a priority, and they did indeed go out too fast at PAC.
So are they any good? Weakness is even today they had no 5th runner and no depth. Strength is that both Dudek and Heymach look better each week. If they run well, team could come 5th, maybe 4th if one of the 4 favorites has a terrible day.
Would it surprise you if I told you that for all the schools (Stanford, OR, OR St, Gonzaga, WA, WASt, Boise St) that ran in the West and at Nuttycombe they ALL averaged at 36 seconds faster today than at Nuttycombe. So 20:00 today seems to be the equivielent of 35th place at Nuttycombe. WA and Stanford improved by almost a minute - so maybe some of that is real improvement. The least an individual runner improved was 17 seconds.
joed|rt wrote:
Happens all the time in the Mountain Region. You could probably put the top 9 from the Mountain into the national championship each year and they'd almost all finish in the top 25. But instead we get 5 teams in. It's a crazy system.
Sorry. I took a look at the first two teams out on both men's and women's mountain region. Not seeing high-quality wins, am seeing some low-quality losses. Farther down, Utah State and Colorado State men both had bad days at regionals, but they also both lost to Boise State at conference and Boise State didn't make it in out of the West region. Doesn't look like those teams are as good now as they were a month ago. Southern Utah men on the other hand improved since Nuttycombe and punched their ticket.
Still Waiting wrote:
get it together wrote:
Appalling. Runnercard has one job.
Except they don't have one job. The owner is the race director. He hired himself knowing his priority that day would be RD not Runnercard. BYU should be left out the NCAA just for this..LOL
You don’t know him. He’s the nicest guy you’ll ever meet. Unfortunately, they needed more bandwidth today. He’ll do better next time.
Fine job coaching by J.J. Clark. He brought them along gradually during the season to be sharp at this point when it counts, and he also had them move up gradually in the race itself, in 5th at the mile, 3rd at the 1.5M, and then 1st at the next splits on to the finish. Wetmore was always good with that tactic with Colorado.
Iona is likely out from the projections i've looked at. Is this a case of NOT running well at a points eligible meet (Nuttyconbe) and not having a quality back up meet? Specifically asking, if they had beaten 1 or 2 of the last 5 projected at-large teams would they be in? Trying to better understand the push in system.
Pretty much. Iona had an uncharacteristic disaster at Wisco so didn’t have any points to push them in. Additionally, they had some big hitters not run and severely underperform today at regionals.
The Truth Hurts wrote:
Still Waiting wrote:
Except they don't have one job. The owner is the race director. He hired himself knowing his priority that day would be RD not Runnercard. BYU should be left out the NCAA just for this..LOL
You don’t know him. He’s the nicest guy you’ll ever meet. Unfortunately, they needed more bandwidth today. He’ll do better next time.
Not to mention one of America’s greatest indoor 2-milers ever.
xc-fan wrote:
Runnercard is down again. Just before it went down they were showing three Texas Tech women as 1-2-3 in the women's race. I wouldn't trust anything they have shown so far.
In any case three of BYU's top five women (Orton, Halladay, Lee) did not run today.
What's the deal with Orton? She hasn't raced since mid September. I'm assuming she's injured?
runnER/DR wrote:
xc-fan wrote:
Runnercard is down again. Just before it went down they were showing three Texas Tech women as 1-2-3 in the women's race. I wouldn't trust anything they have shown so far.
In any case three of BYU's top five women (Orton, Halladay, Lee) did not run today.
What's the deal with Orton? She hasn't raced since mid September. I'm assuming she's injured?
She won at wcc conference.
ny guy wrote:
rocky mtns wrote:
In case my post is misinterpreted, I'm not trying to argue, just curious as much as anything. So, in essence, they didn't really sacrifice Pac-12s, but ran poorly compared to today?
Some Stanford thoughts. With the quarter system they get into their training schedule later than most schools. Ie. They arrive at school 9/1 and start day1 with their rust buster first meet, and only then leave for their off site training camp. They are back at school around 9/15 for start of classes. The semester schools are basically a month ahead of them. Add in this year that Dudek was returning from injury, and Heymach was looking for a slow start after Olympic trials, and there was even more reason for slow buildup. My guess is they trained right through the entire meet schedule, only looking to this week's meets. I don't think they tanked conference, but it wasn't a priority, and they did indeed go out too fast at PAC.
So are they any good? Weakness is even today they had no 5th runner and no depth. Strength is that both Dudek and Heymach look better each week. If they run well, team could come 5th, maybe 4th if one of the 4 favorites has a terrible day.
good points-Stanford peaking at the right time--too bad their 2019 grad transfer Aubrey Roberts has barely raced in 2 years-she was top 25 at NCAAs in 2018...
Server overload not a software issue. So much interest in the MOuntain Region the server could not handle the traffic.