Mt. Sac vs. Van Cortlandt Park: Which course is more important in prep xc history?

VCP has history on its side. Victorians were running xc there in hoop skirts and strongman singlets in the 1880s.

I'm throwing in Crystal Springs in California's Central Coast. It's only 2.9 miles but is a brutal course. It has its own invitational and is the sectional championships course qualifying to state.

That's nice Cali guys, apparently reading comprehension is not your strong suit.

The title of the thread is comparing two courses, VCP and Mt. Sac.. Stick to the topic or create another thread about which course in the US is the best, pretty sure the topic has come up before and there are many great courses out there.

In history, sure, VCP. In recent history, Mt. Sac. At some point that'll change to a Mt. Sac sweep.

on broadway again wrote:

That's nice Cali guys, apparently reading comprehension is not your strong suit.

The title of the thread is comparing two courses, VCP and Mt. Sac.. Stick to the topic or create another thread about which course in the US is the best, pretty sure the topic has come up before and there are many great courses out there.

VCP over Mt. Sac- Incredible history and great course.

Best X-C course in the country:

Crystal Springs in NorCal- This course was specifically built for cross country races back in the 1970s. It has never been altered and represents true cross country running. 100% dirt trails, challenging hills, amazing spectator course (you can watch 75% of the race from one area), and is tough as hell. It's only 2.95mi but don't let that fool you.

Since 1973 only 90 high school boys have run sub 15:00 and only 30 girls have run sub 17:30.

Both are second fiddle to Balboa, at best.

Crystal my be lost forever as a course, sadly, at least as we know it. The land is owned by the SF Public Utility Commission and local neighborhood groups want to shutter it for access to large groups like xc meets. The San Mateo Community College District Board that holds the lease needs to make a final decision. Negotiations are underway and races continue, but it is not clear for how long and in what number or size.

Gentleman Savage wrote:

Both are second fiddle to Balboa, at best.

Balboa is not a real XC course. Run around a pool, yea.

Sorry you southern cali folks don't get it.

Eh, all these non-5k courses out in CA bother me. I get VCP has a 4k course and 5k course, but as many others have said, VCP has a TON of history on its side.

Also second the mention of Holmdel. Extremely fair course in terms of difficulty (plenty of ups, downs, grass). Unless I missed someone, the sub 15 list stands at 2 runners all time. Doesn't have the VCP history but traveling to for Shore Coaches Invite if you are on the East Coast.

Wise Old Man wrote:

I'm originally from the east coast, so I say Vanny is more legendary with a greater all-time list among those with top times. If you could hold the course record on any prep xc course in the US, which would be most prestigious?

That's not a fair comparison. The North East doesn't have the weather for sports participation of Southern California.

xcmets wrote:

Eh, all these non-5k courses out in CA bother me. I get VCP has a 4k course and 5k course, but as many others have said, VCP has a TON of history on its side.

Also second the mention of Holmdel. Extremely fair course in terms of difficulty (plenty of ups, downs, grass). Unless I missed someone, the sub 15 list stands at 2 runners all time. Doesn't have the VCP history but traveling to for Shore Coaches Invite if you are on the East Coast.

Agree.

on broadway again wrote:

That's nice Cali guys, apparently reading comprehension is not your strong suit.

The title of the thread is comparing two courses, VCP and Mt. Sac.. Stick to the topic or create another thread about which course in the US is the best, pretty sure the topic has come up before and there are many great courses out there.

He had to answer that way because it’s a DAQ. Neither is of importance if you haven’t run both of them as most high school runner have not.

To almost every high school runner that has run HS cross country in the different parts of this country the local home course is of more importance to them than the so called great courses.

This DAQ question has no true answer. Just some egotistical opinions that do not matter.

Comparing Mt Sac known for it's Olympic Medalists and Van Cortland Park a regional XC hotspot is over the top and ridiculous. Both are super in my opinion.

Mt Sac ain't squat, and the only reason it get pub it's the biggest meet in So Cal.

VCP has lost its luster with equally challenging (maybe tougher) Holmdel, Sunken Meadow, and Bowdoin, holding meets close by.

Nevertheless images of Lindgren and Prefontaine racing up Cemetery Hill will keep the reputation of VCP alive forever.

You guys should lay off VCP. It's o.k. I've run it. Just because they won't have the Olympics there doesn't mean it isn't a good course.

The only thing I disagree with here is the statement that VCP is a fast course. The 5k sucks. Yes the first mile is flat, but the entire 2nd mile is a climb all uphill. And it it hard to keep a rhythm and consistent stride because of all the railroad logs you have to go over every 15 yards in the woods which is over half the course. And look at the times, there is only one HS girl who ever broke 17:00 on the course, and VCP has a long history with incredible athletes on it. And it is by far the slowest and most difficult course of all the FL Regional races. I think it is a crappy course but with lots of history and is by far the most historical course.

I agree that van cortlandt is not fast I mean it's not impossible but the back loop is tough and lots of people blaze the first mile in the field . I was going to bring up the Cathy Schiro performance that you referenced. 1646? I could be wrong about that but that always obv stood out as a legendary run that is now approaching 40 years as the course record that some very good runners have not really approached. When you put in the fact that it was before the crushed gravel path was put in and the footing on the back loop was even worse then it's almost unimaginable how good it is. That and Trautmann in the Penn 3k are the two otherworldly hs distance runs from history for me esp in the NE.

hannsen wrote:

I agree that van cortlandt is not fast I mean it's not impossible but the back loop is tough and lots of people blaze the first mile in the field . I was going to bring up the Cathy Schiro performance that you referenced. 1646? I could be wrong about that but that always obv stood out as a legendary run that is now approaching 40 years as the course record that some very good runners have not really approached. When you put in the fact that it was before the crushed gravel path was put in and the footing on the back loop was even worse then it's almost unimaginable how good it is. That and Trautmann in the Penn 3k are the two otherworldly hs distance runs from history for me esp in the NE.

When I was running VCP back 1978-80, it was by far the toughest course we ran. For the first mile it was too easy to go too fast, but at the same time you felt it was essential to get out front because the 2nd mile was horrendous and very difficult to pass people during this stretch. However, we were always proud to run at VCP and felt like we were running in the footsteps of the giants of the sport. No other course we ran conjured that feeling.