Utah State Meet - 33 under 16:00, 3 under 15:00 at 4,260'

Most of those kids grew up at elevation so those conversions are too generous. That said, Mormon kids can run.

Damn, we have league finals in 2 weeks and these kids are done.

2.9 miles

some quick strava analysis shows that most of the kids who raced the state meet had at between 3.01 and 3.10 miles on their GPS. looked at data from about 10 kids all who raced on the 18th. all watches said 3.0 which could mean anything from 3.01 to 3.10 on strava. there's no way any of them ran only 2.9, even with tangents not being perfect.

Based on speed ratings this is just a very fast course. The kids running 190+ (or sub 15:00) on the boys side should probably qualify for either footlocker or NXN, but they aren't going to win it any time soon. Just a normal fast state meet.

Utah has very strong front runners. Typically 2-5 guys that are very, very solid. The rest (ala the OP), like to use altitude conversions to make themselves feel better.

Springville averaged 15:26 compared to 15:18 for AF last year and AF missed the national title by a single point. They won't beat Loudon Vlley or GO (unless a Bozeman-style upset)but are contenders for third. Their #1 Grant Gardner ran 14:58 and is only a junior.

The what you say? wrote:

Damn, we have league finals in 2 weeks and these kids are done.

Why does anyone care about times in XC?

moist wrote:

Utah has very strong front runners. Typically 2-5 guys that are very, very solid. The rest (ala the OP), like to use altitude conversions to make themselves feel better.

This argument goes on and and on in spite of evidence indicating otherwise. e.g., those utah and colorado kids running faster at sea level than altitude every year (track times are more accurate), including championship meets. Not to mention the fact that the on soil PRs by pros and top college runners at from these states are always significantly slower than at sea level. For example no one from Colorado has broken 4 in the mile, nor 14 in the 5K. It goes on and on. But there are always these skeptics, probably never raced at altitude who think they know all even though the scientific and empirical evidence clearly point otherwise. Lol at these.

Oh well since you brought it up, I did live and train at altitude for several years. Then I moved to sea level and trained there as well. I have excellent insight into the effects of altitude on training.

The NCAA conversions are WAY too generous to those who live and train at altitude. Nobody argues that they won't run faster at sea level. Just that it's not 20 seconds for 5k.

reed wrote:

some quick strava analysis shows that most of the kids who raced the state meet had at between 3.01 and 3.10 miles on their GPS. looked at data from about 10 kids all who raced on the 18th. all watches said 3.0 which could mean anything from 3.01 to 3.10 on strava. there's no way any of them ran only 2.9, even with tangents not being perfect.

Was the race in a straight line? Because that's basically the only way these GPS watches have any legitimacy.

moist wrote:

Oh well since you brought it up, I did live and train at altitude for several years. Then I moved to sea level and trained there as well. I have excellent insight into the effects of altitude on training.

The NCAA conversions are WAY too generous to those who live and train at altitude. Nobody argues that they won't run faster at sea level. Just that it's not 20 seconds for 5k.

First, you're you're a horrible fat loser with a bad attitude. I'm not using altitude conversions to "make myself feel better." I live in Massachusetts. I'm just someone making an observation.

Second, your living at both altitude and sea level doesn't give you any special insight when your brain is fundamentally damaged. You sound like someone who thinks he's an expert driver because he once got behind the wheel of a buddy's Porsche. You can say that the 2.1% conversion factor or whatever for people born and raised at altitude is too generous, but whatever the average figure is, it ain't zero.

If the course isn't 5K that's a different story but I have no way too know the true distance. I can only accept what he twits on MileSplit say.

YMMV wrote:

Springville averaged 15:26 compared to 15:18 for AF last year and AF missed the national title by a single point. They won't beat Loudon Vlley or GO (unless a Bozeman-style upset)but are contenders for third. Their #1 Grant Gardner ran 14:58 and is only a junior.

Worth noting that Springville's team makeup is different than AF's in 2016: Springville has two low sticks, a pair of chasers about 20sec behind them, and then a ~40sec gap to their 5th. AF had three low sticks with a sizable (~40sec) gap to their 4th and another gap (~30sec) to their 5th. Is that change in makeup enough to make Springville more competitive in the larger meets? Maybe, maybe not. But I think it's a bit naive to immediately dismiss their chances against LV and GO, especially when LV has a similar team composition.

tullyrunners wrote:

http://tullyrunners.com/XC2017/UtahStates2017.htm

Based on speed ratings this is just a very fast course. The kids running 190+ (or sub 15:00) on the boys side should probably qualify for either footlocker or NXN, but they aren't going to win it any time soon. Just a normal fast state meet.

I ran the course and can say, it's not fast. It's actually very slow. I ran nearly a minute slower than I normally do. Granted, I got out way too fast the first mile. This is not the kind of course many people can pr on and is one of the toughest if not the toughest course I've seen.

As you whirr wrote:

moist wrote:

Nobody argues that they won't run faster at sea level. Just that it's not 20 seconds for 5k.

You can say that the 2.1% conversion factor or whatever for people born and raised at altitude is too generous, but whatever the average figure is, it ain't zero.

(facepalm)

And here I hoped you were capable of intelligent conversation.

Jayordon wrote:

tullyrunners wrote:

http://tullyrunners.com/XC2017/UtahStates2017.htm

Based on speed ratings this is just a very fast course. The kids running 190+ (or sub 15:00) on the boys side should probably qualify for either footlocker or NXN, but they aren't going to win it any time soon. Just a normal fast state meet.

I ran the course and can say, it's not fast. It's actually very slow. I ran nearly a minute slower than I normally do. Granted, I got out way too fast the first mile. This is not the kind of course many people can pr on and is one of the toughest if not the toughest course I've seen.

Whoa, shout out to my boi JORDON!!!! Not sure if your 16:29 PR is legit, the course looked short to me!!!!!

moist wrote:

And here I hoped you were capable of intelligent conversation.

Bullsh*t. That's why you led with the declaration that I was some mountain kid reaching up my ass for an overly generous conversion factor. Clearly, if were to communicate with utmost intelligence here, the conversation would be one-sided anyway.

How's this? 33 kids broke 16:00, straight up. 84 did so with the conversion I used per the NCAA. If you think it should be somewhere in the middle based on lifelong high-altitude residence, great, so the number may be closer to 50. If you cannot understand that the essential point is not the exact number of kids who can break 16:00 from Utah but the impressive depth of the talent there, maybe you've spend to much time at the low intellectual altitude of Letsrun.

Two words for those that don't believe in NCAA altitude adjustments: Christian Soratos