Rich's write up of Manhattan

[NYrunner]

Rich the NE is very good this year! Shen is not the FM of 2004 but not that far back. Coatesville and Collegiate are right there with them and heck the 8th best NE team ran a 13:10ish average (178.7 speed rating) so the NE is just that good. Please except that fact.

If you think Ferris is as good as FM 2004 when they averaged 12:48 and, like manhattan, Jim Danner is one of those huge meets where teams run very well then lets compare it to Manhattan.

Assuming Ferris at 12:48 which is giving them a ton of credit and plugging in the teams from Jim Danner you get:
12:48(USA #1, NW #1)
13:09(USA #21, NW#3)
13:13
13:16.5
13:19
13:15
If you assume these teams would be slightly closer for 4k and subtract 3 seconds that puts the #3 NW team at 13:06. Now this thinking is based on assumption that FM 2004 was not better then Ferris 2006 which I would disagree with. Also it is assuming that these teams would all be closer to Ferris by a full 3 seconds per guy.

In reality as many as 8 teams from the NE are as good as NW #3 based on results from Manhattan. This was a day when all the top NE teams ran great and if you look at last year only FM ran a great team race at Manhattan and they were NE #1. This year the times were run by NE #3-8.

Why is it so hard to believe that the NE is this good? B/c this was suppose to be a "down year for the NE" or "rebuilding year" or etc.... Truth is the NE is stronger then ever and has more depth then any region by far so let's just except the truth and not try to take away from what these young kids have worked so hard for.

How did the NE get this deep? Like I have been predicting since last fall ended, the NE "power programs" would be good like FM, Shen, Warwick and Coatesville and the "second tier" programs like Shaker, Danbury, Smithtown, Collegiate and others had tons of talent coming back so it was clear to anyone being objective that the NE would be very, very deep. Remember that two potentially elite teams, Glastonbury and Brockton, were not at Manhattan and the NE #1-2 were not there also.

Clearly the people involved with the NTN committee did not notice what was going to happen in the NE this year. I not gonna lie the NE is even better then I thought they would be.

[ArcadiaInvite]

Rich the NE is very good this year! Shen is not the FM of 2004 but not that far back. Coatesville and Collegiate are right there with them and heck the 8th best NE team ran a 13:10ish average (178.7 speed rating) so the NE is just that good. Please except that fact.

If you think Ferris is as good as FM 2004 when they averaged 12:48 and, like manhattan, Jim Danner is one of those huge meets where teams run very well then lets compare it to Manhattan.

Assuming Ferris at 12:48 which is giving them a ton of credit and plugging in the teams from Jim Danner you get:
12:48(USA #1, NW #1)
13:09(USA #21, NW#3)
13:13
13:16.5
13:19
13:15
If you assume these teams would be slightly closer for 4k and subtract 3 seconds that puts the #3 NW team at 13:06. Now this thinking is based on assumption that FM 2004 was not better then Ferris 2006 which I would disagree with. Also it is assuming that these teams would all be closer to Ferris by a full 3 seconds per guy.

In reality as many as 8 teams from the NE are as good as NW #3 based on results from Manhattan. This was a day when all the top NE teams ran great and if you look at last year only FM ran a great team race at Manhattan and they were NE #1. This year the times were run by NE #3-8.

Why is it so hard to believe that the NE is this good? B/c this was suppose to be a "down year for the NE" or "rebuilding year" or etc.... Truth is the NE is stronger then ever and has more depth then any region by far so let's just except the truth and not try to take away from what these young kids have worked so hard for.

How did the NE get this deep? Like I have been predicting since last fall ended, the NE "power programs" would be good like FM, Shen, Warwick and Coatesville and the "second tier" programs like Shaker, Danbury, Smithtown, Collegiate and others had tons of talent coming back so it was clear to anyone being objective that the NE would be very, very deep. Remember that two potentially elite teams, Glastonbury and Brockton, were not at Manhattan and the NE #1-2 were not there also.

Clearly the people involved with the NTN committee did not notice what was going to happen in the NE this year. I not gonna lie the NE is even better then I thought they would be.

You did miss the point of the story. EVERYONE is way faster this year, not just NY.

And in regard to your claim about the committee not knowing what was to come, you are incorrect there too. So far, it has been pegged right.

In late summer, we projected the northeast to not be nearly as strong as last year, but the whole region would improve under fierce competition as a result of the short-term (as in a few weeks) parity for most of the teams.

Yes, many Northeast teams ARE running faster than last year... and so are other regions. When someone posted last week not to expect a sub-13:00 average for anyone as that average is too good for these teams, i publicly begged to differ. Additionally , during the first race of the day at Vanny I went on record again with three friends in stating at least one team (my pic was Shen, but that;s no surprise), would crack the 13:00 average.

The 13:00 average would be eclipsed (it was), the record for total number of sub-13's would get absolutely hammered (it did), and the Southeast girls would take first (although I picked Eleanor Roosevelt to do it, not Midlothian).

Check outside the Northeast and you will find a GREAT series of teams all across the land. Yes, Shen was pegged to crack 13:00, but so would have been Collegiate and Coatesville had they been in the race and the weather was not oppressive.

It used to be where us statisticians could compare marks from years past on all-time courses to gauge efforts. In reality, and I know some people will staunchly disagree, that rule of thumb is becomnig less significant in the last year, because the major wave of improvements all over the nation is quickly wiping away records.

In a nutshell, runner performance indexes, speed ratings, race/course conversions, need to be treated with caution. Compare one region's numbers this year with its numbers last year only gives half the story. ... because other regions have some of theose indexes zooming right now.

I loved going to New York this past weekend because of a desire to witness more of the "further breakthroughs" firsthand. New York is becomnig VERY GOOD this year against past years, but when you start talking about at-large berths, etc., you just can't compare NY/NE marks with past marks NY/NE anymore, because all regions are running way faster.

There were no real surprises (other than Midlo beating Roosevelt, in my eyes) this weekend. The girls final recap is on the way.

[sisyphus]

I didn't read the write up because I am familiar enough with journalistm that I am a bit too much of a snob to consider these "articles" anything but a message board post without a "reply" button on the bottom. I take it the North East was somehow insulted though. I ran a Manhattan merge of any team I could find with 5 guys under 14:15 (this keeps the numbers down to more realistic sizes) and then threw Collegiate and Ferris in for comparison. I got Collegiate at 106, Shen 116, Ferris 120, Danbury 144. Ferris AVG was only 12:56 by the way, Collegiate 12:55.

[breng77]

The article did not so much insult the northeast as it, claimed that NTN is improving the level of competition nationwide, especially at large invitationals. So rather than bashing the NE it provided this as the reason the times were so fast. Basically, saying that while the Northeast is as good or better than it has ever been, so is everybody else.

[NYrunner]

The article did not so much insult the northeast as it, claimed that NTN is improving the level of competition nationwide, especially at large invitationals. So rather than bashing the NE it provided this as the reason the times were so fast. Basically, saying that while the Northeast is as good or better than it has ever been, so is everybody else.
He didn't insult the NE? Then why did he feel he had to post this? He went out of his way to down play the results of Manhattan. to tell everyone, not on the message board but on the main page in big, bold letters, why the NE performance that was outstanding and unbelievable, was not all that great.

When the Cali teams run big times does he give us a 20 paragraph explanation of why that is not such a big deal? No he praises the Cali teams for being great. He talked about the huge invites and how they are raising the level of comp and resulting in freakish times(which I totally agree with). @ Jim Danner with almost the entire NW, Ferris was 21 seconds a head of #2 team and if you are very generous and assume Ferris' performance was equal to FM's 12:48 average of 2004, that would put the team that got 2nd(USA #21 Central Valley after JD invite) at Jim Danner around 13:09 and the 3rd place team at about 13:13 at manhattan. So maybe, even though we are seeing fast times all over, we are seeing more in the NE? If times are off the charts everywhere then how is there a :21 second gap at Jim Danner from 1st to 2nd?

Realistically I would estimate Ferris at 12:50-12:52ish on VCP and that would put the USA #21, NW #3 team near 13:12-13:13 range based on their big invite Jim Danner. But again even with Ferris at 12:48 that puts the NE #8 team right with USA #21, NW #3 CV.

Think of it this way:
FM was 23rd in USA after Mcquaid and ran way better at Manhattan and finished 6th in merged results with a Tully speed rating average of 180.

[sisyphus]

Ok,

I started to read it but was stopped by the run on sentence, the missing apostrophe and the complete lack of logic. Like I said, it's a message board post masquerading as an article. It's a perk of being a big dog on dyestat. There is very little evidence that would put Ferris or Royal under 12:50 at Vanny. Comparing GA performances is silly. Midlothian rips a hole in the time-space continuum if you try that. Obviously Murdock, Ahearn and a couple other guys are different over 4k on a cool day than in oppressive heat over 5k. They're improving; like runners are supposed to do. Throwing Hubers in there was silly. What wouldn't be silly is to look at Clovis. One week after Woodward, a very easy course to judge, Clovis came to Vanny. They were pretty consistent at 1.22 times slower at Woodward. Stanford is a faster course than Woodward, 15 seconds for guys is a fair estimate. So, add 15 seconds to Royal or Ferris and divide that by 1.22 and you've got Vanny. No sub 12:50. Sorry. Shen, Royal and Ferris are very close to equal right now. Collegiate is a step ahead. Once again, Midlothian proved the whole world can change in a few weeks so that is not to say that is how NTN will finish. It is just to say that some need to rationalize the performances at Vanny, the rest of us can just enjoy them.

[CaliRunner19]

except there may be an adjustment, especially for Clovis because last weekend they raced on their home course. this weekend they flew all the way across the country to race in a completely new surrounding. what would happen if you adjusted times based on don bosco prep's races at stanford and manhatten? they were under almost the same situation

[sisyphus]

I will check out Don Bosco; didn't realize they doubled. I did factor in that Dave Scudamore raced there when I was in high school and Vanny was a little slower (10 seconds) and the correlation still worked pretty well.

Edit: Still the same within 2 seconds per guy.

[GirlsXC_coach]

Rich, I thought you did a nice job in your coverage. Keep up the good work! It was good to see you again.

[NYrunner]

The SE did awesome and proved they can compete with any region in the country. The fact that Hilton and Toga both ran similar speed ratings to last year's Manhattan race and still finished behind two SE teams shows the SE teams ran great and are top 5 USA teams at this point. Toga and Hilton are probably 7-10 range. With Greenwich and FM in the 20 range. (what do you do with Radnor though who is USA#5?). If Toga is USA #7ish and Hilton 10ish then Radnor would have to drop to like 12-15 range.

I am a huge fan of the NE and try to show how strong they are by using stats (mainly speed rating comparisons) and the NE teams look as strong as they were at Manhattan last year and even more depth in the region. The SE is just that good. ER looked good coming in but from what I was hearing Midlothian was not projected top 5 based on previous performances so they ran great. ER, Hilton and Toga ran to form but Midlothian just stepped it up huge.

I would guess that Midlothian and ER will be 2, 5 in next Harrier (CDM, Yankton and Roosevelt filling the other top 5 spots)
rankings and Toga around 7-8 and Hilton 10-12 range. With Hilton and Toga looking similar to last year based on speed rating or time gaps and most other top rated teams like Yankton and CDM looking similar to last year I could see the rankings being:
CDM
Midlothian
Yankton
Roosevelt
ER
West Valley (with full 5)
Toga
Hilton
Westfield
Iowa City
Radnor
Tatnal

[CornathaCantersmack]

Also, keep in mind that Murdock lost to Georgia's Ben Hubers by 11 seconds just three weeks ago at the Great American Cross-Country Festival. If Hubers was at this meet and beat Murdock by 11 seconds, that would have been a 12:0

As much as I appreciate the great coverage and all this could be the worst logic I've seen in a long time. 5Ks and 4Ks are horses of different colors. And even if you did use that logic you'd have to adjust the times and take 4/5 of 11 seconds. But either way it doesn't work.

