When will Women's NCAA DI Cross-Country move up to 8K/10K?

I could see women's coaches being pretty hesitant to change, just because it would change how they recruited and such. A 1500m woman is worth more than a 1500m man, because she will be more competitive at 5k/6k than the 1500m man will be at 8k/10k.

I really like the idea of keeping it at 8k for men and women, and not moving up to 10k at regional and nationals anymore.

6k is too short. Now that they have Chip times it's not so bad, but when I was in school you had pile ups in the finish chutes the girls come in do quick.

If you brought the men down to 8k, you might have to shrink the field for Nationals to 25 or 26 teams to have the finish chutes not be too crowded. I'd like women 6/8, men 8/10.

Sara Palin wrote:

6k is too short. Now that they have Chip times it's not so bad, but when I was in school you had pile ups in the finish chutes the girls come in do quick.

If you brought the men down to 8k, you might have to shrink the field for Nationals to 25 or 26 teams to have the finish chutes not be too crowded. I'd like women 6/8, men 8/10.

Or you could make the finish chutes bigger.

How can we petition or get a coach to bring this up?

Is there anything we can do with the power of Letsrun.com?

rewthgyter wrote:

How can we petition or get a coach to bring this up?

Is there anything we can do with the power of Letsrun.com?

Is there anything we can't do with the power of Letsrun.com?

rewthgyter wrote:

How can we petition or get a coach to bring this up?

Is there anything we can do with the power of Letsrun.com?

Ask them to end Title IX.

Female, former D1 college athlete here. I ran 1500m and 800m in college and generally sucked in anything over 5k. So a 10k would be even worse for someone like me, worse than the 6k did. However, I was always interested in the idea of making cross country an 8k/10k for men and women and cutting out the indoor 5000m as an event. All outdoor track events would remain. That way, cross country would be more for the true distance types and they would get a rest during indoor or use it to practice speed. The middle distance types would run the early-season home meets in cross for strength, but indoor would be more serious and "theirs." Outdoor would belong to everyone.

Can't say why that idea appealed to me, or how it would change scholarship distribution and recruiting and stuff, but I always thought about it.

Agree to cutting out the indoor 5000m. Too long for indoor track. Looks dumb unless it's really competitive, and even then not great. Let the 5k/10k gals/guys traing through the winter and/or try their hand at the mile/3000m. I've never met a long distance runner that actually enjoys indoor track anyways, and trying to race at a championship level 3 times a year only complicates a season. Would be far better if you trained during the summer, raced in the fall, trained in the winter, raced in the spring.

Supertramp wrote:

rewthgyter wrote:

How can we petition or get a coach to bring this up?

Is there anything we can do with the power of Letsrun.com?

Is there anything we can't do with the power of Letsrun.com?

Make it a SJW issue. Seriously. If you make it about gender equality and shame the opposition for being bigoted/sexist, you will win.

Supertramp wrote:

Agree to cutting out the indoor 5000m. Too long for indoor track. Looks dumb unless it's really competitive, and even then not great.

You just described the women's outdoor 10,000m.

Why should the women race at 8k/10k, because the men do? Because the quality of racing will improve? Based on what I’ve seen on the track and in the men’s races, I’m not sure we’d see better races. There is no doubt the women can run/race at 10k, but I’m not convinced it would enhance the sport if they did. Until a better reason than the men race at 8k/10k is advanced, I don’t see this as an inevitability.

Supertramp wrote:

[quote]arbor day wrote:

Agree to cutting out the indoor 5000m. Too long for indoor track. Looks dumb unless it's really competitive, and even then not great. Let the 5k/10k gals/guys traing through the winter and/or try their hand at the mile/3000m. I've never met a long distance runner that actually enjoys indoor track anyways, and trying to race at a championship level 3 times a year only complicates a season. Would be far better if you trained during the summer, raced in the fall, trained in the winter, raced in the spring.

Yeah I can't see any reason keeping the indoor 5000m. It's confusing for spectators, leads to injuries, cuts into valuable base training time for outdoor and all in all not a very enjoyable event for anyone. The only reason I would see keeping it would be distance-based programs trying to score some conference points. But that distance-team glory is what cross is for.

At least 8K. I would like see more of an advantage given to true long distance runners. It will never change because there does appear be enough women interested in pushing for a change. A similar situation exist with the 100m hurdles, college and the pros compete at the same height as high school.

Why not offer both a long course and short course options for both genders? Has anyone heard of the Great Edinburgh race? They somehow make it work. Extending a meet by an hour or so wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. Track meets are far longer than that and few people complain about it. I think it's a viable option for people that maybe are more middle distance oriented or just can't handle 10k training without compromising health. Another place you see something similar to this is nordic skiing, I think it ends up making for more interesting competition. A school like Penn State may end up competing at a higher level in XC because it better displays their talents.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqahSz-l5hA&t=303s

Also, on a tangent, imagine a world where Ritz had never left the mud and hung up the ole 3/8"s. I often have wondered if that would have made the difference for him in getting global hardware. Sure there's no cash in it, but a title is still a title. Same could be said for be Heath or Derrick (not to say that any of these athletes will never race cross in the future, just that it seems they'll never have it be a true focus.) On another note, I wish CC was in the winter olympics....

Using the '10k XC for women is not competitive/good close racing' argument has limitations.

If we only want closely competitive/good races, than we should consider eliminating all distances over 1500 meters, as the competitors tend to get spread out and do not normally finish within a second or two of each other. This frequently occurs in 1500s also.

8k/10k is very much more different than 6k when compared to the 1500M. Those mid distance 1500 women may not all like running 8k/10k, but they will live. Some of them will do quite well and it might help them run better 1500s.

Most high schools now run both males and females over 5k xc. Its just as big a jump from 5k to 10k for male now as it would be for females. The men can handle the jump, and so can the women.

Are women's coaches reluctant to adapt? Training for 10k is not much different than training for 6k. Sure more miles and more time is involved. Are women's coaches opposed to spending the extra time because their base pay is less???

We certainly have enough women running open road and trail races at distances of 10k, half marathon, marathon and longer.

Women can handle it.

This decision should not be left up to women's coaches. The NCAA and other associations should just do it, because

1) women can run 10k

2) competitiveness will be similar to what it already is

3) the coaches will adapt to the change and the training is similar

4) gives the true distance women a chance to shine brighter

5) supports gender equality

I propose

Division: Men/Women

D1: 8K/8K

D2: 8K/8K

D3: 8K/6K (gotta make it baby Nats somehow)

Y-Naught wrote:

Why not offer both a long course and short course options for both genders? Has anyone heard of the Great Edinburgh race? They somehow make it work. Extending a meet by an hour or so wouldn't be the worst thing in the world. Track meets are far longer than that and few people complain about it. I think it's a viable option for people that maybe are more middle distance oriented or just can't handle 10k training without compromising health. Another place you see something similar to this is nordic skiing, I think it ends up making for more interesting competition. A school like Penn State may end up competing at a higher level in XC because it better displays their talents.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqahSz-l5hA&t=303s

Everybody (with any sense) complains about the length of track meets. Also, this is just a terrible, non-viable idea overall.

this and this wrote:

Most high schools now run both males and females over 5k xc. Its just as big a jump from 5k to 10k for male now as it would be for females. The men can handle the jump, and so can the women.

The top HS males are running a lot higher mileage though.