Looking at the splits of my team mates and others at races everybody starts the race way too fast. their first split will be like 5:10 and the end with a 6:00 pace. Why not just keep a consistent effort the whole way through or better yet, negative split? thats what ALL of the fastest guys do, the engative split. i know the anxiety and excitement is HIGH at the start of a race, but i'd think runners would get better results NOT sprinting all out at the beginning and negative split
yup
didn't butler U snag 3rd at NCAAs D1 Cross last year by running even splits?
It is probably because Cross Country used to often feature portions of the course that would force people to go in single file. If you didn't get good position you could be stuck behind a chain of slower runners and unable to pass.
The tradition continues whether the course merits it or not.
Colorado is also known for going out conservative at NCAAs then negative splitting.
The vast majority of humanity consists of absolute morons. Cross country runners are no exception.
SMJO wrote:
It is probably because Cross Country used to often feature portions of the course that would force people to go in single file. If you didn't get good position you could be stuck behind a chain of slower runners and unable to pass.
The tradition continues whether the course merits it or not.
That's an interesting theory, however I disagree with that being the main reason. Some courses are still like that, so it's true that sometimes you're forced to go out hard to get good position, however I think a bigger reason is adrenaline, as well as pack mentality, everyone dragging you along at the fast pace. Also, not being like a track, you don't usually get very much pace feedback till you are a mile in, way too late to fix anything.
pastaisgood wrote:
Looking at the splits of my team mates and others at races everybody starts the race way too fast. their first split will be like 5:10 and the end with a 6:00 pace. Why not just keep a consistent effort the whole way through or better yet, negative split? thats what ALL of the fastest guys do, the engative split. i know the anxiety and excitement is HIGH at the start of a race, but i'd think runners would get better results NOT sprinting all out at the beginning and negative split
...because they're high schoolers, and high schoolers do dumb things?
Pacing yourself smartly can really help. Psychologically, a lot of people find it hard to be that far back early. (Running even splits for a 1600m, I would regularly be behind people until 500-600m who would end up a minute behind me. Yes, a minute, as in sixty seconds.) Get past that and reap the benefits.
For a high-level example of this, look at Dathan Ritzenhein's 12:56:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMyxo-JX-sg&t=1h11m20sHe goes out in dead last while the field goes out stupidly fast, around 60 and 2:02. I wish I could find a full English version of the race -- at 1600 he's still dead last, the announcers have totally written him off, but he's run an even-paced 4:10 or so -- right on pace for 13:00, which is what he could reasonably run. (In running, you can't do more than what you are in shape for just because you want to. Going out too fast will result, every time, in coming home way too slow.)
Then later in the race the clueless announcers are fawning over Bekele "pressing the pace" as he runs a 63 and a 64 -- he's not pressing anything, just slowing down less than the rest of the field. None of them should have been going out at 12:40 pace. Meanwhile, Ritzenhein, the token white guy they forgot about a while ago, is working his way through the field. When they finally notice him with 600 to go, he's in fourth.
When everyone goes out fast, going out smart can lead to you beating people you were never supposed to beat. (As others mentioned, Colorado has done this at NCAAs many times.)
Going out too fast is just you beating yourself.
good post
the reviver wrote:
pastaisgood wrote:Looking at the splits of my team mates and others at races everybody starts the race way too fast. their first split will be like 5:10 and the end with a 6:00 pace. Why not just keep a consistent effort the whole way through or better yet, negative split? thats what ALL of the fastest guys do, the engative split. i know the anxiety and excitement is HIGH at the start of a race, but i'd think runners would get better results NOT sprinting all out at the beginning and negative split
...because they're high schoolers, and high schoolers do dumb things?
Pacing yourself smartly can really help. Psychologically, a lot of people find it hard to be that far back early. (Running even splits for a 1600m, I would regularly be behind people until 500-600m who would end up a minute behind me. Yes, a minute, as in sixty seconds.) Get past that and reap the benefits.
For a high-level example of this, look at Dathan Ritzenhein's 12:56:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMyxo-JX-sg&t=1h11m20sHe goes out in dead last while the field goes out stupidly fast, around 60 and 2:02. I wish I could find a full English version of the race -- at 1600 he's still dead last, the announcers have totally written him off, but he's run an even-paced 4:10 or so -- right on pace for 13:00, which is what he could reasonably run. (In running, you can't do more than what you are in shape for just because you want to. Going out too fast will result, every time, in coming home way too slow.)
Then later in the race the clueless announcers are fawning over Bekele "pressing the pace" as he runs a 63 and a 64 -- he's not pressing anything, just slowing down less than the rest of the field. None of them should have been going out at 12:40 pace. Meanwhile, Ritzenhein, the token white guy they forgot about a while ago, is working his way through the field. When they finally notice him with 600 to go, he's in fourth.
When everyone goes out fast, going out smart can lead to you beating people you were never supposed to beat. (As others mentioned, Colorado has done this at NCAAs many times.)
Going out too fast is just you beating yourself.
good post indeed
Sorry but there is NO way Ritz was clean during this race.
agip wrote:
the reviver wrote:...because they're high schoolers, and high schoolers do dumb things?
Pacing yourself smartly can really help. Psychologically, a lot of people find it hard to be that far back early. (Running even splits for a 1600m, I would regularly be behind people until 500-600m who would end up a minute behind me. Yes, a minute, as in sixty seconds.) Get past that and reap the benefits.