And Steve is hard to measure from race to race. His tactics are completely different from last year, he's still adjusting to his new style of racing, new training, and just the climate adjustment from GA.

Too many variables to make a claim like that.

[NYrunner]

I really agree with Rich's claim that NTN has raised the bar. Without a regional qualifier the big invites have almost taken the place of a regional qualifier. The result is many more teams training harder and focusing on big performances in invites. I have been predicting record depth in the NE and NYS since last December and I said then that the reason was the added incentive for teams b/c of NTN and the success they saw other NE teams having there.

Before NTN teams usually trained for State and saw very little comp before that meet (unless they were located in sec. II NYS b/c they always see huge comp). Now teams are focusing on big, mid-season and early season invites to try to impress the committee members. It has no doubt lifted the level of effort in HS cross-country runners. I agree the entire country, on average, is better then the past. In NYS alone, based on speed ratings, we have close to 13 teams in 2006 at or above the level of the #2-3 teams in NYS back in 2003. Since NTN started NYS has seen increased depth each year.

What happened this year? How are teams like Warwick Valley running so fast with a bunch of kids that were jv. last year? One thing that has helped was a mild summer and fall that have given the NE perfect training weather since June. Usually the summer brings high 80s and humid weather but this year we had a mild summer with only a few stretches of extreme heat/humidity and very cool August/September. It has been 60s-70s for the last 12 weeks which is just perfect training conditions.

[breng77]

This convorsation reminds me a little of 2 years ago when FM ran so well at Manhattan, and everyone (except the MW) said no one would beat them, and yet York did. I'm not saying the NE did not run great, or that we are not the deepest region, however, It is not unrealistic to believe that the top teams from other regions could have put up simliar (not better) times for the course.

[got miles?]

sorry Rich but you just lost me as a fan.....Forys and Greunewald and Murdock and Shen running amazing times because of Dyestat and NTN?????

sure NTN is a great idea and causes motivational increase for some....but give 99% of the credit to the GREAT ATHLETES and to Coach Jones, Aris, and Schlentz not to NTN and Dyestat....and be thankful to have a perfect day to run....

amazing performances TG and CF.....

Met homers last night = 4
NTN and Dyestat homer = 1

[themanontherun]

sorry Rich but you just lost me as a fan.....Forys and Greunewald and Murdock and Shen running amazing times because of Dyestat and NTN?????

sure NTN is a great idea and causes motivational increase for some....but give 99% of the credit to the GREAT ATHLETES and to Coach Jones, Aris, and Schlentz not to NTN and Dyestat....and be thankful to have a perfect day to run....

amazing performances TG and CF.....

Met homers last night = 4
NTN and Dyestat homer = 1
I think he was referring to the motivation that it provides to teams, which I agree with. These coaches are doing a great job, and these kids are working their butts off, no doubt at all. But I do believe that NTN motivates teams more and more each season to want to be at their best at these big meets, more so than they would otherwise.

[daman]

You did miss the point of the story. EVERYONE is way faster this year, not just NY.

And in regard to your claim about the committee not knowing what was to come, you are incorrect there too. So far, it has been pegged right.

In late summer, we projected the northeast to not be nearly as strong as last year, but the whole region would improve under fierce competition as a result of the short-term (as in a few weeks) parity for most of the teams.

Yes, many Northeast teams ARE running faster than last year... and so are other regions. When someone posted last week not to expect a sub-13:00 average for anyone as that average is too good for these teams, i publicly begged to differ. Additionally , during the first race of the day at Vanny I went on record again with three friends in stating at least one team (my pic was Shen, but that;s no surprise), would crack the 13:00 average.

The 13:00 average would be eclipsed (it was), the record for total number of sub-13's would get absolutely hammered (it did), and the Southeast girls would take first (although I picked Eleanor Roosevelt to do it, not Midlothian).

Check outside the Northeast and you will find a GREAT series of teams all across the land. Yes, Shen was pegged to crack 13:00, but so would have been Collegiate and Coatesville had they been in the race and the weather was not oppressive.

It used to be where us statisticians could compare marks from years past on all-time courses to gauge efforts. In reality, and I know some people will staunchly disagree, that rule of thumb is becomnig less significant in the last year, because the major wave of improvements all over the nation is quickly wiping away records.

In a nutshell, runner performance indexes, speed ratings, race/course conversions, need to be treated with caution. Compare one region's numbers this year with its numbers last year only gives half the story. ... because other regions have some of theose indexes zooming right now.

I loved going to New York this past weekend because of a desire to witness more of the "further breakthroughs" firsthand. New York is becomnig VERY GOOD this year against past years, but when you start talking about at-large berths, etc., you just can't compare NY/NE marks with past marks NY/NE anymore, because all regions are running way faster.

There were no real surprises (other than Midlo beating Roosevelt, in my eyes) this weekend. The girls final recap is on the way.You "da man", Rich.....I love seeing the NE guys getting all fired up when they don't feel they're getting respected enough. Funny how when Illinois did the same, they were trashed for it and called whiners. I particularly remember King99 bad mouthing our state meet times last year when the whole state ran smoking times there.

[Shen Rules]

As insane as it sounds, exhaustive research on relative data shows that both Ferris and Royal could average 12:50 or better at Van Cortlandt right now, which would shatter the team-time course record.

Oh really?
You mean the record my team set in 2003? 12:58?
FM demolished that in 2004, which I watched in person as well...
12:48.82

If you're gonna use words like 'shatter' in order to explore one or two team's interests over a whole regions history, you should get your facts straight. It's not like this is ancient history...

All in all, I don't completely disagree with what you've said, I think you just started the article all wrong and tried to make your point in the first 2 paragraphs, which if you've taken any kind of journalism classes or had a whole lot of real writing experience you'd know does not make for the most professional of articles... but then again, you do learn something new each day!

[watchout]

As insane as it sounds, exhaustive research on relative data shows that both Ferris and Royal could average 12:50 or better at Van Cortlandt right now, which would shatter the team-time course record.

Oh really?
You mean the record my team set in 2003? 12:58?
FM demolished that in 2004, which I watched in person as well...
12:48.82

If you're gonna use words like 'shatter' in order to explore one or two team's interests over a whole regions history, you should get your facts straight. It's not like this is ancient history...

All in all, I don't completely disagree with what you've said, I think you just started the article all wrong and tried to make your point in the first 2 paragraphs, which if you've taken any kind of journalism classes or had a whole lot of real writing experience you'd know does not make for the most professional of articles... but then again, you do learn something new each day!


Yikes, all this hate on Ferris?

Listen. 2004, Ferris was just as good as FM was. Believe it or not, I believe that that is true.

Look at the NTN meet, and then look at Washington's State meet... Ferris demolished both Eisenhower and Mead, and then at NTN Mead wasn't too far behind FM. Take averages, and you'll find that if you plug Ferris into the meet they finish between York and FM (if I remember right, it's been a couple years now) ...

Now, this Ferris team vs. 2004? I think it's quite a bit better... To think that Ferris COULDN'T crack 12:50 at VCP? is in my opinion ridiculous.

Here is a REALLY simple comparison:

Don Bosco ran a 13:22.9 average at VCP.
Don Bosco ran a 16:41 average at Stanford.

Top teams at Stanford:
Joel Ferris 15:32
Royal 15:34
Mead 15:46
El Toro 15:49
Jesuit CA 15:51
LaSalle OH 15:54
Davis Senior 15:47

now, let's give Don Bosco the benefit of doubt, say that they ran 10 seconds better at VCP. Ferris' 3.05 or whatever time is 60 seconds better. 3.0 miles is 1.2 times longer than 2.5 ... 60/1.2 = 50 seconds.

That suggest Ferris' average time around 12:33.

Sound crazy? I'm sure it does ... but like Rich said, all over the country, runners are blowing records out of the water, the level is being raised dramatically.

Cybulski ran 15:03 at Stanford... Ferris averaged not quite 30 seconds behind him. Again, using 1.2 to change from 3.0x to 2.5 miles, that's 25 seconds. That implies that Cybulski could have ran VCP in the 12:08-12:10 range...

Again, most of you guys won't believe that. But I certaintly think that he is every bit as good as Forys and Gruenewald... and given that that might not have been his best race, let's say we add 10 seconds to that, and it because extremely reasonable.

That gives Ferris an average of 12:40-45.

Again, far from out of question.



Maybe he meant to say 12:40 for Royal and Ferris... because that would beat the record, by a good 5 seconds. And those teams are capable of it.

Think about it... if the 2nd or 3rd best team in the NE can run 12:56, don't you think that the best teams in the nation can run well under 12:50?

[got miles?]

I think he was referring to the motivation that it provides to teams, which I agree with. These coaches are doing a great job, and these kids are working their butts off, no doubt at all. But I do believe that NTN motivates teams more and more each season to want to be at their best at these big meets, more so than they would otherwise.


I agree that NTN provides additional motivation to teams with a chance to get to the show at Portland Meadows....races at Manhattan were definitely of better quality because of the competition to get to NTN , especially girls Eastern States....don't get me wrong, I love the NTN thing....but Rich just seemed so dismissive of these great performances by these great athletes and great coaches....sure anyone that woke up that morning downstate and went for a run knew that times would be real fast at Vanny.....but Forys and Greunewald and Murdock were still unbelievable...and Shen was REAL good....their performances should be lauded rather than rationalized by the "great new heights that Dyestat and NTN are bringing to all athletes around the country"....paraphrased...I'm quite sure that many are shaking their heads after reading that article....

[daman]

I agree that NTN provides additional motivation to teams with a chance to get to the show at Portland Meadows....races at Manhattan were definitely of better quality because of the competition to get to NTN , especially girls Eastern States....don't get me wrong, I love the NTN thing....but Rich just seemed so dismissive of these great performances by these great athletes and great coaches....sure anyone that woke up that morning downstate and went for a run knew that times would be real fast at Vanny.....but Forys and Greunewald and Murdock were still unbelievable...and Shen was REAL good....their performances should be lauded rather than rationalized by the "great new heights that Dyestat and NTN are bringing to all athletes around the country"....paraphrased...I'm quite sure that many are shaking their heads after reading that article....But this meet alone doesn't qualify anyone for anything. You don't qualify for NTN based on one meet (or at least you shouldn't) and you need to get through regionals for FL.

This was a great meeting, but the season is far from over and other regions may have impressive results too. Manhattan is not the end-all of hs school cross country, except in the NE.

[watchout]

using what I have on York so far... (this is just for fun :)) this is what York would have probably ran at Manhattan.

Fry 12:26.7
Achtein 12:28.4
Kuczwara 12:46.7
M.Sulkin 12:58.4
D'Ambrosio 13:02.5*

*D'Ambrosio is one of 3 potential #5 guys for York.

York's estimated team average: 12:44.6

and that's from a team that is right around top-5 in the nation... not top-2, but right with the #3-7 teams.

Better than FM 2004.

FYI, for Illinois' 2nd teir teams... Palatine is about 20 seconds/man behind York, Sandburg and Schaumburg within 25. That puts Illinois' #2-4 teams all among the Northeast's #5-10 teams.

And they aren't even top-4 in the Midwest.

The nation is deep... it's not just Northeast seeing this kind of success.

Another case: Bob Firman. Course record was set last year by the NTN#11 finisher (so it wasn't a great CR, but it was still pretty good... just off FLN-caliber)
Course record was 15:40.31 ... top 2 teams from that meet ran within 30-35 seconds... that's an average of 30 seconds per man for these teams... and for the winner of the meet, that wasn't even that good of a race for them! think about it. That's like running an average within 25 seconds of a FLN-caliber runner at Manhattan ... a 12:55-13:00-ish average. In a losing effort. And that's the #4/5/6 NW type team. The #4/5/6 CA type team. The #3/4/5/6 MW type team. All near Shenendehowa.

