Sarah Baxter 16:10

you canthandlethetruth wrote:

she has powerful XC thighs. she is built for XC.

especially hilly courses. She DESTROYED MARY CAIN last year, because it was muddy and required low gear power that she has.

I don't know about DESTROYED, Baxter did beat Cain by 4 sec. Cain got a bad start, a girl fell in front of her and put her back a bit. Cain was closing in on Baxter and the end but the mud and the gap Baxter had was to much.

Baxter does start fast to avoid gettin bumped and stay out of trouble. This is the classic front runner (Baxter) vs the sit and kicker (Cain)

Everyone went out way too fast this morning. In the Boys Individual Sweepstakes race Blake Haney of Stockdale went out in a reported 61 and through the half at 2:16 (I couldn't see the quarter but I think the half split was pretty accurate) and through the mile at 4:38. He then faded and finished 6th while the winner was a couple seconds behind him at the mile. In the girls Individual Sweepstakes race a freshman girl from Rancho Cucamonga was 64 at the quarter and 2:28 at the half. She also finished in 6th.

Granted the first 200-300m is downhill and a lot of it is on pavement but it's still absurd to go out that fast.

Davey Guy wrote:

Baxter does start fast to avoid gettin bumped and stay out of trouble. This is the classic front runner (Baxter) vs the sit and kicker (Cain)

If Baxter is to Cain as Chelanga is to Rupp, then GO BAXTER!

More 'nads than the Ruppster!

At least no one is saying that she failed and is washed up because it's only a 3 mile not a true 5K and she ran slower than last year. Nevertheless you see a lot of back and forth and arguing on the first page.

Why can't you guys just take a step back and say, wow amazing run again this year!

Is this course even Rupp certified?

Letsrun = letshate wrote:

Is this course even Rupp certified?

Need pollen count, humidity, wind, temperature and precise local C02 to say.

No it's not Rupp certified.

1. It has hills

2. The hills are steep

3. The course is not 3 miles, it is 2.93.

Wow. Amazing run again this year.

Chet Manly wrote:

Everyone went out way too fast this morning. In the Boys Individual Sweepstakes race Blake Haney of Stockdale went out in a reported 61 and through the half at 2:16 (I couldn't see the quarter but I think the half split was pretty accurate) and through the mile at 4:38. He then faded and finished 6th while the winner was a couple seconds behind him at the mile. In the girls Individual Sweepstakes race a freshman girl from Rancho Cucamonga was 64 at the quarter and 2:28 at the half. She also finished in 6th.

Granted the first 200-300m is downhill and a lot of it is on pavement but it's still absurd to go out that fast.

The first 200-300m is most definitely not downhill where did you even get that absurd idea? Have you ever been there?

Baxter is way overrated and does not run enough races. She'll be your average college runner. Mark my words.

Michael Stud wrote:

Baxter is way overrated and does not run enough races. She'll be your average college runner. Mark my words.

She'll be top five all four years of her college career. Most likely will win three xc championships.

Michael Stud wrote:

Baxter is way overrated and does not run enough races. She'll be your average college runner. Mark my words.

Let's see - Baxter has posted faster HS XC times than Hasay on a lot of the same courses; Hasay made little improvement while in college but was a force in NCAA XC; ergo...Baxter will be "your average college runner"??? Can't say I agree.

On the other hand, I don't think Baxter is a lock to win NXN - Efraimson and Cranny have also put up some very impressive results this season. Seems unlikely Cain will be running, but if she happens to decide to qualify, she'll be a factor too. [Actually, Cain would be the favorite in my opinion, but that's a different conversation.]

xenonscreams wrote:

rupp-certiefied saladbar wrote:

Buddy, the OP started talking about times and how the fast start "hurt her," not me.

Sounds like brutal pacing to me but she got the win so, who cares? Nobody ever critiques the tactics of collegiate winners, and then win the same stupid tactics don't work on the big stage (RUPP) everyone acts surprised.

Not comparable at all. In XC at EVERY level it's pretty normal to go fast at the beginning so you get a good position, then relax a bit, then go fast at the end.

I agree that it may be normal, but it is a very stupid way to run.

Bad performance Baxter is a chump. Time for al sal to load up more peds

Chet Manly wrote:

Granted the first 200-300m is downhill and a lot of it is on pavement but it's still absurd to go out that fast.

We had a kid a few years ago leading the state meet 300 meters into the race. The 71 runners that passed him didn't seem to have much trouble. Our runner should have been around 15th that day.

GOING OUT TOO FAST IS STUPID!!

ill just shout it wrote:

Chet Manly wrote:

Granted the first 200-300m is downhill and a lot of it is on pavement but it's still absurd to go out that fast.

We had a kid a few years ago leading the state meet 300 meters into the race. The 71 runners that passed him didn't seem to have much trouble. Our runner should have been around 15th that day.

GOING OUT TOO FAST IS STUPID!!

No you are stupid.

And your best XC result is...?

Stick with eharmony wrote:

Bad performance Baxter is a chump. Time for al sal to load up more peds

Stick, stick - chill, man.

Baxter [as far as I know] has no relationship with AlSal + won her race by over a minute - it's all good.

If the course announcer is to be believed, she ran the first mile 10 seconds faster than she did last year and finished about 10 seconds slower.

Is that optimal? No. But hey, she pretty much knew she could put up a "1" for her team no matter how she split the race, she decided to go flat out for the course record and she came up a bit short. Not the worst thing anyone's ever done.

Meanwhile, how're you doing with your ex-fiancee + what's your opinion of Lou Reed?

And while I'm at it - what is it that you have against the Stones? [I'd think the harmonies on an album like Flowers would appeal to you, but it seems not.]