Is this the end of US running @ World XC? It's futile to continue.

But it's still not genetics...

We'll likely never win the team title, but no we shouldn't get up. CD was the only truly elite runner we sent, not to short the other guys. BUT, imagine this team:

Rupp

CD

True

Cheserek (once he gets citizenship)

Bumbi

Hill

No. It's Africans working harder and Western nations defeatist mentality (like that of OP) and not taking the event seriously. The Us did not send close to its best team. Quitters never win.

You are not Wowzers.

yellowbellies wrote:

No. It's Africans working harder and Western nations defeatist mentality (like that of OP) and not taking the event seriously. The Us did not send close to its best team. Quitters never win.

The US, with its absolute best team would have come in anywhere from 4th to 6th. Not even sniffing distance to top 3.

Don't want to believe me - do the math. Only Rupp finishes ahead of Derrick. Others all at least a few places behind. Point total = 90 - 100.

Ethiopia: 20

Kenya: 20

Bahrain: 54

US, Eritrea, Uganda = 90 - 100

Pointing Out the Obvious wrote:

The US, with its absolute best team would have come in anywhere from 4th to 6th. Not even sniffing distance to top 3.

Don't want to believe me - do the math. Only Rupp finishes ahead of Derrick. Others all at least a few places behind. Point total = 90 - 100.

Ethiopia: 20

Kenya: 20

Bahrain: 54

US, Eritrea, Uganda = 90 - 100

DO you intend all of that to mean the US should give up? If so, then exactly the same logic would suggest that everyone in the US other than Chris Derrick should stop running. Straight up stupidity.

so? wrote:

Pointing Out the Obvious wrote:

The US, with its absolute best team would have come in anywhere from 4th to 6th. Not even sniffing distance to top 3.

Don't want to believe me - do the math. Only Rupp finishes ahead of Derrick. Others all at least a few places behind. Point total = 90 - 100.

Ethiopia: 20

Kenya: 20

Bahrain: 54

US, Eritrea, Uganda = 90 - 100

DO you intend all of that to mean the US should give up? If so, then exactly the same logic would suggest that everyone in the US other than Chris Derrick should stop running. Straight up stupidity.

No! Never give up! Never surrender!

But DO try to be logical next time. My post was obviously in response to "The US did not send close to its best team" and was obviously correct in its assessment that the US' best team would not have made a whole lot of difference.

The US doesn't take the event seriously when the ONLY XC race prior to the meet is the Trials meet. Go to Europe and compete on the XC circuit - even if it isn't as good as it used to be - if the US wants to be prepared for this Championship, or create meets in the South in the winter where athletes - even bringing in people from Europe/Africa - can prepare for XC by racing XC. It is the only way to even up the odds. As long as the fall is the main XC season, when World XC is ALWAYS at the end of March, then preparation will never be optimal, and it needs to be (unless it is advantageously muddy - something some Americans are trained for, although less than in Europe) to create a level field.

But the US could be like Europe and have given up on the sport at this level. Then can't figure out why prospects at other distances (Farah excepted as he is US trained, and doesn't do XC anyway) have also fallen off. European championships (usually December) have taken on the mantle of the XC meet of importance and Europe (in general) skips worlds, so as not to get humiliated by the Africans. What a terrible attitude.

OP is a liberal

Relax. XC is just training for track. It's not a real sport.

Only by holding World XC in cold, sea-level and muddy course can U.S. compete with Africans (as in Poland two years ago, Edinburgh more recently). Give Africans altitude, firm footing and warm weather and the result is what you saw today...a rout.

B-Sample wrote:

Only by holding World XC in cold, sea-level and muddy course can U.S. compete with Africans (as in Poland two years ago, Edinburgh more recently). Give Africans altitude, firm footing and warm weather and the result is what you saw today...a rout.

Probably true, but a World Championship should be exactly that. You go do your best and see where you fall, exactly like Chris Derrick, Sarah Hall and the others just did. Even before the race, Derrick stated that there were 6-8 guys above his pay grade and another 10-15 that would be tough to beat. The way that you improve is to keep trying. The fact that you did not win does NOT mean that 'it's futile to continue'. With that logic we would never have seen Rupp, Simpson, Centrowicz, Goucher, Keflezighi and Kastor take Olympic/WC medals on the track.

The trajectory of US distance running is definitely in the right direction, but USATF (and more generally IAAF) do need to pull their thumbs out of their @sses and do the work necessary to organize and present the XC WC in a manner that generates commitment from the top runners and interest from the public.

I am not sure why a runner like (for example) Ritz, who would cut a nut off to make the Olympic team to go race the Kenyans and Ethiopians, would consistently give up a spot on the US team for XC. But figuring that out should be HUGE priority for USATF and IAAF. Talk to the athletes and find out what are the impediments. Probably mainly the amount of money available in the marathon. Why is the money in the marathon and not XC/ Because the marathons have marketed themselves in a way that draws in a lot of corporate money and public interest.

