........PSAC.......

IUP's course is pretty rough and the race wasn't exactly packed with people so that would explain the slow times.

The times up at Mansfield were fast, shows that the 10k at Regionals is going to be an awesome race. Any thoughts on the course?

if no one\'s going to say it, i will...neely spence, 5:00 avg mile...WOW. i know it is only 4k, but she\'d beat a ton of the guys in the conference. suprised no one said anything yet.

girl in the guys race wrote:

if no one's going to say it, i will...neely spence, 5:00 avg mile...WOW. i know it is only 4k, but she'd beat a ton of the guys in the conference. suprised no one said anything yet.

how about a "whole" thread on it

Hey Guys

Neely was truly impressive but the fact is that I laid out an accurate 6k and 10k course and the 4k was just an afterthought. Now I told Coach Spence and Neely that beforehand too. My estimate is that the two loops are between 3800-3825 and I’ll go out and wheel it tomorrow.

We ran on it with two GPS watches and the 4k turned out to be 3840 meters for both watches. The 6k was right on with 3.75 and the 10k was 6.27 miles so the courses that the races will be on come regionals will be very accurate, it puts Neelys 4k to about 13:10, still a great time

Thanks! I will re-wheel all the courses again - that 6.27 bothers me because that would make it long. I can shave the top of Hall's loop (the farthest loop from the start) and get it dead on and not affect the rest of the loops. I'll still wheel the loop anyways - it will give me and excuse to get out of the office and do some jogging.

current ship runner wrote:

We ran on it with two GPS watches and the 4k turned out to be 3840 meters for both watches. The 6k was right on with 3.75 and the 10k was 6.27 miles so the courses that the races will be on come regionals will be very accurate, it puts Neelys 4k to about 13:10, still a great time

the wheel is much more accurate than a GPS watch. If it's a Garmin, it will always tell you you ran further than you actually did. Run a mile on the track and you'll see what I mean. If you wheel measured them already, they are probably pretty accurate.

I've never had that problem with mine.

the only problems the gArmin watches have is when your under tree cover or next to tall buildings.

but out in an open field, the garmin watches are very, very accurate.

Coach Mike Rohl wrote:

that 6.27 bothers me because that would make it long.

current ship runner wrote:

We ran on it with two GPS watches

It bothers me that these guys run with Garmins.

the loss of Soul.

How many of those does Garmin sell in Arsi Province?

Why does it bother you that people run with Garmins? It seems stupid to be bothered about it, it's a great training tool.

garminfan wrote:

Why does it bother you that people run with Garmins? It seems stupid to be bothered about it, it's a great training tool.

they end up spending time perseverating instead of training.

that's why.

It might not be the course is long, more so that I didnt hug the turns that tight. Over 6 miles if you don't hug the inside of a turn it can make a difference, because the watches are that accurate.

GPS watches are nice for a simple reason, when you get done running you take the time you ran, pace you think you were running, and divide. Well the watches do all of this for you and give you the true distance. It's a great way to monitor your recovery runs and hard runs with updated pacing. There is more then one way to train, some like GPS watches and some don't.

current ship runner wrote:

GPS watches are nice for a simple reason, when you get done running you take the time you ran, pace you think you were running, and divide. Well the watches do all of this for you and give you the true distance. It's a great way to monitor your recovery runs and hard runs with updated pacing. There is more then one way to train, some like GPS watches and some don't.

Tergat to Geb:

You know, when you outkicked me in the Olympic final, my Garmin said I ran 6.22 miles. So, actually I ran farther and faster than you. Gimme that medal!

Geb to Tergat:

What's a Garmin?

back to me, your as-hole bother-in-law,

If you are letting a GPS tell you at which pace you should be running to gain benefit from your runs, then, well, you have never had or you have lost your racing soul.

Distance means nothing. There are too many other factors that affect how much ground you cover. Your runners brain should be able to monitor your effort. You do not need even a watch.

I agree

You're retarded, "racing soul", seriously? You really believe the crap that's coming out of your mouth? Running is just like sex, I wear my Garmin and go for 60 min. and get in a great 10 miles, you wear no watch...go by feel...blow your load too early...you end up having to walk in...you only got in 4 miles and your girl is now sleeping with the football team.

sounds like you had a bad experience...

yeah that is just an absolutley retarded answer. racing soul? why dont we all just run barefoot and naked for as long as we want and as fast as we want and we will all be olympians. theres nothing wrong with utilizing the technology we have available to us. I bet you hate galen rupp for using alter g treadmills and altitude tents too, even though hes one of the best non african runners in the world. if it's gonna make me a better, smarter runner im going to use it. give me a break man, go do your miles without and watch and let me know how your racing sole is doing when your barely finishing scrub-ass road races into your 30s and 40s.

psac alum wrote:

Boro ran a pretty low key meet in Buffalo NY and handled the competition pretty easily. Josh arthur ran a nice race. overall times were very fast, which means the course must have been tough. Arthur got a course record winning the race by 11 secs and lead his team to 22 pts.

I'm guessing the course was sloppy that day, but just for the record (pun) it wasn't a course record. it was 25:48 at the time (

), although this weekend it was lowered to 25:29 (

)