Towards the end of the article the writer proposes “that the NCAA host two separate cross country national championships: a short course championship in October and a long course championship in December.”
Thoughts?
Knvdsfhy wrote:
https://www.flotrack.org/articles/6097416-how-to-solve-cross-countrys-gender-equality-problemTowards the end of the article the writer proposes “that the NCAA host two separate cross country national championships: a short course championship in October and a long course championship in December.”
Thoughts?
lol
well, that isn't the WORST idea to come out of the idiot minds behind flotrack
still stupid though
Considering most of the women fall over right at 6K as they cross the line, this despite 99% of females claiming they are much tougher than guys, I could understand why the NCAA wouldn’t stretch it out to 10K.
That being said, I’d prefer 8860 meters for the women and 10000 for the men. Then the times could be comparable as well.
Honestly do people really give that much of a sh!t about XC? Like XC is fun and all but I think everyone just does it because it's something to do before track. If i had to peak for two championships I'd be pissed.
Logistically overcomplicated solution to a problem that doesn't exist.
They already both run the 10k outdoors, so I don't see why women wouldn't be able to handle the 10k in the fall.... The real issue with NCAA XC is the having to run two (essentially all out) 10ks two weekends in a row. Would just make more sense to keep everything 8k, especially considering that's the distance that run in the regular season. On that note, the physiological toll of running a 10k varies on the region due to weather. If you look at this years NCAA results you'll notice that for the most part teams from the NE region underperformed at nationals, arguably their performance was hurt by the fact that their race was held in freezing temperatures, in contrast to the modest temperatures of the west regional.... not necessarily something that should change, but rather just food for thought.
More iz bester wrote:
Considering most of the women fall over right at 6K as they cross the line, this despite 99% of females claiming they are much tougher than guys...
Women are tougher than guys. In reality, they should run 12k and the men 10k.
winnr1 wrote:
well, that isn't the WORST idea to come out of the idiot minds behind flotrack
still stupid though
Their new website is terrible.
Flotrack's new website is terrible.
Their site is not that bad.
In fact, it is quite good.
Let it Rupp wrote:
Honestly do people really give that much of a sh!t about XC? Like XC is fun and all but I think everyone just does it because it's something to do before track. If i had to peak for two championships I'd be pissed.
You're a real student of the sport, aren't you? I can tell you've got quite a few years of racing behind you as well.
Here's the solution, men and women race 10k together against each other. Now that's equal opportunity for ya.
The Barkley Marathons should be the women's NCAA championship. Collegiate women get to demonstrate their toughness, ultras get a participation bump.
win/win
Scottish Athletics hold a Short Course Championship each November that is 4k for men and women. Laura Muir won the women's race this year.
The main National Championship race is in February and both races are now 10k. It only changed last year as it was 12k and 8k before. It went fine. In a few more years it'll probably seem weird that the distances weren't always equal.
I think it's a great idea. Let's make both races 10k. And let's eliminate women's and men's divisions all together. Instead let's do one mass race with men and women with 5 men and 5 women running per team and score the top 5. And while we're at it we should probably change some other things too, including:
-Increasing women's throwing implements to men's standards.
(In case you didn't know, women throw 4kg shot put/hammer to men's 7.26kg; 2.2-2.3m length, 600 g javelin to the men's 2.6-2.7m and 800g javelin; 1kg discus to men's 2kg.
- Hurdle heights
Women hurdle 30in vs 36in in the 400m hurdles; run shorter and jump lower in the high hurdles (100m and 33in vs 110m and 42 in); and hurdle 33 in vs 42 in 55m and 60m hurdles.
While we're at it, let's examine some other sports, shall we?
- Increase the 3 point line distance and implement playing with an NBA men's size basketball instead of a women's size ball.
- Make all women play baseball, where the fields are larger, the bases further apart, the ball is smaller, and the bats are heavier
- Volleyball net height should be raised from 7'4 to 7'11, like the men.
Then only sports that offer true equality are swimming, soccer, and tennis. Let's throw out women's leagues too. It's not true equality unless the women get to compete with the men. No more gender divisions. It's simply ignorant and flies in the face of equality for all. May the best athletes win!
In the early days of women's collegiate athletics, when a lot of teams were pretty small, it was easier to field a decent team if you could get contributions from middle distance runners and underclassmen. The argument for men and women running the same distance isn't really an argument about equality, since neither 6k nor 10k are inherently better, and the different distances are a product of history unrelated to sexism. Instead, the argument seems to be all comes down to the symbolism, ignoring the history and the fact that there are pros and cons to both distances. If you ask the actual athletes, I'm sure 75% of women would rather continue racing 6k. But instead of taking the preferences of athletes into account, some people would rather use them as pawns to advance a political agenda.
Seriously? The right solution is to have the women start running 10k like the men. I thought that was pretty obvious.
Is XC the only sport that changes the length of the contest for the championships?? Imagine if this weeks super bowl had 20 minute quarters?? Or the world series was 12 innings?? why not have championship races the same distance as regular season races??
Hard enough to field a competitive team at a mid major, in a state with a poor high school system. Most women on my team have no interest in racing that long and like the 5k/6k distance. The few 10k runners I coach are rather indifferent.
I do have men that wish their races were shorter. 10k is a long race. The difference is it is much easier to maintain a team of 12 to 15 guys though, so you worry less about injuries and training volume can be higher. The longer racing distance is required to spread a men's field out a little bit in a big race.
Also, (and others have stated this) it is not that women can't do it, but rather that you often need 1500m and 800m women's runners to contribute to field a decent XC team. There are a lot of top 7 women at the mid major DI level who top out at 40 miles a week for training volume. A 10k would be miserable for them.