I dont get why you are all hating on the mud?
That is what real cross country is about! its not supposed to be a track race on grass. The mud requires a different set of skills. Sure fast times are cool but the mud is more of a challenge!
Can someone please explain why no one likes the mud?
That's the thing though; people don't want to test a new set of skills in the national meet. They want to race like normal.
KLS wrote:
That's the thing though; people don't want to test a new set of skills in the national meet. They want to race like normal.
Sorry to break it to ya, but this is real xc. People in the northeast and upper midwest run in crap often. Southern Cali and it's road race courses is far from real xc. Strap on a pair.
Funny how Southern Cal runners seemed to do ok today though.
be realistic.. wrote:
Southern Cali and it's road race courses is far from real xc. Strap on a pair.
And yet they still won...
gads wrote:
I dont get why you are all hating on the mud?
That is what real cross country is about! its not supposed to be a track race on grass. The mud requires a different set of skills. Sure fast times are cool but the mud is more of a challenge!
Can someone please explain why no one likes the mud?
They're wimps. XC is whatever gets thrown at you - mud, hills, loops, whatever
Yes you do need to know how to run in the mud. You also need to know how to run hills. It is XC. But some courses favor some runners. So all XC coures be in the mud?
I know a lot of college coaches watch these races. And a lot of runners hope to impress those coaches.
Racing runners under conditions they may have never run under might be fun for spectators, but really doesn't seem like the best opportunity for the runners and the recruiting coaches. If I were recruiting at this race, I really wouldn't know what I'd think about it. Most college teams do not run under these conditions.
I haven't seen the final results yet, but when you don't see national caliber runners like Montoya and Burcham in the top 5, it makes you wonder.
Terrible courses lend themselves to uniterpretable results.
Did the best runners/teams win? On the ladies side, yes. On the mens? Who knows.
If one regards this sort of mess as integral to XC then fine but if one wants to identify the best runner, the course needs to be less of a wildcard.
Running in the mud takes away from most rhythm runners, and favors those with strength like steeplers. Not everyone trains and races for these conditions. Mentally, one breakdown and you are out of it. I saw one kid today surge to the lead, step in a giant rut, stumble a few steps, before fading quickly. A lot of people simply gave up today. Congrats to those that didn't.
They're wimps. XC is whatever gets thrown at you - mud, hills, loops, whatever
You don't get it. I don't think anyone would dispute your second sentence here. What's terrible about the NXN course is that it's all contrived. The artificial obstacles do nothing other than make this race a ridiculous circus. That is why sensible people hate this meet.
runn wrote:
They're wimps.Tough Mudder is whatever gets thrown at you - mud, hills, loops, whatever
Is this what you meant to say?
crab people wrote:
They're wimps. XC is whatever gets thrown at you - mud, hills, loops, whatever
You don't get it. I don't think anyone would dispute your second sentence here. What's terrible about the NXN course is that it's all contrived. The artificial obstacles do nothing other than make this race a ridiculous circus. That is why sensible people hate this meet.
Ever see a world XC race? This is what you get, learn to deal with it.
be realistic.. wrote:
Sorry to break it to ya, but this is real xc. People in the northeast and upper midwest run in crap often. Southern Cali and it's road race courses is far from real xc. Strap on a pair.
I have lived in the northeast all my live and I've been around the sport 18 years. Seen a lot of races in shit weather. Nothing is like NXN.