Were last night's ACC 10ks, the greatest in NCAA conference 10,000 history?

Big 10 just finished. Winner 29:09 sixth place 29:13, didn't have the same depth...8 guys under 29:22...14 under 30:00

Ok, I figured it out- you’re hyping these placebo shoes because you get more ad revenue from these companies. Took me a second but I got it now.

Poltergeist wrote:

Ok, I figured it out- you’re hyping these placebo shoes because you get more ad revenue from these companies. Took me a second but I got it now.

Yeah. The placebo shoes.

Acc steeple results are in. 8 guys broke 8:57 and didn't' score.

Of course, the ACC is ridiculously large. I probably should consider it to be the eqiuvalent of like 2 conferences.

The PAC 12 begs differ.....

https://finishedresults.trackscoreboard.com/meets/9620/events/21/Final

Large like the SEC. look at their results.

The PAC 12 begs differ.....

https://finishedresults.trackscoreboard.com/meets/9620/events/21/Final

That depth is stunning. 28 guys at 29:54 or faster - are you kidding me? Insane.

I think the shoes play a role; how much of a role is open to debate. It also seems remarkable that 28th place in a 10k is only 43 seconds behind 1st. It would seem that there has to be more going on than just super-shoes to explain that kind of depth. But if you don't believe the shoes are a factor, how DO you explain it? In the past I've seen a lot of posts that sort of say, it's NATURAL for times to improve. It's just what happens; people get faster. But we're talking about the exact same species as 5, 10, or 50 years ago (evolution doesn't happen that fast), so how are so many people running so fast? (I know the answer is going to be "better training, better athletes, ..." but if so, how and why?) People don't just get faster for no reason. If that was the case, I'd advise young runners to wait before taking up running. "You'll be better if you wait 10 years, because people will inevitably be faster 10 years from now." Times have gotten progressively faster (in general) as the decades go by, but there's always a reason or reasons. Better tracks, better equipment, more knowledge of training, better nutrition, etc.

But what is driving the current improvements, if not shoes? For the most part, it seems that the workouts themselves are the same as they have been for quite some time.

I genuinely want to know. If training is better nowadays, then how so? I'm not trying to say it isn't better than when I was running

A down-to-the-wire 10,000m!!! Exciting!

The athletes must’ve watched the Billy Mills video on repeat and stayed on top of their intensity just **SNAP** that much each lap!

Got any splits?? Got any video??

What did these guys run in high school 3200m?

Rojo, you need to update your time comparisons and percentage improvements after this weekend

Charles Hicks/Stanford closed his 28:39 in 55.74 . . . next best was 58.23 . . . Great Britain's got a good one comin' up for the 2024 Paris Olympics & beyond . . .

rojo wrote:

Speaking only about times (ignoring the impact of super shoes), has there anything like what we saw last night?

1) 6th place in a men's 10,000 at 29:12?

The shoes are unreal. SEC results are in. 6th was 29:13 but 'only' 8 broke 29:30

but

hani saleem wrote:

The PAC 12 begs differ.....

I guess it depends on what you value.

At pac 12s, 6 guys broke 29:00 (zero did it at accs) but 8th was 29:22 whereas the ACCs had 19 guys break 29:30.

rojo wrote:

Speaking only about times (ignoring the impact of super shoes), has there anything like what we saw last night?

1)6th place in a men's 10,000 at 29:12? The top 6 all ran 29:11-29:12 and were separated by just 1.54 seconds

2) 11 guys broke 29:30 and DID NOT SCORE. Yes19th place broke 29:30.

. Has there ever been a conference meet before with anything like that before?

For the women,

3) Has anyone ever run 33:32 before and not scored? Doesn't that almost always make NCAAs at regionals?

Not bad but NAU has 4 guys alot faster. Nur and Ferro just ran under 28.

rojo wrote:

Speaking only about times (ignoring the impact of super shoes), has there anything like what we saw last night?

1)6th place in a men's 10,000 at 29:12? The top 6 all ran 29:11-29:12 and were separated by just 1.54 seconds

2) 11 guys broke 29:30 and DID NOT SCORE. Yes19th place broke 29:30.

. Has there ever been a conference meet before with anything like that before?

For the women,

3) Has anyone ever run 33:32 before and not scored? Doesn't that almost always make NCAAs at regionals?

https://results.flashresults.com/2021_05-13_ACC/028-1_compiled.htmhttps://results.flashresults.com/2021_05-13_ACC/008-1_compiled.htm

fast times for sure---shoes making a difference, but NCAA depth way better in the past 10-15 years-I believe that West prelims in 2018-the cutoff for women qualifying for NCAA was low 33 minutes for the 10000m...

rojo wrote:

Speaking only about times (ignoring the impact of super shoes), has there anything like what we saw last night?

1)6th place in a men's 10,000 at 29:12? The top 6 all ran 29:11-29:12 and were separated by just 1.54 seconds

2) 11 guys broke 29:30 and DID NOT SCORE. Yes19th place broke 29:30.

. Has there ever been a conference meet before with anything like that before?

For the women,

3) Has anyone ever run 33:32 before and not scored? Doesn't that almost always make NCAAs at regionals?

https://results.flashresults.com/2021_05-13_ACC/028-1_compiled.htmhttps://results.flashresults.com/2021_05-13_ACC/008-1_compiled.htm

Winning times weren’t impressive so no.

Rojo, you are failing to address the fact that an enormous number of people are running times fairly close together. It isn’t like there is an even distribution of times and they are just faster. Yes shoes help but the real story is that American distance running at the collegiate level is really deep right now. You do yourself and the sport a disservice by pinning this all on freaking shoes.

Regarding the ACC 10K;

1) The weather in Raleigh Thursday night was absolutely perfect. No wind, abnormally low temps.

2) The leaders went out in 14:50, so everyone stayed in the race longer without going out too fast. So the 29:30 guy had a perfect set-up.

3) As others have mentioned, extremely large conference.

4) Within the conference:

a) Notre Dame - 2nd at NCAA's in X-C

b) Multiple head coaches/programs that focus primarily on distance: in addition to Notre Dame - NC State, UNC, Wake, Virginia, Syracuse. And Duke was 16th at NCAA X-C.

5) Much more depth in distance running in the Southeast compared to 30 years ago. I know these schools recruit nationally/globally, but it does create more depth across the board.

Obviously shoes matter. But the brojos push them non-stop and then put out an actually scientific thread about how they might give you 1:00-2:00 in a marathon. If spikes have the same advantage, maybe you're getting :15-:30 in a 10k. They banned the flats for the tracks so I would guess the spikes do not have quite the same impact. I haven't seen a real study on them.

It also needs to be said again & again what the pandemic has done. So many just went into good training, with very little racing, for the past year. NCAA athletes weren't forced to race every weekend and try to peak 3 times last year. Many skipped indoor track and did cross country. Now people are going for it when racing opportunities exist. I think a combination of elements are leading to fast times. Shoes add a little. So do other factors.

I agree with you that long stints of training and lack of over racing due to covid has helped times jump. Along with this super shoes allow for athletes to train hard with less wear and tear on their bodies. However I would be remiss to point out that the super shoes such as the next % are not banned within the NCAA.

As someone else pointed out too, the talent pool is getting larger for distance events and many schools within the ACC are distance orientated