For a high-level example of this, look at Dathan Ritzenhein's 12:56:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMyxo-JX-sg&t=1h11m20sHe goes out in dead last while the field goes out stupidly fast, around 60 and 2:02. I wish I could find a full English version of the race -- at 1600 he's still dead last, the announcers have totally written him off, but he's run an even-paced 4:10 or so -- right on pace for 13:00, which is what he could reasonably run. (In running, you can't do more than what you are in shape for just because you want to. Going out too fast will result, every time, in coming home way too slow.)
Then later in the race the clueless announcers are fawning over Bekele "pressing the pace" as he runs a 63 and a 64 -- he's not pressing anything, just slowing down less than the rest of the field. None of them should have been going out at 12:40 pace. Meanwhile, Ritzenhein, the token white guy they forgot about a while ago, is working his way through the field. When they finally notice him with 600 to go, he's in fourth.
When everyone goes out fast, going out smart can lead to you beating people you were never supposed to beat. (As others mentioned, Colorado has done this at NCAAs many times.)
Going out too fast is just you beating yourself.
good post indeed
agip wrote:
the reviver wrote:...because they're high schoolers, and high schoolers do dumb things?
Pacing yourself smartly can really help. Psychologically, a lot of people find it hard to be that far back early. (Running even splits for a 1600m, I would regularly be behind people until 500-600m who would end up a minute behind me. Yes, a minute, as in sixty seconds.) Get past that and reap the benefits.
For a high-level example of this, look at Dathan Ritzenhein's 12:56:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMyxo-JX-sg&t=1h11m20s...
When everyone goes out fast, going out smart can lead to you beating people you were never supposed to beat. (As others mentioned, Colorado has done this at NCAAs many times.)
Going out too fast is just you beating yourself.
good post indeed
What?!? I already said this! And I used WAY fewer words.
"The vast majority of humanity consists of absolute morons. Cross country runners are no exception."
Dude, give credit where credit is due.
Here is the unfortunate truth wrote:
agip wrote:good post indeed
What?!? I already said this! And I used WAY fewer words.
"The vast majority of humanity consists of absolute morons. Cross country runners are no exception."
Dude, give credit where credit is due.
You like being laconic? OK. Details matter.
the reviver wrote:
Here is the unfortunate truth wrote:What?!? I already said this! And I used WAY fewer words.
"The vast majority of humanity consists of absolute morons. Cross country runners are no exception."
Dude, give credit where credit is due.
You like being laconic? OK. Details matter.
Ah, so you agree.
SMJO wrote:
It is probably because Cross Country used to often feature portions of the course that would force people to go in single file. If you didn't get good position you could be stuck behind a chain of slower runners and unable to pass.
The tradition continues whether the course merits it or not.
That's probably the only remotely reasonable explanation that I've ever heard, and it doesn't seem to make much sense on most modern courses, especially courses used for big championships. When I was in college, I would sometimes find myself in dead last position at the one-mile mark, eventually working my way up through the field over the remaining miles. Despite my relatively even splits (compared with those of everyone else in the race) and high placings at the finish, I would still get berated afterward by my coach, who seemed to think that it was important to "establish position" early in a cross-country race. It is certainly true that one can lose time in getting around a large number of slowing runners, but I don't recall ever seeing great evidence that it's better to be one of those slowing runners than it is to be the guy who is trying to pass them with a relatively even pace.
The bottom line for me is, I suppose, that the actual reasons for fast early paces in cross-country races usually have nothing to do with optimal pacing, and have much more to do with the tendency of young, undertrained, and inexperienced cross-country runners to (1) pace themselves badly and (2) grab any opportunity for fleeting glory by running at or near the front of the pack for a while.
This sort of style, while not banal to a cross country race, is death in longer events. So many people who want to break 3:00 for the marathon will run the first 5k in 18:00 or faster. If you go out hard in a 5k/8k, you only have to crawl home for a couple of miles. The marathon ends in a 20k death march for so many because of one foolish mile or first 5k.
By definition, the winner of any race did not go out too hard.
Do you have any tips on how to hold back in a race. I seem to follow most runners and slow down throughout the race. I always seem to out harder than I should. I always tell myself I will hold back, but I end up never following plan.
michaelchamp2112 wrote:
Do you have any tips on how to hold back in a race. I seem to follow most runners and slow down throughout the race. I always seem to out harder than I should. I always tell myself I will hold back, but I end up never following plan.
wear a gps watch if you have one and they let you
otherwise, it's all in the training - you have to know what, say, a 5:30 mile feels like. If you run a lot of 82 second quarters or 2:45 800s in practice..you'll know what it feels like and can reproduce it in a race.
otherwise, piggybacking on teammates or competitors is a old friend - there is usually someone who runs smart - just run on his shoulder.
michaelchamp2112 wrote:
Do you have any tips on how to hold back in a race. I seem to follow most runners and slow down throughout the race. I always seem to out harder than I should. I always tell myself I will hold back, but I end up never following plan.
#1 Rule: If you do not FEEL like you are running way[/]i too slow at the start of the race then you ARE running way too fast.
Cross country races are most often on narrow trails so everybody has to sprint out at the start because there can be a TON of people and it would be very easy to get boxed in and thus bringing those guys to 6 minute pace anyway