Can we stop pretending Woodbridge isn’t short?

Not sure this is helpful but... wrote:

800 dude wrote:

GPS is not reliable, but it's more often underestimates the distance you ran because it cuts corners.

The reason people usually get long distances on their GPS is because they ran even longer.

I agree that GPS is not reliable... however I don't think it underestimates the difference, it's actually quite the opposite.

To check that out please go out to the track with your GPS watch on, run a mile, and then tell us how far it said you ran. Pretty sure it will register 1 mile before you get to the mile mark. If GPS cuts corners it would result in you hitting a mile before GPS said you did.

That is all.

That's because the GPS watch is on the left wrist. Now run a mile in the opposite direction, and your GPS won't say a mile until you're past the mile mark.

This is because it can't deal with the turns properly.

You Americans don't even know what XC is!! Get yourself over to the UK and run in the wet and filth we have to deal with through the winter! Pan flat golf course XC's are a joke!!

Effillo wrote:

You Americans don't even know what XC is!! Get yourself over to the UK and run in the wet and filth we have to deal with through the winter! Pan flat golf course XC's are a joke!!

Not this one:

no need to call anyone names but... wrote:

So Dumb wrote:

So college scholarships don't matter? If one of these kids gets a scholarship over kids that didn't run this short course then it's a problem.

... college coaches don't give scholarships out based on XC times. That wouldn't make a whole lot of sense. They might give a scholly based on how someone completes in XC though.

So you don't think college coaches would look more closely at someone that ran 14:01 for 3 miles then 15:01?

yesstiles wrote:

Not sure this is helpful but... wrote:

I agree that GPS is not reliable... however I don't think it underestimates the difference, it's actually quite the opposite.

To check that out please go out to the track with your GPS watch on, run a mile, and then tell us how far it said you ran. Pretty sure it will register 1 mile before you get to the mile mark. If GPS cuts corners it would result in you hitting a mile before GPS said you did.

That is all.

That's because the GPS watch is on the left wrist. Now run a mile in the opposite direction, and your GPS won't say a mile until you're past the mile mark.

This is because it can't deal with the turns properly.

Thanks for the info... That is interesting. But often times I run the opposite direction on the track so the watch is on the outside of the turn... still the same issue...

Honestly, it makes no sense to me that GPS watches would react this way... should be the opposite.

So Dumb wrote:

no need to call anyone names but... wrote:

... college coaches don't give scholarships out based on XC times. That wouldn't make a whole lot of sense. They might give a scholly based on how someone completes in XC though.

So you don't think college coaches would look more closely at someone that ran 14:01 for 3 miles then 15:01?

Trust me and the other coaches who recruit... in XC coaches look at placing because we know that distances on an XC course are often not accurate. No kid is getting a scholarship based solely on a fast time on an XC course.

John Clendon wrote:

I had no idea what this Woodbridge invite was until this morning.

There is no way the winning team runs and average of 14:31. Approx 15:00 for a full 5k. Zero chance that course is accurate. Yes it was Great Oak, but lets be real here.

Perhaps they’re just really good. Realistically, how short could the course be? More than 10 seconds?

bro idk sub 4 isn’t that impressive

uhhhh wrote:

Perhaps they’re just really good. Realistically, how short could the course be? More than 10 seconds?

Uhhhhh, yes. There are several "really fast" courses around here that are supposed to be 5000m but are actually between 4800m and 4900m. But everyone swears they are legit and are just really really fast courses. LOL.

Woodbridge times are total bs. The meet is just really fast by its nature, and the course just makes it faster. I mean come on, how do you call it cross country if you are running loops on a turf soccer field!! Being from California it really sucks seeing you competitors run low 14's at Woodbridge, but when you beat them later in the season (when it matters) you feel so much better.

You get a lot of media attention for running something like 14:01. If you don't think college coaches look at that attention then you are blind. Best 5K time in the country is 14:52 but Woodbridge "3M" is 14:01? Do the math, it's at least 15-20 seconds short.

I disagreed with Wojo on his post. Now I'm banned

I am sure this will be relevant once again tomorrow so just bringing it up now.

8:40 3200 —> 13:37 3M

always wondered... wrote:

yesstiles wrote:

That's because the GPS watch is on the left wrist. Now run a mile in the opposite direction, and your GPS won't say a mile until you're past the mile mark.

This is because it can't deal with the turns properly.

Thanks for the info... That is interesting. But often times I run the opposite direction on the track so the watch is on the outside of the turn... still the same issue...

Honestly, it makes no sense to me that GPS watches would react this way... should be the opposite.

GPS usually measures too long because when you run in a straight line it is not recording in a straight line. It will slightly zig zag down a straight path. Eventually this adds up. So usually people run shorter than what their GPS says.

Early evening in Southern California rules. Deal.

tarckstar wrote:

Early evening in Southern California rules. Deal.

I measured the course with a wheel last year from the inside and it was 3miles. Actually it was just a tad over 3miles. George (Race director) makes sure it is measured and has multiple people do this to make sure it's 3miles.

Don't get me wrong they make sure its very fast and flat, but it's 100% 3 miles.

So Dumb wrote:

no need to call anyone names but... wrote:

... college coaches don't give scholarships out based on XC times. That wouldn't make a whole lot of sense. They might give a scholly based on how someone completes in XC though.

So you don't think college coaches would look more closely at someone that ran 14:01 for 3 miles then 15:01?

And that kid that ran 14:01 also ran 8:40 for a 3200m . The only ones who say Woodbridge is not 3 miles are the ones watching from home.

Effillo wrote:

You Americans don't even know what XC is!! Get yourself over to the UK and run in the wet and filth we have to deal with through the winter! Pan flat golf course XC's are a joke!!

UK don't know what XC is!!!! Way more exciting in HS XC then in the UK.