[got miles?]

using what I have on York so far... (this is just for fun :)) this is what York would have probably ran at Manhattan.

Fry 12:26.7
Achtein 12:28.4
Kuczwara 12:46.7
M.Sulkin 12:58.4
D'Ambrosio 13:02.5*

*D'Ambrosio is one of 3 potential #5 guys for York.

York's estimated team average: 12:44.6

.

can one of the Jaspers take a run up Cemetary Hill tomorrow....because I think the Van Cortlandt's just turned over in their graves:)

[Kalaby]

can one of the Jaspers take a run up Cemetary Hill tomorrow....because I think the Van Cortlandt's just turned over in their graves:)

LOL!

Signed Kalaby aka "A Former Jasper"

[watchout]

can one of the Jaspers take a run up Cemetary Hill tomorrow....because I think the Van Cortlandt's just turned over in their graves:)

why?

York was better than FM in 2004... this year's team is close to York 2004, if not a little better... you would think that this York team would therefore be able to run better than FM 2004 did... and that's only by 4 seconds.

You'll see at NTN this year. If New York doesn't place a team in the top-5, maybe then you'll start agreeing that that is all certaintly possible.

And just think... Collegiate/Shen has an advantage there, as Dexter MI and Potosi MO probably won't be able to go, despite being incredible teams.

And Ferris doesn't really run NTN hard, either...

[Shen Rules]

Ever think that maybe FM 04 was just incredible at Manhattan? Maybe that might be one of the best performances of ANY team EVER?
Because guess what... you say York was 'better'.... but then again the next year FM was pretty dominant too... but saratoga was clearly better by the end of the year.... and york finished behind them too.... Until everyone races on manattan im still sticking to what I mean when I say a race is a race and nothing can simulate that. Speed ratings are still nothing to me.



Anyways, that wasn't my point at all... my point was that Rich is throwing claims around about teams using incorrect numbers, which is pretty funny I think considering he spent the whole weekend probably with some of the most knowledgable people in the sport in NYS.
SMALL point by me... BIG claim by rich.
NOT a knock on Ferris at all...
as a matter of fact, I have no idea how amazing or not amazing they are at all.

[watchout]

Ever think that maybe FM 04 was just incredible at Manhattan? Maybe that might be one of the best performances of ANY team EVER?
Because guess what... you say York was 'better'.... but then again the next year FM was pretty dominant too... but saratoga was clearly better by the end of the year.... and york finished behind them too.... Until everyone races on manattan im still sticking to what I mean when I say a race is a race and nothing can simulate that. Speed ratings are still nothing to me.



Anyways, that wasn't my point at all... my point was that Rich is throwing claims around about teams using incorrect numbers, which is pretty funny I think considering he spent the whole weekend probably with some of the most knowledgable people in the sport in NYS.
SMALL point by me... BIG claim by rich.
NOT a knock on Ferris at all...
as a matter of fact, I have no idea how amazing or not amazing they are at all.


It's been widely accepted, I believe, that while FM had a SLIGHTLY worse day at NTN ... it wasn't nearly enough to have changed the outcome.

and York's #3 runner had a horrible day at NTN due to injury/sickness

so....... yeah. York > FM.

about to post my Top 35 teams' suggested averages at Manhattan btw... up in a few minutes.

[daman]

Ever think that maybe FM 04 was just incredible at Manhattan? Maybe that might be one of the best performances of ANY team EVER?
Because guess what... you say York was 'better'.... but then again the next year FM was pretty dominant too... but saratoga was clearly better by the end of the year.... and york finished behind them too.... Until everyone races on manattan im still sticking to what I mean when I say a race is a race and nothing can simulate that. Speed ratings are still nothing to me.Saratoga wasn't clearly better....they beat York based on the 4th runner (Fry) only. York beat FM last year too, with Fry not having a real good race. The point is there are teams out there who can run fast or faster on that course, they just haven't run there.



as a matter of fact, I have no idea how amazing or not amazing they are at all.And that wouldn't be unexpected. By the same token, non-NE people feel the same about Manhattan. Those times must be good because you're all excited about them, but it doesn't mean other areas of the country should be in awe....Jager, Turner, Chenoweth, Heineking, Aprill from the MW could probably run great there as well.

[xcrunna]

Fry 12:26.7
Achtein 12:28.4
Kuczwara 12:46.7
M.Sulkin 12:58.4
D'Ambrosio 13:02.5*

*D'Ambrosio is one of 3 potential #5 guys for York.


What are Fry and Achtein's track times? Just asking out of curiosity.

[watchout]

What are Fry and Achtein's track times? Just asking out of curiosity.

York is notorious for being extremely better in XC than in track... only exceptions I've heard mentioned are MacNamara (9:00ish as a junior) and the Dettmans (9:00-9:10 as seniors)

Fry ran 4:20y
Achtein ran 9:30ish

they've been running with 9:15ish guys so far this year.


national list will have to wait a bit... I'm getting distracted by the pizza that was put infront of me.

But here is the top-5: (and York is #6)
US#1 Joel Ferris WA: 12:41.3 average
Hickerson 1221.7
Olsen 1235.0
Quackenbush 1240.9
Laplante 1253.4
Maloney 1255.9

US#2 Dexter MI: 12:43.0 average
Aprill 1218.4
Jackson 1243.4
Bishop 1247.5
Steavenson 1250.0
Neely 1255.9


US#3 Potosi MO: 12:42.2 average
Thebeau 1220.0
Mathis 1221.7
Swearingen 1244.2
****eman 1300.9
Forbes 1304.2


US#4 Willmar MN: 12:45.9 average
Awale 1236.7
Adeys 1236.7
Bedel 1242.5
Hassan 1250.0
Yusuf 1303.4

US#5 Royal CA: 12:44.9 average
Cybulski 1219.2
Andrews 1233.4
Reichl 1251.7
Benson 1257.5
Routh 1302.5

[xcrunna]

York is notorious for being extremely better in XC than in track... only exceptions I've heard mentioned are MacNamara (9:00ish as a junior) and the Dettmans (9:00-9:10 as seniors)

Fry ran 4:20y
Achtein ran 9:30ish

Still, I think there's no way that a 4:20y guy and a 930ish guy are running that fast at VCP. Another exception to your York rule is Kuczwara(sp.). I can't see guys with PR's that slow(in relative terms) running that fast. Are they on the level of Springer(who ran that time)? I don't think just because it's a cross course, those guys can handle 9:05y guys. Partially lost in the fact that there were so many fast times was that nearly EVERY competitor running them had monster Pr's.
EDIT: I'm open to counter-examples guys who were sub 12:40(this year or in prior year) and had slow Pr's etc.

[run2win]

York is notorious for being extremely better in XC than in track... only exceptions I've heard mentioned are MacNamara (9:00ish as a junior) and the Dettmans (9:00-9:10 as seniors)



sage?

[Derrick08]

Still, I think there's no way that a 4:20y guy and a 930ish guy are running that fast at VCP. Another exception to your York rule is Kuczwara(sp.). I can't see guys with PR's that slow(in relative terms) running that fast. Are they on the level of Springer(who ran that time)? I don't think just because it's a cross course, those guys can handle 9:05y guys. Partially lost in the fact that there were so many fast times was that nearly EVERY competitor running them had monster Pr's.
EDIT: I'm open to counter-examples guys who were sub 12:40(this year or in prior year) and had slow Pr's etc.

Well the two did come within about a second or two of Dan Chenoweth, who besides having a great XC season, ran 9:12y in track. Another thing to note on the pair is that they didn't get to run the 3200/1600 with really good competition all year long.

[DetroiterInIL]

using what I have on York so far... (this is just for fun :)) this is what York would have probably ran at Manhattan.

Fry 12:26.7
Achtein 12:28.4
Kuczwara 12:46.7
M.Sulkin 12:58.4
D'Ambrosio 13:02.5*

*D'Ambrosio is one of 3 potential #5 guys for York.

York's estimated team average: 12:44.6

and that's from a team that is right around top-5 in the nation... not top-2, but right with the #3-7 teams.

Better than FM 2004.

FYI, for Illinois' 2nd teir teams... Palatine is about 20 seconds/man behind York, Sandburg and Schaumburg within 25. That puts Illinois' #2-4 teams all among the Northeast's #5-10 teams.


Oh God; an non-Illinoisan talking about the strength of Illinois! I'm still in shock. Pretty soon he'll be saying the NTN committee is wrong and Palatine should have gone in 2004, or maybe even 2005.....

Although, in fairness, in IL we think York can be top by the end of the season; they always save the best for last.

[daman]

I got some Meylan speed ratings for York:

PEORIA nvitational - September 30, 2006
1. Tom Achtien Elmhurst York 14:41 188.0 188
2. Mike Fry Elmhurst York 14:49 185.3 185
3. Nick Kuczwara Elmhurst York 14:51 184.7 185
6. Mark Sulkin Elmhurst York 15:06 179.7 180
8. Kevin Spicer Elmhurst York 15:14 177.0 177
22. Alan D'Ambrogio Elmhurst York 15:26 173.0 173
36. Brian Spisiak Elmhurst York 15:41 168.0 168

Palatine Invitational September 23, 2006 - 3.0 miles
2 Michael Fry (Sr) York 14:17.9 191.7 192
3 Tom Achtien (Jr) York 14:19.9 191.0 191
8 Nick Kuczwara (Sr) York 14:41.8 183.7 184
14 Mark Sulkin (Sr) York 14:55.1 179.3 179
22 Kevin Spicer (Sr) York 15:08.9 174.7 175
32 Mark Talbot (Jr) York 15:20.9 170.7 171
83 Rojin Thomas (Jr) York 16:04.4 156.2 156

[watchout]

Still, I think there's no way that a 4:20y guy and a 930ish guy are running that fast at VCP. Another exception to your York rule is Kuczwara(sp.). I can't see guys with PR's that slow(in relative terms) running that fast. Are they on the level of Springer(who ran that time)? I don't think just because it's a cross course, those guys can handle 9:05y guys. Partially lost in the fact that there were so many fast times was that nearly EVERY competitor running them had monster Pr's.

well... it's only 5 minute pace for the race...

and they had 185-190 speed ratings last year. It's not like they were slouches last year... you would think that they would be faster this year. say low 190s. 190.0 at Manhattan this year was 12:36.0

York speedratings from this year (via daman and Meylan):

Palatine Invitational September 23, 2006 - 3.0 miles
2 Michael Fry (Sr) York 14:17.9 191.7 192
3 Tom Achtien (Jr) York 14:19.9 191.0 191

(these are the marks I got their PRs from as well)

the times I suggested would have been speed ratings of 193.1 and 192.6 ... only 4.2 seconds faster than Meylan estimated.

[xcrunna]

Well the two did come within about a second or two of Dan Chenoweth, who besides having a great XC season, ran 9:12y in track. Another thing to note on the pair is that they didn't get to run the 3200/1600 with really good competition all year long.
The latter point of that seems to me to be pretty hard to believe. Again, if you can find someone who hit sub 12:40 with PR's on the same wavelength as these guys we'll see.

[DetroiterInIL]

I'm not sure how; but York runners also seem to make their big improvement during the summer. They run an ungodly amount of miles and guys end up running a LOT better for XC than for track. There's a huge focus and camaraderie around it.

I think Forys and Gruenewald are 2 of the best runners in the country; but I really don't think Achtein/Fry are all that far behind. And... York is running 100+ miles/wk now with a peak planned for the state meet. York continues to amaze me how they do this year in and year out.