Maybe link the World XC to a major marathon? Work with a group like NYRR to get them in the same city on the same weekend, and use that to get enough money on the line for the XC that it turns back into the one race where you get to see the top milers and marathoners and everyone in between all eat each other alive to see who's the best of the best.

The fact that World XC is dominated by African runners is mentioned a lot, but that is absolutely no different than the Diamond League, the Olympics and WMM. All of those are doing fine. The national federations and IAAF are just f&^ing up with XC.

Since we're not sending our best teams to World XC (I can't recall when we sent our best team...80s?) - why waste valuables $$ resources $$ on sending US athletes? Use that money to increase prize monies of National XC meets instead.

XC is still very popular on the national scene (club XC this year had a TON of participants), so just keep it national and forget about worlds and other international races.

Why go to some far off place like China or Jordan or Kenya to run a race, with barely any world media attention, in March? What are you getting out of it besides some world travel? You sure as heck aren't learning anything by getting your @ss whooped other than to be more intimidated by Africans than you were before. You're not doing your sponsors any favors.

If you really want to run "with the best" then go to some tempo session in Kenya and run with like 50-60 guys on the dirt roads. See if that increases your rep.

kennedy, meb, abdi and rogers made the podium in 2001. In those days there were a short course race on Saturday and a long course race on Sunday which perhaps diluted the field allowing the non African nations to get on the podium.

Wowzers wrote:

Since we're not sending our best teams to World XC (I can't recall when we sent our best team...80s?) - why waste valuables $$ resources $$ on sending US athletes? Use that money to increase prize monies of National XC meets instead.

If you are not going to send the athletes to worlds then why increase prize money at nationals?

The intent is to create an incentive for the best to go race at Worlds. Like a lot of things, this will not happen in one step, it will require a process.

And it is a huge HS sport in the US based on participation. But to promote excellence at the national level,the worst thing we could do is just stop comparing ourselves to everyone faster. Look at what the internet has done to HS track times... no one is satisfied to be the fastest in the local paper, and we have dozens of guys running 2M in the 8s, whereas there were years in the 90s when no one did.

If not winning makes you intimidated, I really don't know what to say.

Heard of Jake and Zane? Yes? Then your point is incorrect.

Wowzers wrote:

We got whooped. Derrick is one of our best 10k guys and he was demolished. The rest of the places were for scraps. Africans totally dominated.

There were 7 Africans who switched nationalities ahead of Chris. This is a joke now and it's not worth the time/energy of Americans to do World XC - we will never be able to do well unless the course is muddy/snowy.

Either IAAF needs to handicap races by making them tougher (muddier, hillier, snowier, etc..) or just end World XC. No one outside of Africa gives a sh*t anymore (aside from the hardcore runners @ letsrun).

Based on your logic, perhaps we should give up on soccer and Brazil should give up on basketball. Winning is great, but sport is also about doing your best and trying to get better. After today, the goal should to be to figure out how to get better...giving up is not an American construct. Btw, it wasn't as bad as it looked, a few things:

- We overrated the USA team and underrated the Africans. The USA has improved a lot over the last decade, but most of that has been in middle distance; outside of Rupp, we are still way behind the Africans in long distance. Look at the African marathon and half marathon times versus the U.S.

- Outside of Derrick, we essentially sent a B team or perhaps B+; however, even our A team probably would have struggled to place 3rd.

- Without seeing the race, I suspect we were somewhat unprepared. If you haven't run a couple of hard world class XC races, I would imagine the level of competition at WXC would be overwhelming.

- The altitude in a race which in effort is about equal to a half marathon had to be a factor. Especially when consider all of our athletes to some degree underperformed. There is a reason why all major half marathons and marathons are at sea level.

- The smart folks knew all along that even getting 3rd, everything had to go right, which is what happened 2 years ago. The Kenyans and Ethiopians are very good at XC...it is their national sport after all.

- Some of the teams where basically scam teams consisting of athletes who only recently switched nationalities and some of them were specially recruited just for WXC.

-We are always going to have limited success in the Jr races with a group of school kids whose average age is 18, going up against athletes training in a pro group and will be racing in DL meets this summer. For our youngsters, WXC is a race and an experience, for an African youngster it is race out of poverty for themselves and their family. Nearly one in 10 African women die giving birth and the average weekly wage is what some of us make per hour. In 24 hours, the U.S. kids will back to studying and hanging out at the mall as opposed to an arranged marriage or herding goats.

With all of that said, the U.S. performance was a reality check and a reminder of how much harder we need to work.

yellowbellies wrote:

No. It's Africans working harder and Western nations defeatist mentality (like that of OP) and not taking the event seriously. The Us did not send close to its best team. Quitters never win.

^ This.

What we need is the XC equivalent of Cas Loxsom in the 600m. An elite level runner who has a true love of XC even though it isnt as glamourous as track and is willing to train specially for it. His schedule would have to be slightly different than the top track guys, but I'm positive the focus on XC would translate over to a fast 10k on the track or Half on the roads. Imagine if someone like the Colorado boys signed a shoe contract and kept training under Wetmore with a focus on XC for 6-8 more years. The only reason we arent competitive in Cross is because we prioritize track higher.