She would have been 5th in the NCAA in 2019.
She would have been 5th in the NCAA in 2019.
kmaclam wrote:
And it looks like Dan King got his 2nd (3rd?) record of the weekend with a 16:48 5K earlier tonight along with the mile age group record yesterday.
Wasn't the mile a few seconds off the record? 16:48 is blastin'.
Ncaa 5000m runs are tactical.
At 1:14:20 they chat with Jenna Hutchins, Abby Vanderkooi, and Taylor Ewert. Jenna talks in detail about her 15:34 at 1:25:00.
You continue to make these negative remarks but then show that you don't bother to base them on facts. The 2019 NCAA final was won in 15:50 so I guess she would have crushed the field. Her time from this one and only race would have been the 5th best time in the entire NCAA for the entire year counting all of the times that the runners competed in paced races. Have that sink in.
Do you even watch these races? People used to make the same claim about Tuohy, but there is huge developmental gap starting around age 20 in ncaa women's running. The top ncaa runners simply run faster. The times seem slower in the finals because it is run tactically.
I watch every single race. That comment was merely for your benefit to show your ignorance of the time in the final for that year before making a comment about a 16 year old girl. Her time would have been the 5th best on the year in the NCAA. Nobody knows how she would have done in the final. Just putting it in perspective for you. NCAA runners travel to large meets that are perfectly paced for 3200. Jenna ran her time in a low key meet. Imagine how she would do at Stanford with a pacer taking her out on 15:20 pace for 2/3 of the race in perfect weather at 10 PM.
And you tell me I am deluded. I never once claimed that a high school runner would immediately excel in the ncaa. But ok.
Btw i love that I pointed out some very substantial facts, to the point that the whole lot of you were mauled and had no response, and yet you mention facts.
Guys let me jump in here, I see a lot of perplexed expressions. Let's get to the bottom of this!
After Hutchins ran 1558 a lot of people responded with wild exuberance. And then another side responded with a tempered questioning and assessment
There were claims that all three of the top girls would break every distance record by huge margins
Certainly people did underestimate Hutchins a little. But it seems like always the truth is somewhere in the middle, between the exaggeration
The point is it certainly was a fast course. Probably only running about 20 seconds slower then a track 5K. Most cross-country courses are at least a minute slower if not more compared to what you could do on the track
And just running on grass itself could be responsible for 20 seconds slower. Possibly, the cross-country course itself was no tougher than a track except for being less energy-efficient surface.
Also she broke the record on the track by 2.5 seconds. It's not like she obliterated it and is on a whole nother level
So let's find some common ground! The fact is Hutchins is running awesome and should be celebrated... her future is very bright and it's very likely that more records will be broken and maybe some epic cross country races as well
but there's certainly some fortuitous circumstances like Fast courses in good conditions
So at the end of the day maybe the best advice is when looking at architecture, or running events for that matter, to see things in their natural state. Look at things as a whole. in their totalitarianism, so to speak....
Hutchins is only 16 years old. Don't expect that she is done at 15:34. She has another 1.5 years to improve. Imagine if you had done that with Schweizer or Houlihan. Celebrate her records. Don't discount them in any way. The sky is the limit and true running fans would only be encouraging her in person and online. These girls are doing great things but a handful of middle aged men want to place limits on their future achievements. That has a familiar sound to it.
TN Flash wrote:
At 1:14:20 they chat with Jenna Hutchins, Abby Vanderkooi, and Taylor Ewert. Jenna talks in detail about her 15:34 at 1:25:00.
https://youtu.be/YspdyXYj1N0?t=4529
This was so cool! Thanks for sharing!
And Tuohy was 15, and set a records with a higher degree of difficulty. And every time she did so people on here wrote her running obituary, talked about how record breaking high school female runners were cursed, et al. Injuries happen. Pressure and the weight of expectations happen. What have you. I think Tuohy will have a terrific college career, had a an extraordinary high school career in general, and likely had the greatest xc season in the history of high school xc. But never make assumptions. And never assume that an athlete's development is linear or that high school achievement will instantly translate at the next level.
And that said, high school dominance does not automatically mean ncaa dominance.
I would never assume improvement is linear. In fact, I predicted that Tuohy would level off and that Dudek would have the best college career. I predicted that Ping would get slower while I predicted that Lane would burnout. I predicted that Hutchins would break all of the records and she has broken two of them over the pat month. I predict Hutchins and Thorvaldson will improve. Hutchins has 18 months which will put her at a place that the rest of you did not think a high school girl could go. So no, I look at each girl or boy individually before making any type of prediction.
Hutchins beats Astro wrote:
You continue to make these negative remarks but then show that you don't bother to base them on facts. The 2019 NCAA final was won in 15:50 so I guess she would have crushed the field. Her time from this one and only race would have been the 5th best time in the entire NCAA for the entire year counting all of the times that the runners competed in paced races. Have that sink in.
That was in Austin TX and it was very warm that day. Remember the Allie O "hot" quoye and note the water station set up.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d3ZkcCyEBOgThrowing darts against a wall and spewing nonsense is not a prediction.
I stated a bunch of facts. If facts are nonsense, you have lost all credibility. Yes I do throw darts, but I predict which section I will hit and I am normally correct.
Throwing darts at a board and wrong much more than you want to admit. I have a very good memory. But no worries.
Hutchins beats Astro wrote:
I would never assume improvement is linear. In fact, I predicted that Tuohy would level off and that Dudek would have the best college career. I predicted that Ping would get slower while I predicted that Lane would burnout. I predicted that Hutchins would break all of the records and she has broken two of them over the pat month. I predict Hutchins and Thorvaldson will improve. Hutchins has 18 months which will put her at a place that the rest of you did not think a high school girl could go. So no, I look at each girl or boy individually before making any type of prediction.
and there is the beauty of using an new unregistered name. You can claim you said whatever you wanted in the past and can't be proven wrong.
Yeah not exactly the Delphi oracle.