XC Course Design Guidelines

always minimize asphalt...... otherwise i think all those parameters are open for debate. i've admired all kinds of XC courses. you just have to tailor the course to the particular landscape that you have to work with.

it depends on whether or not you want to host an NCAA sanctioned championship event or not. If you don't (assuming you coach at an NCAA school), then you can do whatever the hell you want. If you do, then there are definitely some rules to follow (course width being the one I'm most familiar with).

You may want to give Marty Day @ www.runnersforum.com a call. He has designed a very nice XC course in Indiana that will be used for the High School Semi-State Championship. It is very tough, but also very fair. He may be able to help you with some ideas/concerns.

Another consideration is you want to have at least 150 yards straight out at the end. I've seen some dicey situations with course that turn 90 degrees in the last 150 yards -- very hard to sprint without wiping out.

Speaking of steep hills...anyone run Berea College's(KY) old course? Dude that climb and descent was scary.

Alan

Thanks for input so far. I guess I should clarify, though. I'm not simply concerned with what I can get away with and still have a course be legal, I'd like to know what parameters I should stay within so that my course is actually DESIRABLE to run on. While I might be able to "get away" with a course that's on a 20-degree uphill grade from start to finish, I doubt any of you actually want to run on it. What is the limit of (hills, asphalt, narrow paths, sharp turns) that you'd choose to compete on?

For instance, if I found a park with a scenic 1.5 mile dirt-road loop over gentle rolling hills, but it required a 200m stretch across asphalt between loops, would that be worth it or should I scrap that location? Thanks again, and keep your suggestions coming.

For up & down hills, pretty much anything goes. I would avoid things like sidehills, 6 inch deep grass, etc

200m of asphalt is probably ok, I don't remember but doesn't Van Cortlandt have about that? I think Lehigh/Paul Short has about that much asphalt as well...but my memory is foggy now.

As far as that 200m asphalt stretch, that wouldn't be a big issue if your college is set in a more urban setting with less parks / golf courses available to make a course. It would kind of be expected by competitors. Now if your college is located more in the country, I'd try to stay away from the asphalt thing as there are likely many more options for "grass-only" courses. One suggestion I have is to try and stay away from any type of sharp hairpin-type turns on your course. Nothing is worse than having to kill your momentum while running to make corners. Especially watch this on parts of the course that would be near the start as the congestion of the runners makes sharp turns even worse. For anyone that ran Indiana University's course back in the late 90's (is it still the same?) knows what I'm talking about with the sharp corners.

The now defunct Sierra College XC course (Rocklin, CA) was one of my favorites, and I think a good example of a course that is desireable to race on from an athlete's point of view.

It had a wide open start, funneling into a roller coaster series of trails in the forest ( trails were probably about 6 ft. wide in most places if not more). There were lots of turns, and lots of ups and downs. It was all dirt, aside from one bridge crossing. Additionally there were numerous areas where spectators could watch the race as it developed.

Also, the course at Rim Rock Farm is pretty awesome, IMO.

I designed a course at my high school: we crossed some roads, but didn't run any straight stretches on asphalt. I've run on a pile of courses, and each one had different steepnesses. The start should be wide, narrowing over a couple of hundred yards to even single track if you have it. I think the key is as much grass and dirt as possible. Ending on a track seems like a good way to have spectators and a long straightaway. I don't think these recommendations you're getting are "what you can get away with," but evidence that courses vary greatly, and desirability is based on a number of factors, including tough hills, wild descents. I think of Van Cortland's start with the nearly 180 degree turn at the 1/2 mile mark or so, and the tough hills. Seems like a universally "desirable" course, and a spectator-friendly course (in fact, I never ran that one, but only spectated).

Sounds like you are concerned about the esthetics. Given that.......

1 Try to make a course that flows with the terrain. You are creating something from nature. Use the land to inspire. Walk it and run it in different directions to get a feel for what might be possible.

2 Make turns gradual.....and try to make them around natural objects that will be there from year to year

3 Spectator friendly can be a plus for athletes! As opposed to courses of 30 years ago that had some spectators in the first 200meters, then the athletes would disappear for 20 minutes or more....the modern courses that circle athletes past spectators at regular intervals have some definite pluses for athletes and spectators alike.

4 Starts and finishes that are fair (no one is impeded and has a chance to show what they can do) are essential. Find your best sart and finish area and create the course with this in mind.

Have fun with the process.......I often feel this is the best part of my job......

Both USATF and NCAA have guidelines manuals. Check their web sites for them.

Everyone loves to run through a trail even if they have to run on asphalt first. Having a trail to run through is able to forgive other parts of the course. Even though hills suck (I don't know what you're working with) people always love to talk about "that" hill.

Well it matters if you want a pussy course or a beast course.

midwaste wrote:

The now defunct Sierra College XC course (Rocklin, CA) was one of my favorites, and I think a good example of a course that is desireable to race on from an athlete's point of view.

I agree. Great course. The best I've ever seen, and I've seen many. Can't believe they destroyed it to create a lousy parking lot/football stadium.

I should note, however, that the Sierra course has been reworked and reopened this year!!!! Great news! It's not as good as it used to be, but it's still pretty damn good and takes advantage of many of the same trails. There is a new front loop, new bridge over the creek, and a nice, new grass start/finish area. No asphalt/concrete on the course at all, and still a good spectator course. Plus there is plenty of parking thanks to the new lot!! lol!!

If you're in the area, check it out!

To the OP, a little asphalt is okay, but no more than 200m. Aside from that, don't make it pancake flat or throw in killer hills. Moderation is my advice on the inclines/declines.

Aspiring RD wrote:

our ocassional "home" meets

"occasional"

I've tryed researching

"tried"

Wide enough start to allow at least half the runners on each team to be on the start line

At least 400 meters straight from the start so no turns while still a big pack, and the first turn should be gradual -- no right hand turn

10 meters wide at the narrowest part of the course, so those who like to run even or negative pace can pass whenever they want

Hills can be pretty steep going up, but try to have more gradual hills going down

Demanding, but not dangerous is the key factor ( no need to brag that you have a "real cross country course" because you had three broken legs in last year's race

Zero road crossings and zero running on anything but grass

Stay off the greens and tees on golf courses

Straight shot into the finish for several hundred meters

Provide for spectators, without allowing them to get in the way of runners or trample greens or tees

That's a lot of pavement. Is it too much? Put on your spikes and run 200 meters in the street hard a couple of times.

First off, always first accommodate the people that will be running on the course. For instance, if the course is for CA high schools, then the asphalt stretch is no problem, because the CIF rules forbid spikes in cross. As far as course width goes, the NCAA has a standard width. But for practicality you should avoid narrowing down onto a trail that is even as wide as 6' wide within the first half mile. Oh, and always make it a standard distance, I got sick of the 3-mile courses in high school that were run around the school with 180 degree turns around a baskettball pole or from one side of the fence to the other, and then in the end the course ends up being short so your time doesn't even count for a PR. Stick with a 5K, or if you do 3-miles, make sure that it actually is 3-miles (instead of Mt. Sac, which they keep claiming is a little bit shorter every year).