At least Rich mentions the NE in his report. I can't think the last time he's commented on the MW either in a report or on the MW boards or anywhere. I'd challenge anyone to find any public attention given to the MW by Rich this year since the pre-season. (Except a quick response to my "Dexter should be in the NTN meet" comment)

[CaliRunner19]

Clovis' Jonathan Peterson went 4:17.99 and 9:25.95 for 1600/3200 last spring and ran 12:42 at Manhattan

[daman]

The latter point of that seems to me to be pretty hard to believe. Again, if you can find someone who hit sub 12:40 with PR's on the same wavelength as these guys we'll see.You can only enter 2 runners per event in track. Well, they had one Dettman (9:02) and Montgomery (9:11) in the 3200 and then both Dettmans (4:11y and 4:13) in the 1600 in the big meets. So guys who run 4:20/9:30 don't get a lot of chances to run in the big meets.

[xcrunna]

You can only enter 2 runners per event in track. Well, they had one Dettman (9:02) and Montgomery (9:11) in the 3200 and then both Dettmans (4:11y and 4:13) in the 1600 in the big meets. So guys who run 4:20/9:30 don't get a lot of chances to run in the big meets.
Thanks for the info. Didn't they run on the 4x1 mile team at nat'ls?

[watchout]

At least Rich mentions the NE in his report. I can't think the last time he's commented on the MW either in a report or on the MW boards or anywhere. I'd challenge anyone to find any public attention given to the MW by Rich this year since the pre-season. (Except a quick response to my "Dexter should be in the NTN meet" comment)

Solution: Start a "Rich to Detweiller!" Paypal account.

That's how ya do it :cool:

[DetroiterInIL]

Solution: Start a "Rich to Detweiller!" Paypal account.

That's how ya do it :cool:

Nah... we've exhausted the funds on you. ;) We'll just have to bombard him with e-mails about ignoring the MW.

[watchout]

Thanks for the info. Didn't they run on the 4x1 mile team at nat'ls?

you mean the same type of thing where King (who only ran 4:23ish? by the way) ran on? and then ran sub-12:40 at Manhattan? :D

[daman]

Solution: Start a "Rich to Detweiller!" Paypal account.

That's how ya do it :cool:He posted somewhere that he's coming to Detweiller this year.

[watchout]

He posted somewhere that he's coming to Detweiller this year.

Ah, sweet deal.

There ya go, Detrioter. You got Rich's attention!

[daman]

Thanks for the info. Didn't they run on the 4x1 mile team at nat'ls?They ran their B team in the 4x1 and ran 17:57. Seeing as 4:20 per man, that's 17:20...it's not easy to run fast splits in a 4x1.

[DetroiterInIL]

Yeah... well I'm surprised Daman's posting here. From the IL boards; the Bears just took the lead. Can't figure out what that has to do with XC; but I guess they figure Jager is a running back or something.... I figured Daman would be glued to the set.

[xcrunna]

you mean the same type of thing where King (who only ran 4:23ish? by the way) ran on? and then ran sub-12:40 at Manhattan? :D
Haha touche. If Achtien led off for York, though(as the results indicate), that still was a great opportunity to PR, and they had company in the race as they finished in the middle of the pack.
EDIT: I don't know I just don't see guys with those PR's running sub 12:30. I see now there're reasons their Pr's aren't better, but still Papazian (9:19) and the Clovis kid from this year are your best examples, and they still had superior times.

[watchout]

Yeah... well I'm surprised Daman's posting here. From the IL boards; the Bears just took the lead. Can't figure out what that has to do with XC; but I guess they figure Jager is a running back or something.... I figured Daman would be glued to the set.

it's about time... I don't see how they could make it so close to Arizona though, really.

Seahawks > Bears? ;) (we both know that they are both >> the Lions)

ok, back to compiling that list...

[daman]

Haha touche. If Achtien led off for York, though(as the results indicate), that still was a great opportunity to PR, and they had company in the race as they finished in the middle of the pack.
EDIT: I don't know I just don't see guys with those PR's running sub 12:30. I see now there're reasons their Pr's aren't better, but still Papazian (9:19) and the Clovis kid from this year are your best examples, and they still had superior times.How do you know he didn't? Maybe the other guys brought their time up with bad races.

[greenman]

Haha touche. If Achtien led off for York, though(as the results indicate), that still was a great opportunity to PR, and they had company in the race as they finished in the middle of the pack.
EDIT: I don't know I just don't see guys with those PR's running sub 12:30. I see now there're reasons their Pr's aren't better, but still Papazian (9:19) and the Clovis kid from this year are your best examples, and they still had superior times.Achtien ran 4:20 as a soph last spring. If you also remember, he took 21st at NTN last year, and has already run as fast at Detweiller as he ran at state last year (14:41). Fry ran 14:40 last year.

Fry ran York's annual 1600 time trial in early September in 4:15. The next day at the team intrasquad race, he and Achtien ran the course just a few seconds slower than the Dettmans ran last year.

They certainly are better runners this year than last year, how they compare nationally we'll have to see. York may not even be #1 in their region.

[xcrunna]

How do you know he didn't?
The fact that according to race reports M-H had the lead after one leg with a time of 4:21.

[watchout]

finished the top-35 teams: http://dyestat.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1038882#post1038882

[Kalaby]

well... it's only 5 minute pace for the race...

Pretty surprised at that comment coming from you. A sub 12:30 at VCP may not sound difficult, but history has proven otherwise (notwithstanding this year's blitz on the record books). Plenty of awesome runners on the older course and also (probably to a lesser extent) on the resurfaced course, have failed to break 12:30.

[watchout]

Pretty surprised at that comment coming from you. A sub 12:30 at VCP may not sound difficult, but history has proven otherwise (notwithstanding this year's blitz on the record books). Plenty of awesome runners on the older course and also (probably to a lesser extent) on the resurfaced course, have failed to break 12:30.

it isn't easy, but for guys that can run at least 4:20, that's 40 seconds slower than their mile pr... and when you think that these guys are better in cross than in track, and that they've no doubt gotten better since (as they are now running alongside 9:1-low runners), runners that can handle 4:35 on a flat surface for two miles, a pace close to 5:00 for 2.5 miles doesn't seem out of the question.

Yes, 5:00 on VCP is flying. ABSOLUTELY flying. And I normally wouldn't say it, because VCP seems so slow/challenging, traditionally, compared to many other courses. But how many guys that run 9:10 the spring before are not able to handle a pace CLOSE to 12:30? I would think that most of them could...

(I'll do a quick research on that stat, but it will only include recent years... you'll have to fill in the question for traditional purposes on the course)




2004:
Papazian and Sheridan ran 12:30ish.

2003:
Gurzeler and Buchanan ran 12:37.

Papazian only ran 9:16 in 2004.
Sheridan ran ???

Gurzeler ran 4:23?
Buchanan ran 9:20s?

[Kalaby]

it isn't easy, but for guys that can run at least 4:20, that's 40 seconds slower than their mile pr... and when you think that these guys are better in cross than in track, and that they've no doubt gotten better since (as they are now running alongside 9:1-low runners), runners that can handle 4:35 on a flat surface for two miles, a pace close to 5:00 for 2.5 miles doesn't seem out of the question.

Yes, 5:00 on VCP is flying. ABSOLUTELY flying. And I normally wouldn't say it, because VCP seems so slow/challenging, traditionally, compared to many other courses. But how many guys that run 9:10-9:15 the spring before are not able to handle a pace CLOSE to 12:30? I would think that most of them could...

(I'll do a quick research on that stat, but it will only include recent years... you'll have to fill in the question for traditional purposes on the course)

It's all relative, as different guys handle the course differently. Gregorek ran there a lot (on the admittedly slower course prior to resurfacing) and has several performances between 12:31 (his PR) and 12:35. He went on to run 4:05.4 and 8:50.7 (uncontested in both cases) for the full mile & deuce the following spring and is generally regarded as one of the best XC guys in Northeast history. There are guys that weren't as good as him (but still very good) that ran a bit faster at VCP for the 2.5 miles. It's a mixed bag and you really don't know how well somebody will run there until they actually run there. Now in terms of Saturday's meet, you did have optimal conditions, so I agree that guys with current 9:15-9:20 PRs would've had the potential to run very fast there, but very fast could be somewhere in the 12:30s or even 12:40s, - it's just really hard to say with any confidence that all guys would've run optimally though. No doubt though that most of the top guys from York and elsewhere in the country would've run very fast on Saturday as most top guys had career type days, or so it would seem.

[watchout]

It's all relative, as different guys handle the course differently. Gregorek ran there a lot (on the admittedly slower course prior to resurfacing) and has several performances between 12:31 (his PR) and 12:35. He went on to run 4:05.4 and 8:50.7 (uncontested in both cases) for the full mile & deuce the following spring and is generally regarded as one of the best XC guys in Northeast history. There are guys that weren't as good as him (but still very good) that ran a bit faster at VCP for the 2.5 miles. It's a mixed bag and you really don't know how well somebody will run there until they actually run there. Now in terms of Saturday's meet, you did have optimal conditions, so I agree that guys with current 9:15-9:20 PRs would've had the potential to run very fast there, but very fast could be somewhere in the 12:30s or even 12:40s, - it's just really hard to say with any confidence that all guys would've run optimally though. No doubt though that most of the top guys from York and elsewhere in the country would've run very fast on Saturday as most top guys had career type days, or so it would seem.

True, it is very hard to say that all guys would run optimally, and the thing is... that's not going to happen except in very rare occasions - this is highlighted in relays :D but I'll skip that and keep with the point.

All the numbers I've spit out are suggesting that guys run as good as their best races so far. So that's 12:20s-12:40s for all of these guys currently capable of running, say, 4:15's and 9:10's. (Fry ran 4:15 back in September and is suggested at 14:2-high, Ferris' 9:17 spring guy is suggested to run a 12:4-low, Mead's 9:18 spring guy suggested at 12:3-low, etc.)

So that's not too far off what you are conceding... if a 9:15-9:20 type guy can run 12:30s on a day that matches his best of the season.. in conditions like were on Saturday... then the only guys off that I'm suggesting are the ones that seemingly made huge leaps forward this summer, as all the others seem to be right about where they should have been. based on best performances and on an excellent day for running.

The numbers themselves are hard to swallow, no doubt... the shear # of runners that ran sub-13 at VCP is crazy, but to think of all the runners that could have done it had they been there...

could you imagine all the best in the land running at VCP 2.5 mile course on the same day? I cannot fathom how many runners would have broken 13 on that day... 46 from those select NE teams alone. Wow. That number jumps to nearly 150 with just adding California? (Thomas ran 12:21, and just at Clovis Invite there were 23 others within 40 seconds of him... including 3 Royal guys)

It just seems like so many runners across the nation are running so well this year. A guy smashed a record in Idaho, at Bob Firman Invite, by over 25 seconds... the record was held by Adam McDonald, a 9:20 guy at altitude, and that kid has basically no shot at going to Footlocker this year. Even though he's 25 seconds faster than a guy who ran 9:20 at 5k' altitude (good for a 9:10 or just under) Almost every meet you look at, there is a new record. Danner just missed, by I think less than 4 seconds... Firman's got smashed, Woodbridge's got smashed, Manhattan's got smashed, several in Ohio, several in Illinois, whatever Forys has smashed... records in Texas have been going down... lots and lots of records in New Mexico going down (and not just by Tebo)... even locally for me, down in lowly 2A and 3A Washington, I've witnessed 2 new course records and 1 got tied... and that's in only 5 meets I've gone to.

this year is just crazy. Usually there are a few records broken every year... or at least that's how it's been for the last couple years... but it seems like almost 40% or more of the meets in the nation, runners and teams are either top-3 all-time, or are absolutely crushing the records. it's just insane.

but I don't know when the last time was so many runners returning with such credintials..... it'll take a 4:15/9:10 type runner to be top-30 at FLW this year. And that might not even do the trick! And it will probably take a 9:15 type performance to see top-20 at FLNE, if not better. FLMW? You gotta be at least 9:10 to break top 20.

sorry, I'm tired, and I'm rambling on about nothing now...

