Epic CA 3200 duel ends in a tie- Baxter vs. Knights 10:07

10/10. Great trolling, as I'm biting right now. Yeah you basketball dudes ran two laps around your school in 9:33 and call it a two miler. I'll believe it when I see you run 8 laps on an official 400m track.

1/10

Pp polly wrote:

Not epic - why is this wonder gal not running faster? I was basketballer who never trained, a nobody runner, and ran 9:33 in my only 2-miler.

That's really good for a girl.

The fact of the matter is that Baxter ran 10:08 as a sophomore, she should be breaking 10 by now.

Realism wrote:

The fact of the matter is that Baxter ran 10:08 as a sophomore, she should be breaking 10 by now.

Why should she be breaking 10 by now. Maybe she has reached her peak physical maturity and isn't training like a professional as most of her contemporaries are.

Realism wrote:

The fact of the matter is that Baxter ran 10:08 as a sophomore, she should be breaking 10 by now.

You're assuming this was a time trial race

She is not getting worse, she just isn't improving very much at all (yet). 6 second improvement from freshman year at 3200 is basically no improvement.

She is a very good HS runner, but if she doesn't improve, she will just be an also ran in college and not there anymore after college

Let's hope that she starts improving...

Nhidfcinjcrfinjcrf wrote:

She is not getting worse, she just isn't improving very much at all (yet). 6 second improvement from freshman year at 3200 is basically no improvement.

She is a very good HS runner, but if she doesn't improve, she will just be an also ran in college and not there anymore after college

Let's hope that she starts improving...

What don't you guys understand about needing to see the splits of the race before you can conclude if she's improving or not? Baxter has never been in a time trial race unlike all of her elite peers. She's almost always had to run alone.

I hears Baxter does low mileage. Maybe she will improve by adding mileage in college.

See link

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/mar/29/track-mt-carmel-invitational/

http://www.prepcaltrack.com/2014/03/29/sunny-skies-fast-times-mt-carmel-invitl/

Without Mercy wrote:

I'm not sure I've ever seen such a good XC runner with such poor track performance. 10:07 should be 5K split for her, as it certainly would for Cain and Efraimson.

Might break 10 this season, but still...

You guys are showing a great lack of understanding of the physiological requirements to run certain times.

Sarah has grown about 6 inches and put on roughly 20 pounds since her freshman year. It is no surprise she hasn't gotten considerably faster. She is running at a very high level and has grown consistently.

If she is done growing and can put on several pounds of muscle in college she'll be able to increase her basic speed and all of her PRs will drop considerably. She is an absolutely massive talent, but is 7-8 pounds of muscle away from being able to run with Cain on the track.

osidkk wrote:

Nhidfcinjcrfinjcrf wrote:

She is not getting worse, she just isn't improving very much at all (yet). 6 second improvement from freshman year at 3200 is basically no improvement.

She is a very good HS runner, but if she doesn't improve, she will just be an also ran in college and not there anymore after college

Let's hope that she starts improving...

What don't you guys understand about needing to see the splits of the race before you can conclude if she's improving or not? Baxter has never been in a time trial race unlike all of her elite peers. She's almost always had to run alone.

What do you call last year's race at Arcadia?

I agree... as an NCAA Division I Head Coach, I am not seeing the improvement I would like. Granted, she would be welcome on the team, full scholarship, and could be within our school records within 2-3 years of my training... but 10:08 as a sophomore, I would like to see 9:50's in her SR year.

I do have a caveat... I think she is an aerobic animal and would run 32-33:00 for me over 10,000m.

She would run 31-32:00

keoll wrote:

I agree... as an NCAA Division I Head Coach, I am not seeing the improvement I would like. Granted, she would be welcome on the team, full scholarship, and could be within our school records within 2-3 years of my training... but 10:08 as a sophomore, I would like to see 9:50's in her SR year.

I do have a caveat... I think she is an aerobic animal and would run 32-33:00 for me over 10,000m.

Just the Facts... wrote:

She would run 31-32:00

keoll wrote:

I agree... as an NCAA Division I Head Coach, I am not seeing the improvement I would like. Granted, she would be welcome on the team, full scholarship, and could be within our school records within 2-3 years of my training... but 10:08 as a sophomore, I would like to see 9:50's in her SR year.

I do have a caveat... I think she is an aerobic animal and would run 32-33:00 for me over 10,000m.

So she has run 76 per lap for 8 laps for the last 4 years, but you believe that she would run 76 per lap for 25 laps (31:40) within 4 years just because you think she would?

That is a time only two collegians have EVER bettered and one of them was not an American.

I agree she is great and I hope she has what it takes to run in the 9:50s this year, and keep improving well into her 20s ... but why is there so much hyperbole on this board?

keoll wrote:

I do have a caveat... I think she is an aerobic animal and would run 32-33:00 for me over 10,000m.

He said, while pondering why on earth no one had offered him a book deal like Jack Daniels. A mind like his was surely deserving, wasn't it?

Giant Johnson wrote:

keoll wrote:

I do have a caveat... I think she is an aerobic animal and would run 32-33:00 for me over 10,000m.

He said, while pondering why on earth no one had offered him a book deal like Jack Daniels. A mind like his was surely deserving, wasn't it?

Then again, to run 33:00 for 10k, she'd only have to have improved by 2.4 seconds/lap faster than she was probably able to do as a sophomore (judging by her 3200m time that year, and assuming she'd be just as good at the 10k as she was over 3200m), and she would have had 6 years to accomplish that improvement, with more than half of that time including collegiate-level training (not to mention training and racing with athletes much closer to her level).

Not exactly a stretch of the imagination.

Now, saying that she should be 31:00-32:00 by the time she graduates... that would take some much better coaching, as that would be taking off about 5 seconds/lap off of where she was as a sophomore.

(note: since she was rumored to not be 100% last spring, I think her sophomore times might be more telling of her abilities on the track)

keoll wrote:

I agree... as an NCAA Division I Head Coach, I am not seeing the improvement I would like. Granted, she would be welcome on the team, full scholarship, and could be within our school records within 2-3 years of my training... but 10:08 as a sophomore, I would like to see 9:50's in her SR year.

I do have a caveat... I think she is an aerobic animal and would run 32-33:00 for me over 10,000m.

How is she going to run those times without a time trial? Isn't that unfair to say that she hasn't improved when she's never been given a rabbit? This should be a clear sign that she's improved - a likely tactical 10:08.

Currently, she is in 32:40 shape in a race with equally talented girls, give or take 10 seconds.

She can drop 2 seconds off her 400 speed in college and knock her 10K times down to the sub-32:00 range. Because of her physiology and her high level of success it will be difficult to find a coach who makes sure she puts on the requisite muscle mass to compete at the international level.