predicting high school runners performances

People don't race like crap unless the training is taking it out of them.

They should be training not straining. Workouts like the ones they are doing are over the top. I didn't train that hard in college and i ran 23:58 for 5 miles in x-c.

Your top 3 sound eerily similar to my XC team in HS.

We didn't run as many miles as your guys, maybe 35-50/week during the summer, and a max of 40 during the season.

Two things come to mind.

1. No matter how easy our runs were supposed to be, we ended up racing. This was especially bad for myself and the number 2 runner as our number one was 30-40 seconds faster over the 5k. This applies to workouts too, I'm sure they're going too hard.

2. HS boys take out races RIDICULOUSLY fast. I bet your guys routinely run 4:50 first miles and 6:10 third miles.

Try to get them to go through the first mile in 5:10-5:15, even if they are in 15th place. With three guys, they can work together to reel in the leaders. You'll really have to pound it in their brains that they will be the strongest over the third mile.

Good luck at your region/section/district and hopefully state.

I guess I am thinking they are doing too much with 3 weeks left.

We won state last year, and I expected a quantum leap in performances after a summer of hard training. But so far, only minimal inprovements from last year.

Probably going to begin taper earlier and only do short, sharpening stuff from now on.

You're only a dumbass for one reason. Predicting times is for those who think this is a game.

Prepare runners. If you wonder why they aren't running better, lets break down the races.

What were their times at the 800M, mile and two-mile. Are they blowing out too fast, are they helping each other or breaking up early. Are they too competative between each other. It is very doubtful that you would have three runners who race crappy unless they all have a crappy game plan. That's too much of a coincidence.

8 x 400m in 1:15 with 60 second jog rest DOES NOT indicate high 15's in cross. At best I would say that it indicates 10:00-10 for 3200 meters on the track.

you won state with times in the mid to high 16s for 5k? what state do you live in?

but seriously now: as another poster mentioned, make sure they dont go out too fast. 5:05-5:15, as a pack. my high school killed people this way. we would basically have a lead group of two, a middle group of 3, and a trail group of 2. they would pack it up and get out moderately well in the first mile, and then KEEP the pace instead of dying over the next two miles, and reel in most of anyone who was ahead.

from talking to people we beat, i gathered that getting passed by two or three runners from the same school is incredibly demoralizing. a friend's parent caught me and two teammates passing a couple of runners at several points on the course on video; you could just see them give up hope and slow down at that point. it was great.

in order to maximize the affect, and also to get by the quickest, we made up two different hand gestures: a peace sign, indicating FORK, as in pass the runner(s) on opposite sides, or hold out the hand (side) on which you want to pass them. simple and effective.

Another HS coach wrote:

8 x 400m in 1:15 with 60 second jog rest DOES NOT indicate high 15's in cross. At best I would say that it indicates 10:00-10 for 3200 meters on the track.

Agreed. People see a handful of high school kids run about 15 flat and then think that a halfway decent workout would mean their kids can run sub 16. A sub 16 minute 5,000 on a CC course for a high school kid is very very good - less than one percent of all high school cross country runners can do it.

That workout isn't all that special.

Predicting one's athletes future race performances using workouts as an indictor is setting yourself up to become one frustrated coach.It sounds as though you have achieved that.

I would just slow them down. In your remaining weeks just do strides for your tournover work and tempo 1000's based off of there more current 5k.

I coached a 8:58 2 miler who could not have done your 400m workout. Remember, they are racing a 5k not the 800m or mile.

With that kind of base behind them, they will come around with a little rest.

believe it, there are crappy states out here in the wilderness, especially in the small school divisions.

we shoot for a "comfortable" first mile (usually 5:05-5:20 depending on course difficulty); a second mile within 15 seconds of the first (given the adrenaline-at-the-start factor); and a last 1.1 within 30 seconds of the first mile (counting on a teeth-baring finish and the added .1).

if you're not predicting times, how well do you gauge and evaluate yourself, your runners, your workouts, race performances, etc?

the three tend to beak apart in the second mile when the top kid (who runs closest to our ideal race plan) maintains pace best. the other drift off and then regroup in the last mile.

two of them don't run track (baseball players!), the other ran 4:40 in the 1600 last spring (i didn't coach track last spring).

btw, that was "2 sets of 8x400 @ 1:15"

and they ran 1:12 to 1:15 for 15 of them and they asked if they could run the last one hard and finished with a 1:05.

Maybe do 4-5 repeat 1000s on an xc course. Maybe they just need to toughen up??

Again, good luck.

well, that's what i'm curious about, are they tough enough, are they running up to their potential (yes, that dangerous word)?

TZilla wrote:

Maybe do 4-5 repeat 1000s on an xc course.

This is a much better idea. Listen to TZilla.

Flagpole Willy wrote:

This is a much better idea. Listen to TZilla.

Yes, Listen to Flagpole. He is a running EXPERT.

I am the most intelligent poster on pretty much any message board, because I am pretty much the most intelligent person in any given setting. That is nothing to be proud of - it is a gift I was given at birth. It just IS.

2 sets of 8x400m @1:15, there times are about what I would predict.

OK. Flagpole is not humble.

Getting back to me, because like Flagpole, it's all about me...

If I am screwed up for wanting to predict 5K potential, how do others go about determing whether their athletes are running up to their true ability?

It looks like they're racing hard, they say they're racing hard, but their performances in workouts give me the idea they can race faster.

I couldn't train like that, and I ran 16:13 in h.s., which is marginally better than they are.

Remember, you're converting short track intervals to a potentially rough and hilly xc course.

I don't think those times are out of line if the courses were tough. If not, they are slow. I would say your interval workouts are too short (not number of intervals, distance) to extrapolate accurate 5k xc times. However, they had a big base, so it shouldn't be unreasonable.

We also don't know how often they are racing. If they're racing twice a week, they most certainly are tired.

With two weeks to go, put focus on recovery, and all of their/your hard work may pay off, but I wouldn't expect more than 30 seconds from any one of them.

Oh, and make sure your #2 and #3 aren't working too hard. The difference between your #1 and #3 runner may be bigger than you think.