[xcrunna]

Watchout, I'm not so sure. Let's first see a guy who doesn't have sub 9:10y or 4:12y credentials run below 12:30 before we can concede that dozens of guys can do it without those credentials. Until then, maybe a little more conservative estimates might suffice. Unless, the NE across the board is in general much better at track than XC for the last 40 or so years it should've happened at least once by now. Do I think Ferris/York/Dexter could run around the same average as FM of 2004? Yeah probably, it's a tremendous year for Cross Country, but can all their #1's run 12:20s or 12:30s? Not so much IMO.

[Kalaby]

No doubt that kids continue to improve upon even the great stuff we've been seeing in the last 6-8 years or so. For me, I want to see how Manhattan's performances translate into other performances in the next few weeks on other well known courses around here. Obviously the weather conditions and atmosphere of Manhattan will be nearly impossible to replicate, but I'd still expect to see some great things based on what happened on Saturday. If nobody or very few come near those performances for the remainder of the season, I'd have to chalk it up to the stars simply aligning perfectly on Saturday leading to those incredible performances in terms of the guys up front as well as the depth of quality performances with all of those sub 13s. It will be interesting to see what transpires the rest of the season.

[watchout]

Watchout, I'm not so sure. Let's first see a guy who doesn't have sub 9:10y or 4:12y credentials run below 12:30 before we can concede that dozens of guys can do it without those credentials. Until then, maybe a little more conservative estimates might suffice. Unless, the NE across the board is in general much better at track than XC for the last 40 or so years it should've happened at least once by now. Do I think Ferris/York/Dexter could run around the same average as FM of 2004? Yeah probably, it's a tremendous year for Cross Country, but can all their #1's run 12:20s or 12:30s? Not so much IMO.


4 Adam Lenz Crested Butte 12:26.1

As far as I know, Adam Lenz has never broken 9:20 or 4:19 (he was in Indiana before moving to Colorado this summer and was not on the leaderboard list, which is very well kept on hoosierauthority.com, and the list goes to 4:18.98 and 9:20.67)

So there's one.. probably not another.

But if you want to say that no 9:10y/4:14y guy could run 12:30 at VCP...

Here is a list of guys from just NTN who could run a 192, or within fractions of it, last year:

1 Kenny Klotz 06 Cent Catholic XC 16:25.8 1 201.4 201
2 Jack Bolas 06 Chapel Hill XC 16:29.4 2 200.2 200
3 Noah Shannon 06 Fort Collins XC 16:34.3 3 198.6 199
4 Thomas Gruenewald 07 Manlius XC Club 16:47.9 4 194.0 194
5 Taylor Nepon 07 Mead XC Club 16:53.1 5 192.3 192
6 DeSean Turner 07 Warren XC Club 16:53.6 6 192.1 192
7 Robert Cosby 06 Spokane XC Club 16:54.8 7 191.7 192

What they did the previous years?

Klotz and Bolas certaintly check out (9:0-low and 4:08 meters)
Shannon: not sub-4:18 or sub-9:20, although he was at altitude.
Gruenewald: 9:21.97 and 4:25.70 PR's going into the season... again, doesn't cut it
Nepon: PR's of around 4:30 and 9:40 if I remember right.
Turner: was also not under 4:18 or 9:20.
Cosby: was a low-4:20's/mid-9:20's guy, but not on that level.

Yet they all ran Speed Ratings close to what 12:30 at Manhattan this year was...

So that's 1 direct runner who did, indeed, run 12:30 or better without even 4:19/9:20 credintials... and 5 more that also didn't match up with the given speed ratings - from just one race.

[Scotty]

What is certain is that Saturday was a VERY fast day at Vanny. It's also safe to say that the large majority of kids throughout the country also would have run very fast had they been there. However, one cannot get into specific times/avgs with anything close to certainty. Far too many variables including quality of performance (i.e "off day") and familiarity with the course.

Certainly little doubt that teams like Ferris and York would have blitzed the course (many others did that day). Their exact avgs, had they run, is anyone's guess. Having been on and around the course for 27yrs, I can confirm that the 12:48.8 record avg is a mind boggling figure (5sec better than the next best ever). Don't know if/when I will see that mark taken down.

[watchout]

No doubt that kids continue to improve upon even the great stuff we've been seeing in the last 6-8 years or so. For me, I want to see how Manhattan's performances translate into other performances in the next few weeks on other well known courses around here. Obviously the weather conditions and atmosphere of Manhattan will be nearly impossible to replicate, but I'd still expect to see some great things based on what happened on Saturday. If nobody or very few come near those performances for the remainder of the season, I'd have to chalk it up to the stars simply aligning perfectly on Saturday leading to those incredible performances in terms of the guys up front as well as the depth of quality performances with all of those sub 13s. It will be interesting to see what transpires the rest of the season.

Well said... I'm just not one to believe in coincidence and "the stars aligning" :)

the rest of the season should be very intruiging to see how it turns out.

[watchout]

What is certain is that Saturday was a VERY fast day at Vanny. It's also safe to say that the large majority of kids throughout the country also would have run very fast had they been there. However, one cannot get into specific times/avgs with anything close to certainty. Far too many variables including quality of performance (i.e "off day") and familiarity with the course.

Certainly little doubt that teams like Ferris and York would have blitzed the course (many others did that day). Their exact avgs, had they run, is anyone's guess. Having been on and around the course for 27yrs, I can confirm that the 12:48.8 record avg is a mind boggling figure (5sec better than the next best ever). Don't know if/when I will see that mark taken down.
You are right, without a doubt. That's why I've been saying "general indication", because it's not an exact science at all.

The #'s are simply to give you an idea of how things stand, and how things could have been.

[xcrunna]

4 Adam Lenz Crested Butte 12:26.1

As far as I know, Adam Lenz has never broken 9:20 or 4:19 (he was in Indiana before moving to Colorado this summer and was not on the leaderboard list, which is very well kept on hoosierauthority.com, and the list goes to 4:18.98 and 9:20.67)

So there's one.. probably not another.

But if you want to say that no 9:10y/4:14y guy could run 12:30 at VCP...

Here is a list of guys from just NTN who could run a 192, or within fractions of it, last year:

1 Kenny Klotz 06 Cent Catholic XC 16:25.8 1 201.4 201
2 Jack Bolas 06 Chapel Hill XC 16:29.4 2 200.2 200
3 Noah Shannon 06 Fort Collins XC 16:34.3 3 198.6 199
4 Thomas Gruenewald 07 Manlius XC Club 16:47.9 4 194.0 194
5 Taylor Nepon 07 Mead XC Club 16:53.1 5 192.3 192
6 DeSean Turner 07 Warren XC Club 16:53.6 6 192.1 192
7 Robert Cosby 06 Spokane XC Club 16:54.8 7 191.7 192

What they did the previous years?

Klotz and Bolas certaintly check out (9:0-low and 4:08 meters)
Shannon: not sub-4:18 or sub-9:20, although he was at altitude.
Gruenewald: 9:21.97 and 4:25.70 PR's going into the season... again, doesn't cut it
Nepon: PR's of around 4:30 and 9:40 if I remember right.
Turner: was also not under 4:18 or 9:20.
Cosby: was a low-4:20's/mid-9:20's guy, but not on that level.

Yet they all ran Speed Ratings close to what 12:30 at Manhattan this year was...

So that's 1 direct runner who did, indeed, run 12:30 or better without even 4:19/9:20 credintials... and 5 more that also didn't match up with the given speed ratings - from just one race.
According to Steveu Lenz was battling sickness and injury(implying he may've missed all of track), nice try, though. Still, waiting on an example. Speed Ratings don't always tell the whole story course-to-course.

[Scotty]

You are right, without a doubt. That's why I've been saying "general indication", because it's not an exact science at all.

The #'s are simply to give you an idea of how things stand, and how things could have been.

Watchout, you're a good man..........I don't care what Kalaby says about you.;)

[BMeylan]

No doubt that kids continue to improve upon even the great stuff we've been seeing in the last 6-8 years or so. For me, I want to see how Manhattan's performances translate into other performances in the next few weeks on other well known courses around here. Obviously the weather conditions and atmosphere of Manhattan will be nearly impossible to replicate, but I'd still expect to see some great things based on what happened on Saturday. If nobody or very few come near those performances for the remainder of the season, I'd have to chalk it up to the stars simply aligning perfectly on Saturday leading to those incredible performances in terms of the guys up front as well as the depth of quality performances with all of those sub 13s. It will be interesting to see what transpires the rest of the season.
I agree!

I could be completely wrong, but I think (to some extent) that the Manhattan Invite has turned into a "track meet" of sorts ... not unlike the Warwick Fast Times track meet where runners come just to run fast times. Clearly Gruenewald, Forys and others were out to break records ... Teams were trying to run fast to yield impressive team averages (and did) ... The great running conditions combined with great competition were simply conducive to running times that are "seemingly" fast relative to prior years.

[tudman]

Rich Gonzalez is a transparent guy. He's always had a "west" agenda, but more precisely a California agenda. He can deny it all he wants but his words and decisions speak for themselves. The most glaring was to deny Bay Shore a spot at NTN a few years ago to an inferior team from out his way. He was taken to task about it and tried to defer much of the responsibility elsewhere. The trouble is, the ones he said had a bigger say pointed right back at him. The guy in charge of the meet (Josh something), agreed with the accusation enough to give Bay Shore lots of goodies that they should have gotten if they went to the meet.
To downplay Manhattan 06, shows either complete ignorance or proof positive that he's setting things up for his NTN picks. I'm betting on the latter...

[Kalaby]

Watchout, you're a good man..........I don't care what Kalaby says about you.;)

Watchout...never ever trust a Farrell guy since they are always "lion" - sorry for the awful pun guys! :D

Bill - agree completely with your assessment. I'm really interested to see what happens at other meets, like Feds, FLNE, NJ MOC and some races at Sunken Meadow to get some idea as to how to properly categorize what we saw at Manhattan. Do we see 3 or 4 kids under 15:25 at FLNE, bunches of kids under 16 at Holmdel and Bowdoin, etc. or do we see things a bit more in line with what we are accustomed to seeing at those venues?

[watchout]

According to Steveu Lenz was battling sickness and injury(implying he may've missed all of track), nice try, though. Still, waiting on an example. Speed Ratings don't always tell the whole story course-to-course.

What? I gave an example of a runner that hadn't run the times you listed... I just did whatcha want!


Watchout, you're a good man..........I don't care what Kalaby says about you.;)


haha, thanks I try

[xcrunna]

What? I gave an example of a runner that hadn't run the times you listed... I just did whatcha want!

Yeah, but the fact is that it implies his outdoor track season was hurt by injury/sickness so he might not have the marks I want, but was he capable of them barring injury/sickness? We don't know. Find a guy who had a healthy outdoor season(only ran 9:30s or 4:20s in it) and ran sub 12:30 maybe even sub 12:40. Doubt you can. There've been so many years for it to happen, yet it hasn't. Why not? Is there a viable reason?

[xcrunna]

Here is a list of guys from just NTN who could run a 192, or within fractions of it, last year:


Didn't we also establish that it's easier to get a higher speed rating over a longer course(typical 5K). In another thread, something on the lines of 4 pts. for Gruenewald's rating (198 to 202) had it been a 5K. So, these 192's at NTN are now 189's or 188's at VCP or am I wrong? I know these guys are closer to the average, but they're still well above. So, the shorter course lowers their ratings as well.

[DetroiterInIL]

FWIW, I understand where you NE guys are coming from. To me, this would be like telling me that Shenendehowa would average 14:30 at Detweiller; which just doesn't happen. As a point of reference, I had a debate with Watchout last year when he said Klotz was 30 sec. ahead of the best runner in IL. I debated this saying that would match Craig Virgin's time at Detweiller and beat Don Sage's and Jim Spivey's. Well... Klotz ended up 31 sec. ahead of IL's best NTN runner at NTN - so 30 sec. was a slight exaggeration - but not by much. It would have been on par with a Sage or Spivey if you could equate.

