Why do American professional distance runners don't care about Cross Country?

to be fair, there were years when the EURO XC also appeared a B-event, except for the u20 and mayb u23 (after this was introduced). A country like the UK has always had strong XC teams but their best runners are/were often not present. There is little or no money in the event, I believe, (certainly not ompared to a high level road running event), some people are also a bit afraid of getting injured, or it simply does not fit with their winter altitude camps abroad. E.g., I was surprised to see Koko last year and this year because I had had the impression that with her move to the US and more professional training she had largely abandoned XC.

It's not as exciting as track.

In my opinion it feels a little embarrassing and cringy to be an adult and running a cross country race.

A dense cluster of well-moneyed nations with similar sporting histories leads European Championships of many kinds to be a major regional competition that Europe’s national federations and media emphasize as a chance to earn (what are in their mind, only slightly less major than global) championships and medals. (This is true of XC as well as on the track in Athletics—it’s also true in other sports, e.g., soccer.)

Also, being club-based, many endurance sports’ training methodologies are a bit more old school, and allow for some “fun” racing in a way that the professionalized, scientific training of son US groups doesn’t.

Lastly, there are actually XC competition opportunities throughout Europe, and those only exist in pockets in the US and are of variable competitive quality. Big travel for a non-competitive off-season race doesn’t make sense.

(Oh, and one more thing—travel to World XC is usually easier from Europe, and that makes it more worth it to prioritize qualifiers.)

But there is no track in Europe in winter, only a little indoor and this hardly befor mid/late january. So the competition in my impression is road running or winter/altitude training the scheduling/travelling of which does not always combine well with XC races.

There is also a higher danger of injury. Klosterhalfen said that she briefly wondered if she should race at all because the course was so tough. One bad fall or twisted ankle and you're out a few weeks at least. It'S all good being plucky and tough in the mud but there is almost no money in XC which must a consideration for some of those who could get a few thousand extra with road races.

There was a professional meet in Texas last week

trackandfieldnews.com

Kurgat, Monson Triumph At WA Cross Tour Austin - Track & Field News

Jeff Hollobaugh

AUSTIN, TEXAS, December 01 — For years American cross country at the professional level has been, if not dead, certainly... Read More

Link:trackandfieldnews.com/kurgat-monson-tr...

Put in more prize money and they will care. Plus I think we are in an age of specialization. Not many distance runners double so I think only the runners already racing the longer distances are interested. A 1500m runner is not likely to jump in.

I also suspect overly cautious folks regarding injury potential.

Ever watch a 60 year old running 2:40 800 with spit all over his face and knees taped up while wearing a body suit and sunglasses? Cringey mc cringle esquire the 3rd

I can't say why current American athletes don't care (if that's true). Decades ago, the cross-country championships at both.the U,S. and the world stage, were the top competitions, and if you didn't know that, you weren't a real runner. I'm guessing several things changed: (1) prize money and appearance fees got higher in road racing and track, and were often used to favor U.S. and other rich but inferior countries in running; (2) the times are slow, and everyone runs for times these days; (3) cross-country venues tend not to attract the kinds of crowds that big sponsors care about; (4) no pacers; and (5) almost no U.S. runners can compete with the best in the world. One day, you're a big Instagram star with people who watch and listen to everything you say; the next day, you run your guts out just to get close to the top twenty, depressingly slogging behind all the invited teams from Kenya, Ethiopia, Uganda, and various neighboring countries that you and your fans have never heard of.

Ngugi, Tergat, Bekele, Lopes, Porter, Jones -- those were the kinds of runners you could trust to run themselves into the ground.

Top runners under contract see more pay-off in base training for the bonus pay of making teams and hitting time standards in the spring. Mid tier pros see more money on the roads and the potential for upping their stock with base training for a big spring.

The entire post-collegiate ecosystem selects for runners who perform better on the track. Cross country is a sport of mid-pack runners. Those NCAA runners who loved or achieved more than in track don't have a place in post-collegiate racing.

There is a great tradition of cross country in Europe that never developed (sadly, in my opinion) in the US. It's mostly a school sport here. In much of the country if you're out of school you'll have a hard time finding more than one or two cross country meets to run other than Nationals. Also, from what I know from my friends in the British Isles, cross country racing there is built around club teams. Even if cross country is not really your thing you'll often turn out to run for your club. We don't have the club tradition here that's going to get someone off the fence and into a cross country race.

In Europe cross country was a late autumn/early winter sport. Here people are doing indoor track by then or are about to. There is very little money to be made here in cross country races. It is, or was, a lot more lucrative in Europe. The money here is made at indoor track meets or road races and I imagine people don't want to "waste" a racing effort in cross country races where there's little or no pay day.

American professional distance runners come out of the American college XC/track programs.

XC in the fall, indoor track in the winter and track in the spring.

The professional scene is track in the summer with XC and indoor track coinciding in the winter.

XC as a fall sport disappears and they choose indoor track or base training in the winter.
I think winter XC is just out of their usual routine and they choose not to go that route.

Ingebrigtsen.

People respond to incentives. Also, distance runners don't have unlimited energy and have a limited number of seasonal peaks they can achieve. I'm guessing that focusing on US and World cross would be not worth it to them in a financial sense.

Some communities have open all-comers meets in the summer. Whoever shows up runs and there is a nominal entry fee.

In my community they would have about 5 or 6 meets in the summer. Every now and then a professional runner or two would come. The race would be a mix of elementary school runners through collegiate runners home for the summer and perhaps a pro or two. Entry fee was $2. I would like to see more of this today. It comes down to finding the people to want to organize it.

Real runners would run XC or used to.

Shorter won several US titles, Rodgers finished 3rd in world XC, edging out Walker. Virgin did Ok. ingebrigtsen values it as did Ovett and Coe and all the top runners of that era.they were complete runners, Americans are time trailers.

Road racing was also much bigger in the US in the 70s and 80s. The top athletes ran a busy season of 5k to 10 mile road races which fed into XC season better. Today all the prize money and contract money is in track or the marathon. There is no money in road racing or xc.

Too many years of experience getting their a$$es handed to them.

Will you be 60 and doing the things you love, or will you be sad and old?