Muddy Race - Did Colorado Go Out Faster Or Slower?

If you've rationalized both of those explanations then perhaps the answer isn't really all that important.

The conventional logic is that people will expend more energy in the mud and die, so it's better to go out slower. It's easy to pass when everyone's dying in the mud.

I had always thought that it was tough to move up in the mud so you needed to get up towards the front early but that year Colorado went out with their traditional strategy and were able to move up incredibly well and pull a significant upset. I think some of it depends on the course. Such as just how bad the mud is, how wide the course is (is there room to pass), are there lots of turns (extra slippage), are their sections that aren't muddy where you might be able to surge, how long is the race (how much time do you have to move up), etc... So I think you have to look at the whole picture will all the factors. A 5k would be tougher to move up. With a 10k there is a lot of time. I seem to remember an interview with Wetmore afterwords that he thought the guys/teams who got out hard would expend even more energy than usual trying to run slosh through the mud.

That year was 2004 NCAA's. On paper Wisconsin was about as huge a favorite ever and their most impressive team to date. I always heard that conventional wisdom was in crappy conditions to get out hard and the gaps won't change since its too hard to move up.

Key issues:

Wisconsin was running their only all out 10k for the first time of the season and only their second race where they didn't cruise.

Colorado's altitude. Wetmore was incredibly smart to realize in a slowish race in muddy conditions other teams would be fighting oxygen debt a little harder and the last mile would be in bad shape.

I watched that race, watched Bairu (the winner), Tegenkamp, and Solinsky fighting from the start to stay in the lead. Also saw their 4 and 5 and rest looking like they were going 6:00 pace after 4 miles. Never even noticed Colorado until the two guys appeared out of nowhere in the last mile in the top 10.

Best coached NCAA team championship ever.

Formica Table wrote:

If you've rationalized both of those explanations then perhaps the answer isn't really all that important.

So tomorrow at Paul Short what should my guys do? It's only 8000 and my AD is going to be there to check up on us.

Probably too late but in mud, it's good to have spikes (shoes) that are oversized at least a size, maybe two- actually gets more flotation. Picked that tip up from a master's national champion who was untouchable in the mud. As for "harder to pass", that would apply if *only* the passer were affected. In reality, it is also tougher to respond to a surge, so there is no advantage in muddy conditions, vis-a-vis dry.So go conservative and take scalps the final 1-2K

confused coach wrote:

Formica Table wrote:

If you've rationalized both of those explanations then perhaps the answer isn't really all that important.

So tomorrow at Paul Short what should my guys do? It's only 8000 and my AD is going to be there to check up on us.

Wow, it's amazing the number of people that think the "hard to pass" crap holds up. In a muddy race, you go out slow and pick people off. It's a no brainer. It's not hard to pass when you're running comfortably, because you didn't blow up, and everyone else is, well, blowing up.

COLORADO WENT OUT SLOW.

THEY WERE IN ABOUT LAST PLACE THROUGH 4k.

I RAN IN THE RACE