Bottom line; something happened this year - I think there are 3 things going on:

1. The "paving" of the course combined with the perfect weather provided perfect conditions.

2. Some top runners in the country going for record times.

3. As Watchout mentioned, the entire country has been getting stronger. Ordinarily with the times York is running this year; and several other schools in IL, they would have been "rated" higher in the U.S. rankings last year or the year before. Either there really is an Illinois bias (which doesn't seem the case for Watchout at least; where I'm getting many of the numbers), or other areas are getting stronger/deeper.

Its a fun season....

[Dr. Kenneth Noisewater]

I thought the article was pretty ridiculous as well. Just another guy out west trying to downplay the NEs accomplishments. This is exactly what happened in 2004 after FMs incredible race. Yes, York was better them at NTN, and yes York was overall a better squad, but could they have beaten FM on that day at VCP? Unlikely.


Now I may sound just like another NE guy whining about being underrated, but some great runners throw down some nasty times and all of a sudden its about excuses. Can't we just recognize that there are some special runners and teams in the NE and MAYBE they are just that good, without some "aligning of the stars" having to take place for them to run how they did.

Look at 2005. In the last week leading up to the meet, no one seriously considered Saratoga or FM as contenders for the win. Most of the talk centered around York, Royal and others. Then look what happened. I would not be surprised in the least if the NE put two in the top 5 again this year.

As for watchout, the effort you put into this sport is commendable, but I think your manhattan averages for teams around the nation is just too far out there. You cannot compare two different meets, of different distance on other sides of the country using ONE team who ran both as the main adjuster between the two. PLEASE bring York and Royal and Ferris to VCP. Show those guys a hill for once in their life. I would eat my own foot if any of those teams could average 12:40 there.

[watchout]

Yeah, but the fact is that it implies his outdoor track season was hurt by injury/sickness so he might not have the marks I want, but was he capable of them barring injury/sickness? We don't know. Find a guy who had a healthy outdoor season(only ran 9:30s or 4:20s in it) and ran sub 12:30 maybe even sub 12:40. Doubt you can. There've been so many years for it to happen, yet it hasn't. Why not? Is there a viable reason?

for some, yes... for some of those mentioned, they were not healthy during the track season - just like Lenz. A PR is still a PR, however..

[watchout]

Didn't we also establish that it's easier to get a higher speed rating over a longer course(typical 5K). In another thread, something on the lines of 4 pts. for Gruenewald's rating (198 to 202) had it been a 5K. So, these 192's at NTN are now 189's or 188's at VCP or am I wrong? I know these guys are closer to the average, but they're still well above. So, the shorter course lowers their ratings as well.

he mentioned that it was more evident the higher up you go, starting around 190 ... only 2 points into it, instead of 8 or 9, that wouldn't have as drastic an effect at all... one could guess that a 192 at manhattan might be a 193 or 194 on a 5k course.

And what you are suggesting is that you should condense the results at the top? that way it more accurately reflect Meylan's speed ratings? why would I do that? 5k times are going to look better, and when they are plugged in they are thus going to be weighted heavier, starting (according to Meylan) around 190 ... or most times sub-12:35 probably.

[watchout]

I thought the article was pretty ridiculous as well. Just another guy out west trying to downplay the NEs accomplishments. This is exactly what happened in 2004 after FMs incredible race. Yes, York was better them at NTN, and yes York was overall a better squad, but could they have beaten FM on that day at VCP? Unlikely.


Now I may sound just like another NE guy whining about being underrated, but some great runners throw down some nasty times and all of a sudden its about excuses. Can't we just recognize that there are some special runners and teams in the NE and MAYBE they are just that good, without some "aligning of the stars" having to take place for them to run how they did.

Look at 2005. In the last week leading up to the meet, no one seriously considered Saratoga or FM as contenders for the win. Most of the talk centered around York, Royal and others. Then look what happened. I would not be surprised in the least if the NE put two in the top 5 again this year.

As for watchout, the effort you put into this sport is commendable, but I think your manhattan averages for teams around the nation is just too far out there. You cannot compare two different meets, of different distance on other sides of the country using ONE team who ran both as the main adjuster between the two. PLEASE bring York and Royal and Ferris to VCP. Show those guys a hill for once in their life. I would eat my own foot if any of those teams could average 12:40 there.


I have no problem with your first two paragraphs, although I might add that I also wouldn't be surprised if no teams from the NE finished in the top 5 ... either is a possibility.

I am NOT comparing Manhattan to anything using just one team who ran at "both meets" (I assume you're talking about Clovis) ... in fact, I did not look at all at Clovis' results and compare them to the Clovis Invite, although I probably should. In fact, I'll do it now, here:

Mikel Thomas ran 15:10 at Clovis.
910 - 16 = 894 / 1.2 = 745 = 12:25.0 Manhattan - close, not too far off... (12:21.4)

Jon Peterson ran 15:22 at Clovis.
922 - 16 = 906 / 1.2 = 755 = 12:35.0 at Manhattan - he ran 12:42.0

Jordan Ashcroft ran 16:24 at Clovis.
984 - 16 = 968 / 1.2 = 806.7 = 13:26.7 at Manhattan - he ran 13:32.6

Max Hernandez ran 16:27 at Clovis.
987 - 16 = 971 / 1.2 = 809.2 = 13:29.2 at Manhattan - he ran 13:27.2

(rest of the times unknown from Manhattan)

Average difference: -1.825 seconds

not too bad...



oh, and by the way. Ferris does run on hills... Ferris isn't located in California (Road Races) or Illinois (Detweiller = Pancake.)

[wilson]

I thought the article was pretty ridiculous as well. Just another guy out west trying to downplay the NEs accomplishments. This is exactly what happened in 2004 after FMs incredible race. Yes, York was better them at NTN, and yes York was overall a better squad, but could they have beaten FM on that day at VCP? Unlikely.


Now I may sound just like another NE guy whining about being underrated, but some great runners throw down some nasty times and all of a sudden its about excuses. Can't we just recognize that there are some special runners and teams in the NE and MAYBE they are just that good, without some "aligning of the stars" having to take place for them to run how they did.

Look at 2005. In the last week leading up to the meet, no one seriously considered Saratoga or FM as contenders for the win. Most of the talk centered around York, Royal and others. Then look what happened. I would not be surprised in the least if the NE put two in the top 5 again this year.

As for watchout, the effort you put into this sport is commendable, but I think your manhattan averages for teams around the nation is just too far out there. You cannot compare two different meets, of different distance on other sides of the country using ONE team who ran both as the main adjuster between the two. PLEASE bring York and Royal and Ferris to VCP. Show those guys a hill for once in their life. I would eat my own foot if any of those teams could average 12:40 there.

Mt. Sac is quite hilly, and Royal runs there every year. Actually all of the good west teams run there. But other than that i agree with you.

[daman]

PLEASE bring York and Royal and Ferris to VCP. Show those guys a hill for once in their life. I would eat my own foot if any of those teams could average 12:40 there.Why do people feel running hills makes them a man or something?

I not only haven't seen Illinois runners having problems with 3/4 mile hill at Parkside, but I have seen them take the measure of runners who were supposed to be so "hill" tough at NTN, Footlocker and Nike.

Any properly trained runner can handle hills, you guys ain't so tough as you think.

[kk.]

Why do people feel running hills makes them a man or something?

I not only haven't seen Illinois runners having problems with 3/4 mile hill at Parkside, but I have seen them take the measure of runners who were supposed to be so "hill" tough at NTN, Footlocker and Nike.

Any properly trained runner can handle hills, you guys ain't so tough as you think.

Remember NTN last year? The conditions were pretty bad.. notice what region seemed to do a lot better than other regions in those conditions.

[xcrunna]

And what you are suggesting is that you should condense the results at the top? that way it more accurately reflect Meylan's speed ratings? why would I do that? 5k times are going to look better, and when they are plugged in they are thus going to be weighted heavier, starting (according to Meylan) around 190 ... or most times sub-12:35 probably.
I don't really get what you mean here. Regardless of anything, 15 seconds = 5 pts. right? For Example: At Manhattan, top guy gets 196, guy 30 seconds back gets 186 for his speed ranking. If put over a 5K, new top guy gets 200. Second guy say 35 seconds back due to longer course and he'll yield 188 points(rounded down from 188.3). See how taking the speed ratings of guys from NTN etc. from the 5K can help the runners to the tune of 5-6 seconds, which is quite significant as you're using it to justify guys with slower track Pr's hitting sub 12:30. Hopefully, you get what I'm saying here. Correct me on any misunderstanding please :) .

[daman]

Remember NTN last year? The conditions were pretty bad.. notice what region seemed to do a lot better than other regions in those conditions.What does that have to with anything? Are we now saying it only rains in the NE?

I notice York beat every team but one....that disproves you right there.

[ArcadiaInvite]

Rich Gonzalez is a transparent guy. He's always had a "west" agenda, but more precisely a California agenda. He can deny it all he wants but his words and decisions speak for themselves. The most glaring was to deny Bay Shore a spot at NTN a few years ago to an inferior team from out his way. He was taken to task about it and tried to defer much of the responsibility elsewhere. The trouble is, the ones he said had a bigger say pointed right back at him. The guy in charge of the meet (Josh something), agreed with the accusation enough to give Bay Shore lots of goodies that they should have gotten if they went to the meet.
To downplay Manhattan 06, shows either complete ignorance or proof positive that he's setting things up for his NTN picks. I'm betting on the latter...

T.D.,

Perhaps your own agenda may speak for itself. FYI, I was the one leading the way in lobbying for Morris Hills, NJ (a Northeast team) to get the final bid last year... over a California team. That gave the NE four NTN boys bids in 2005. It may have not been a popular decision with my Calfiornia colleagues, but it was the right one, in my opinion. If I wanted to slant it any way for the California Region, it was sure a weird approach I took.

The bottom line is we choose the teams that the majority feels best fits the criteria. Unfortunately, that criteria will not always reward the hottest team at the end of the season. And sometimes, it can unfortunately hinder a very good team that has a minor slip-up at the most inopportune time. The current process rewards those teams that do very well during the season and "finish the job" (for lack of a better term) at the end.

I tried lobbying for a slight change to the criteria in August of this year. However, the group decision was made to continue it under the current format. We make the best with what we have, but it's not gonig to be 100% accurate with certainty. We hope to one day have regionals. It's the best way, and hopefully we reach that point soon.

[watchout]

I don't really get what you mean here. Regardless of anything, 15 seconds = 5 pts. right? For Example: At Manhattan, top guy gets 196, guy 30 seconds back gets 186 for his speed ranking. If put over a 5K, new top guy gets 200. Second guy say 35 seconds back due to longer course and he'll yield 188 points(rounded down from 188.3). See how taking the speed ratings of guys from NTN etc. from the 5K can help the runners to the tune of 5-6 seconds, which is quite significant as you're using it to justify guys with slower track Pr's hitting sub 12:30. Hopefully, you get what I'm saying here. Correct me on any misunderstanding please :) .

