Coach Rand wrote:
I can't confirm the validity of the course but I can confirm that McNeil ran the following workout 6 days prior to the race:
3*1600 with 2:00 recovery (4:01, 3:58, 4:03)
Obviously this workouts demonstrates that he's in the shape of his life.
at 7,000ft? I think not.
McNeill is an absolute stud! However, he drafted off his teammate the whole race and passed him with 200m to go(kinda b.s. if you ask me). So, it's not like he took off and crushed the field at near world record pace. Which leads me to believe he DIDN'T go all out and probably could have run faster if he had to.
In 2001 the course was dead on 8k. 1st place then and now was 24:56 compared to 21:28. 10th place was 25:30 compared to 22:27. That's at least a 3min. difference which is 800-900m.
If the coach says it's 300-450m off he's lying or you are.
It was bush league and the coach should have wheeled the course before he set it up.
Does anyone care that there were mile markers painter on the course two hours before race time? Wouldn't this verify some things? It seemed pretty close to those that were there. McNeil is a special athlete. Add the 40 - 60 seconds to account for the 315 - 400M and it was a fast, although not unrealistic, Big Sky championship.
this sucks wrote:
10/10 you actually pissed people off.
anon wrote:
successful troll is successful
What in the hell is wrong with you imbeciles? You are not clever or even remotely intelligent for figuring out that this was a troll. 95% of us realize this immediately. The whole point of this game is to let people keep taking him seriously so we can have some fun. But no, you have to f everything up for everyone for no reason. You are 10 times as pathetic as any troll or anyone who falls for one and should be IP banned immediately.
some crazy runner guy wrote:
2/10 see now you just took it to far your first one was good though you got a lot of people.
Ya, that's why several more people fell for it... also, notice that he had already been outed twice, so it is actually quite an amazing feat that he was able to continue reeling anyone in at all. You are a braindead moron like 99% of troll outers, and cannot begin to comprehend how much more intelligent the "troll" in this case is compared to your sorry ass so do not bother trying to rate these posters ever again. You make this forum suck even more than your own pointless life.
triple take... wrote:
14:46 may be world class. 15:46...not so much. Not even top American.
It was 6k not 5k. 15:46 for 6km is world class for a man (~12:58 fro 5km) and is not even possible for a woman.
This is the last time I will mention this. Times in XC really don't mean anything and this whole thread is retarded. But anybody that says it's 300-400m short simply doesn't know how to add. It was roughly the same course as 2001. The same course map was even used. Add your 60 sec. and the entire field in 2001 was still more than 2min slower. A field that included the 4th place team at nationals.
In the women's race in 2001 Ida Nilsson NAU won in 17:29 (12th at NCAA's) 10th place was run in 18:19. This year 15:46 and 16:14 for 10th. The women's race was around 400-500m off. This all makes sense because the men circle around and head back thru the course.
It doesn't matter how many times you try to justify it. 2+2 does not equal 5. But maybe that's the edumacation you get at EWU.
Hmmm... @ Old Eag - Are you not happy with what you learnt?
Old Eag wrote:
This is the last time I will mention this. Times in XC really don't mean anything and this whole thread is retarded. But anybody that says it's 300-400m short simply doesn't know how to add. It was roughly the same course as 2001. The same course map was even used. Add your 60 sec. and the entire field in 2001 was still more than 2min slower. A field that included the 4th place team at nationals.
In the women's race in 2001 Ida Nilsson NAU won in 17:29 (12th at NCAA's) 10th place was run in 18:19. This year 15:46 and 16:14 for 10th. The women's race was around 400-500m off. This all makes sense because the men circle around and head back thru the course.
It doesn't matter how many times you try to justify it. 2+2 does not equal 5. But maybe that's the edumacation you get at EWU.
Did it ever occur to you that the course this year was most likely ACTUALLY 7.55 and the course in 2001 was probably a bit longer than 8k? That seems more likely than the course being a half mile or more short
What if the course was actually legit and the Big Sky teams went on to utterly destroy everyone at regionals and then nationals.
McNeil beats Chelenga by a minute and Chelenga finishes right behind the 16th Big Sky runner.
Then wouldn't we all just feel silly.
That's what I've been saying-the corse is legit. It's been measured and remeasured and each time it comes out to 8K.....and all of his workouts leading up to the race pointed to a time this fast. Before the race "sub 21:30" was discussed as the goal.
Quite frankly I believe he would beat Chelenga by a minute now.
My Bad! It must have been 8.4km in 2001. That's why those times were sooo slow and everybody was talking about it back then.
I'm now predicting the top 20 Big Sky guys to be All-American this year.