Meylan's speed ratings start at 0, and work their way up from there (how many seconds faster than baseline diveded by 3)

He has noticed that, generally, 2.5 mile VCP speed ratings come out as lower than usual in most cases after about 190. (as I quoted). As to why this is? It is assumed that it is due to the shorter course, and thus closer time differential. I would say that that is accurate, as you look at how the top ratings at manhattan are usually 194-196, and that's VERY good ratings... but not for guys that can regularly hit 200 (i.e. Barnicle or Forys or maybe also Gruenewald)

Since the ratings were so close to 200 (198.7 is pretty close!), he mentioned that the ratings on a normal 5k course would probably have been over 200. This is due to the probability that the frontrunners would have been able to further extend their leads over the rest of the field, which is probably true (the gaps in a 800m are almost always closer than they are in a mile, or the gaps in a 2 mile are usually closer than they are in a 3 mile... same would be true for a 2.5 mile vs. a 3.1 mile)

And since speed ratings start at 0 and work their way up from the baseline, that means that the closer to the baseline, the more representive of a 5k the ratings will be. Conversely, the further away they are, the less likely they would hold true for a 5k. He discovered that it was around 190 that the difference became noticable. Therefore, the difference in the low 90's would be less severe than the differences in the high 90's. (because it gets worse as it goes along)

That's why these guys' speed ratings at the very top are not representive of their 5k probable ratings.

[watchout]

What does that have to with anything? Are we now saying it only rains in the NE?

I notice York beat every team but one....that disproves you right there.

I would hope that's not what is implied...

NTN is in the NW ... conditions in the NW would be the same conditions at NTN ... therefore, the conditions at NTN must be the same as the NW.

Not the NE, where the meet is not located.

It makes sense :)

[daman]

I would hope that's not what is implied...

NTN is in the NW ... conditions in the NW would be the same conditions at NTN ... therefore, the conditions at NTN must be the same as the NW.

Not the NE, where the meet is not located.

It makes sense :)Well, his post is silly...he somehow feels that NY teams did well at NTN last year because they could handle the rain and are somehow "tougher" because of hills.

Well, York hammered FM in 2004, beat them again last year and only got second because one guy on Toga went nuts and passed 80 guys over the last 2 miles of the race.

How did the lack of hills or the rain make them any less tougher? 2 NTN races and only one team beat them.

[watchout]

Well, his post is silly...he somehow feels that NY teams did well at NTN last year because they could handle the rain and are somehow "tougher" because of hills.

Well, York hammered FM in 2004, beat them again last year and only got second because one guy on Toga went nuts and passed 80 guys over the last 2 miles of the race.

How did the lack of hills or the rain make them any less tougher? 2 NTN races and only one team beat them.

You're right - it's time for a changing of the guard!

Let's see a CA or NW team win. Just for this year. :D

Spread the love around

[daman]

You're right - it's time for a changing of the guard!

Let's see a CA or NW team win. Just for this year. :D

Spread the love aroundNo. ;)

[watchout]

No. ;)

Hmm. Well, I guess we'll have to wait and see what York, Ferris and Royal have to say about all that.

[sisyphus]

I don't think Ferris or any other GSL school has an issue with hills. Ferris is located ON a pretty big hill, I seem to recall. Hangman, Whitworth, St George's all have pretty solid hills as far as GSL courses are concerned. Those are just the ones I've seen.

As far as Royal and Southern Section is concerned, Mt. Sac is actually hillier than Vanny. Vanny just beats you up with the terrain more. Also, Simi Valley is right in the middle of the Santa Monica Mountains so I'm guessing those guys see some pretty serious hills is training.

[NYrunner]

Hmm. Well, I guess we'll have to wait and see what York, Ferris and Royal have to say about all that.
my money is on York....look at all three and how they were projected to finish and how they actually did the past two years at NTN.....Last year:
I know these are different kids for the most part but York was projected to finish behind Royal and just in front of Ferris but they crushed both teams. The Cali teams have not run well (boys or girls) at NTN so until they prove they can handle conditions other then 80s+ and sunny they are not going to be serious contenders at NTN where it will never be close to 80s and sunny and dry in Oregon in December? Not gonna happen. If it rains at all that week the course will still be wet by race time. Both year's have given the runners very soggy, cold conditions so people should expect more of the same.

Oh and Daman the only team to beat any NYS boys team at NTN (there have been 3 NYS boys teams there) was York and in 2004 FM-York were almost even with 1000 to go and York just kicked way better and pulled away. York is awesome and represents the MW very well at NTN but what other team other then York has beaten a NYS team? Even on the girls side Hilton, Toga 04 and Toga 05 did not lose to any non-NYS team. FM's finishing behind York is the only time one of the 6 NYS teams that should have been at NTN lost to a non-NYS team.

Guys, Toga boys were not the best team at NTN and in southern Cali they probably would have been roughed up by Royal but in Oregon they dominated so no matter what people think going into NTN there will be 1-2 teams that come out of nowhere to win it all. Going into NTN Toga and CBA/Morris Hills all looked pretty even and Toga was rated back in like 7th by Mr. Meylan yet they came through with a dominating performance. I think the conditions and timing of NTN (way after most teams are done with reg. season) leads to many teams having very off days while Toga boys had their best day.

Bottom line is anything can happen once they get there but the trouble is not picking who will do well in those conditions but who has earned a bid.

[NYrunner]

I believe the Bethlehem girls team finished (13th?) behind many non-NYS teams in 2004. And they clearly deserved to be there.

Saratoga's performance at States was the best team performance in the NE prior to NTN. They were pretty clearly ahead of CBA (and definitely ahead of Morris Hills) going into the race. As for Meylan's predictions... one of the weaknesses of his approach is that it doesn't consider head-to-head results for individuals. For example: going into NTN, Andy Bangert and Luke Fitzgibbons had raced head-to-head twice, with Bangert finishing first both times. Seemed to reason that he'd finish ahead of him again... but Meylan projected Fitzgibbons ahead of Bangert. Missed by 56 places, as it turns out. This is anecdotal, of course, and doesn't invalidate Meylan's work - but his approach isn't perfect or all-inclusive. Nobody's is.
Bayshore....

[s2fan]

Well, York hammered FM in 2004, beat them again last year and only got second because one guy on Toga went nuts and passed 80 guys over the last 2 miles of the race.


ONLY got second? LOL.

the guy who went nuts was not a fluke - proved by becoming a consistent 4:midteens miler & sub 9:20 2 miler later on.

He - KILEY - also was the consistent #3 man - usually ahead of #4 all year

If he didnt go "nuts" and finished 1 spot behind #4....that only would have been a 12 point difference. Still would have beat York by 10 or so.

you are going to have to come up with some more reasons why they lost.

ONLY second - more luck LUCKY to get second given that is was
1) a tie
2) the 3rd place team had a faster 5man total time.

they finished second - congrats to them for that achievement.

[BMeylan]

I believe the Bethlehem girls team finished (13th?) behind many non-NYS teams in 2004. And they clearly deserved to be there.

Saratoga's performance at States was the best team performance in the NE prior to NTN. They were pretty clearly ahead of CBA (and definitely ahead of Morris Hills) going into the race. As for Meylan's predictions... one of the weaknesses of his approach is that it doesn't consider head-to-head results for individuals. For example: going into NTN, Andy Bangert and Luke Fitzgibbons had raced head-to-head twice, with Bangert finishing first both times. Seemed to reason that he'd finish ahead of him again... but Meylan projected Fitzgibbons ahead of Bangert. Missed by 56 places, as it turns out. This is anecdotal, of course, and doesn't invalidate Meylan's work - but his approach isn't perfect or all-inclusive. Nobody's is.

The Bethlehem girls finished a bit lower than expected in 2004 only because their top runner (Emily Malinowski) did not have a normal race (she had her wisdom teeth pulled the previous weekend) ... with just a normal race, Bethlehem would have finished about 6th.

Track & field leaderboards do not consider head-to-head races either ... as one example, several years ago one 1600m runner beat another in all four of their head-to-head races - yet the final leaderboard had the losing runner ahead because he had run a faster time.

[Sully 800]

Well, York hammered FM in 2004, beat them again last year and only got second because they weren't the best team on that day, just as FM wasn't in 2004.

Fixed.

As stated (and easily seen) York was much closer to 3rd than 1st.

[watchout]

my money is on York....look at all three and how they were projected to finish and how they actually did the past two years at NTN.....Last year:
I know these are different kids for the most part but York was projected to finish behind Royal and just in front of Ferris but they crushed both teams. The Cali teams have not run well (boys or girls) at NTN so until they prove they can handle conditions other then 80s+ and sunny they are not going to be serious contenders at NTN where it will never be close to 80s and sunny and dry in Oregon in December? Not gonna happen. If it rains at all that week the course will still be wet by race time. Both year's have given the runners very soggy, cold conditions so people should expect more of the same.

Oh and Daman the only team to beat any NYS boys team at NTN (there have been 3 NYS boys teams there) was York and in 2004 FM-York were almost even with 1000 to go and York just kicked way better and pulled away. York is awesome and represents the MW very well at NTN but what other team other then York has beaten a NYS team? Even on the girls side Hilton, Toga 04 and Toga 05 did not lose to any non-NYS team. FM's finishing behind York is the only time one of the 6 NYS teams that should have been at NTN lost to a non-NYS team.

Guys, Toga boys were not the best team at NTN and in southern Cali they probably would have been roughed up by Royal but in Oregon they dominated so no matter what people think going into NTN there will be 1-2 teams that come out of nowhere to win it all. Going into NTN Toga and CBA/Morris Hills all looked pretty even and Toga was rated back in like 7th by Mr. Meylan yet they came through with a dominating performance. I think the conditions and timing of NTN (way after most teams are done with reg. season) leads to many teams having very off days while Toga boys had their best day.

Bottom line is anything can happen once they get there but the trouble is not picking who will do well in those conditions but who has earned a bid.

I'll admit, I only read the first half paragraph.

NYrunner:

I wasn't actually being serious in my replies.

Joel Ferris has never ran well at NTN, whether that's because the see it as an "end of the year festival" or simply don't take the meet as seriously as it should, or perhaps simply bomb it every year (which I doubt, since they don't bomb WA State every year - they dominate it)... they have to prove they can run well at NTN before you give them a championship - they have to earn it.

Royal ran well in 2004, and imploded in 2005 for whatever reason. Meanwhile, York has run great every time.

I expect roughly more of the same this year. But that has nothing to do with right now, as right now York "only" looks like a #4/5/6 team in the nation... that will change by the end, no doubt, but more importantly... they will run well at NTN.

I never said they wouldn't. I was keeping the conversation light hearted.

[daman]

As stated I'm someone who has to change someone else's posts because I jumped in the middle of a dialogue and didn't understand what the original issue was.

You "fix" mine, I'll fix yours.....

You guys try to change the subject....which was York is successful under ANY conditions and NY teams have no claim to being tougher.

[Jew]

As insane as it sounds, exhaustive research on relative data shows that both Ferris and Royal could average 12:50 or better at Van Cortlandt right now, which would shatter the team-time course record.

Oh really?
You mean the record my team set in 2003? 12:58?
FM demolished that in 2004, which I watched in person as well...
12:48.82

If you're gonna use words like 'shatter' in order to explore one or two team's interests over a whole regions history, you should get your facts straight. It's not like this is ancient history...

All in all, I don't completely disagree with what you've said, I think you just started the article all wrong and tried to make your point in the first 2 paragraphs, which if you've taken any kind of journalism classes or had a whole lot of real writing experience you'd know does not make for the most professional of articles... but then again, you do learn something new each day!


ouch lol

[Jew]

I thought the article was pretty ridiculous as well. Just another guy out west trying to downplay the NEs accomplishments. This is exactly what happened in 2004 after FMs incredible race. Yes, York was better them at NTN, and yes York was overall a better squad, but could they have beaten FM on that day at VCP? Unlikely.


Now I may sound just like another NE guy whining about being underrated, but some great runners throw down some nasty times and all of a sudden its about excuses. Can't we just recognize that there are some special runners and teams in the NE and MAYBE they are just that good, without some "aligning of the stars" having to take place for them to run how they did.

Look at 2005. In the last week leading up to the meet, no one seriously considered Saratoga or FM as contenders for the win. Most of the talk centered around York, Royal and others. Then look what happened. I would not be surprised in the least if the NE put two in the top 5 again this year.

As for watchout, the effort you put into this sport is commendable, but I think your manhattan averages for teams around the nation is just too far out there. You cannot compare two different meets, of different distance on other sides of the country using ONE team who ran both as the main adjuster between the two. PLEASE bring York and Royal and Ferris to VCP. Show those guys a hill for once in their life. I would eat my own foot if any of those teams could average 12:40 there.

Another good point. I wish some of the national championship meets run run here in the East. I'm 99% sure we'd see some different results. Heck, Barnicle or the Taye's may have been national champs in 04/05. When the US nats were there last year, Blood took first. I've never run out west before, but VCP is about as tough/fair/strategic of a xc course I've ever seen. The previous Manhattan invites and FL NE's had some of the best racing you'll ever see. The course rewards talent and smart running, and I really think that teams outside the Northeast should have to compete there at some point.

[watchout]

Another good point. I wish some of the national championship meets run run here in the East. I'm 99% sure we'd see some different results. Heck, Barnicle or the Taye's may have been national champs in 04/05. When the US nats were there last year, Blood took first. I've never run out west before, but VCP is about as tough/fair/strategic of a xc course I've ever seen. The previous Manhattan invites and FL NE's had some of the best racing you'll ever see. The course rewards talent and smart running, and I really think that teams outside the Northeast should have to compete there at some point.

I coulda sworn that NIN, NSIC and NON were all run on the east side.

But maybe I was wrong...

3 of the 5 "national championships" in the sports of xc t&f are on the east side... don't get too greedy.

It's just fine how it is.

XC Teams Championships in the NW, XC Individuals in the SW (Cali), Outdoor track in the SE, and indoor track in the mid-atlantic region (NE)

that's one (or more) in every corner of the nation.

now we just have to figure out something to give the middle of the nation...

USATF Junior Nationals move to St. Louis? a more central location...

[Derrick08]

Another good point. I wish some of the national championship meets run run here in the East. I'm 99% sure we'd see some different results. Heck, Barnicle or the Taye's may have been national champs in 04/05. When the US nats were there last year, Blood took first. I've never run out west before, but VCP is about as tough/fair/strategic of a xc course I've ever seen. The previous Manhattan invites and FL NE's had some of the best racing you'll ever see. The course rewards talent and smart running, and I really think that teams outside the Northeast should have to compete there at some point.

This is such a NE-centric point of view, you seem completely convinced that no other region can match what you have and that if you don't run well on NE courses than you suck. Kind of reminds me when my Dad moved from New York to Minnesota and people told him that he would be the smartest one there because New Yorkers are so much better than everyone else. I love New York and the rest of the NE, I was born there and visit twice a year, but seriously you gotta travel more, other places are just as good.

[daman]

Another good point. I wish some of the national championship meets run run here in the East. I'm 99% sure we'd see some different results. Heck, Barnicle or the Taye's may have been national champs in 04/05. When the US nats were there last year, Blood took first. I've never run out west before, but VCP is about as tough/fair/strategic of a xc course I've ever seen. The previous Manhattan invites and FL NE's had some of the best racing you'll ever see. The course rewards talent and smart running, and I really think that teams outside the Northeast should have to compete there at some point.Why don't you come to Columbus Park on the west side of Chicago? That would be a great place for a national championship. The runners can jump over the crackheads laying around, get mugged on remote areas of the park, and your daddy can check out the pimps 'n hoes while the race is going on. I'll bet if they held nats there we would win every time.

I really think NE teams should have to compete there at some point.

[daman]

Oh and Daman the only team to beat any NYS boys team at NTN (there have been 3 NYS boys teams there) was York and in 2004 FM-York were almost even with 1000 to go and York just kicked way better and pulled away. York is awesome and represents the MW very well at NTN but what other team other then York has beaten a NYS team? Even on the girls side Hilton, Toga 04 and Toga 05 did not lose to any non-NYS team. FM's finishing behind York is the only time one of the 6 NYS teams that should have been at NTN lost to a non-NYS team.

You're way off here. The 2004 FM was the only NY boys team to make NTN in 2004, and they were touted as the best NY team ever, and they still lost. What happened to the rest of NY in 2004? If they were so dominant, why did no one come near FM during the season and why did none of them go to NTN? Where was their dominance that year?

2005 Naperville North's girls were ranked 24th, only got into NTN because a Michigan team couldn't go, and finishes 4th, only 21 points behind your vaunted girls Toga team. They didn't seem to be out of their league due to any inherent inferiority. As for the boys MW teams, NTN has seen fit to invite such powerhouses as Madison West and Northridge, and leave more deserving teams home. This year, Dexter MI may be better than York, but will stay home.

There have been 2 NTN meets and you're acting like this is some sort of 30 year trend, you better hope it keeps up, or you can be sure there will be no shortage of people asking you some questions.

[Dr. Kenneth Noisewater]

You're way off here. The 2004 FM was the only NY boys team to make NTN in 2004, and they were touted as the best NY team ever, and they still lost. What happened to the rest of NY in 2004? If they were so dominant, why did no one come near FM during the season and why did none of them go to NTN? Where was their dominance that year?

2005 Naperville North's girls were ranked 24th, only got into NTN because a Michigan team couldn't go, and finishes 4th, only 21 points behind your vaunted girls Toga team. They didn't seem to be out of their league due to any inherent inferiority. As for the boys MW teams, NTN has seen fit to invite such powerhouses as Madison West and Northridge, and leave more deserving teams home. This year, Dexter MI may be better than York, but will stay home.

There have been 2 NTN meets and you're acting like this is some sort of 30 year trend, you better hope it keeps up, or you can be sure there will be no shortage of people asking you some questions.



Hey daman, I have a question for you. Who has performed better at NTN in the two years its been held, NY or IL? kthanksbye.

[Sully 800]

You "fix" mine, I'll fix yours.....

You guys try to change the subject....which was York is successful under ANY conditions and NY teams have no claim to being tougher.

Sorry- I agree mostly with what you said and yes York and FM have been extremely successful both years at NTN so far. I expect York to continue that tradition, and I think FM will be a decent team for the NE but won't make NTN. It certainly is amazing what York can do every year, and I by no means by into the philosophy that running hills make a team tougher.

I just took offense to the statement "York only got second because one guy on Toga went nuts and passed 80 guys over the last 2 miles of the race."- That's basically saying York only got second because they didn't run as well as the guys who got first. It just didn't seem to fit with the rest of your post.

York has been incredible each year though and will likely do the same this time as well.

[daman]

I just took offense to the statement "York only got second because one guy on Toga went nuts and passed 80 guys over the last 2 miles of the race."- That's basically saying York only got second because they didn't run as well as the guys who got first. It just didn't seem to fit with the rest of your post.

York has been incredible each year though and will likely do the same this time as well.What I meant was had the Toga runner not done what he did, York would've won the meet. It was a great effort by that guy and had he given up and mailed it in, the outcome would be different. But he did what it took and that's what it took to beat York.

But he didn't do it because he was somehow better because of hills or whatever....he just made a great effort that I'm sure runners from all over the country have made at some time or another....it has nothing to do with that he's from NY and the other teams aren't.

[daman]

Hey daman, I have a question for you. Who has performed better at NTN in the two years its been held, NY or IL? kthanksbye.See the first sentence of Strider's post...."Doc".

[daman]

ONLY second - more luck LUCKY to get second given that is was
1) a tie
2) the 3rd place team had a faster 5man total time.

they finished second - congrats to them for that achievement.You misunderstood what I was talking about and I since explained to Sully so maybe you should check that out.....

however...

You score five runners and York put 6 guys ahead of FM's #5 and was less than a second away from putting all 7 ahead of him....had one of FM's guys had a bad race, York would've beaten them easily. FM had no room for error and York did.

FM was the team that was "lucky".

[Jew]

Wow

How can you honestly compare a track to a cross country course? I wouldn't say that NYers have a "major home field advantage" at NON in NC or even NIN in DC. All I'm saying is that VCP is probably the best(out of all courses run by many teams) course I've ran in terms of strategy required/toughness. The 8k is even more infamous/brutal. Top runners from all over the nation have had their conference championship race there only to be wrecked by the back hills or cemetary hill. I'm in college in the Northeast and still have never once had a good race there. That's y from my point of view, the acomplishments by teams like FM, Shen, Toga and individuals like the FL finalists seem to be downplayed a lot.

[daman]

Wow

How can you honestly compare a track to a cross country course? I wouldn't say that NYers have a "major home field advantage" at NON in NC or even NIN in DC. All I'm saying is that VCP is probably the best(out of all courses run by many teams) course I've ran in terms of strategy required/toughness. The 8k is even more infamous/brutal. Top runners from all over the nation have had their conference championship race there only to be wrecked by the back hills or cemetary hill. I'm in college in the Northeast and still have never once had a good race there. That's y from my point of view, the acomplishments by teams like FM, Shen, Toga and individuals like the FL finalists seem to be downplayed a lot.Why should the national championship be held on a course that the NE region uses and no other region does?

Why not hold it at Parkside? It's held FLMW for 20 years, it's a collegiate course, it's got a 3/4 mile hill at the start and the only guys to break 15:00 on it are Ritz, Solinsky, Ige and Withrow. Why should everyone go to your backyard?

[watchout]

Wow

How can you honestly compare a track to a cross country course? I wouldn't say that NYers have a "major home field advantage" at NON in NC or even NIN in DC. All I'm saying is that VCP is probably the best(out of all courses run by many teams) course I've ran in terms of strategy required/toughness. The 8k is even more infamous/brutal. Top runners from all over the nation have had their conference championship race there only to be wrecked by the back hills or cemetary hill. I'm in college in the Northeast and still have never once had a good race there. That's y from my point of view, the acomplishments by teams like FM, Shen, Toga and individuals like the FL finalists seem to be downplayed a lot.

I assume that by "top runners from all over the nation have had their conference championship race there", you are talking strictly college, and that's not really "all over the country" ... those are still eastern college teams. And isn't that on the 8k course? not the 2.5 mile course.. because it would be pretty ridiculous to claim that top high school runners from all over the nation have ran their conference championships there...

and you said "course that you run on" ... but have you ever run Mt. SAC or any west coast course for that matter? (disclaimer: not saying that average west coast courses are harder, as VCP is probably one of the top 5 most challening courses in the nation)

and if that first sentance was directed at me, since I was the one that brought up track and xc both ... I don't know what you are talking about... home course advantage? I never claimed anything like that? what? where did you get that?

You said: "I wish some of the national championship meets run run here in the East."
I replied: I coulda sworn that NIN, NSIC and NON were all run on the east side.

But maybe I was wrong...

3 of the 5 "national championships" in the sports of xc t&f are on the east side... don't get too greedy.

It's just fine how it is.

XC Teams Championships in the NW, XC Individuals in the SW (Cali), Outdoor track in the SE, and indoor track in the mid-atlantic region (NE)

that's one (or more) in every corner of the nation.


where was anything saying what you are defending from?

Here, simple terms: "Now that NTN is held in the Northwest, each region of the nation (except the middle) is now holding one or more "national championship" ... why should a 3rd "national championship" be added to the Northeast, so that the Northwest no longer has the priviledge to hold one and that whole region gets left out? Things are fine as they are: Balanced! Don't get greedy. The rest of the nation deserves the same priviledge the East coast gets for track championships.

[daman]

I assume that by "top runners from all over the nation have had their conference championship race there", you are talking strictly college, and that's not really "all over the country" ... those are still eastern college teams. And isn't that on the 8k course? not the 2.5 mile course.. because it would be pretty ridiculous to claim that top high school runners from all over the nation have ran their conference championships there...

and you said "course that you run on" ... but have you ever run Mt. SAC or any west coast course for that matter? (disclaimer: not saying that average west coast courses are harder, as VCP is probably one of the top 5 most challening courses in the nation)You know...it's really interesting....he probably actually believes schools all over the country travel there to hold their conference championships, that's how some of these guys come off....until he says otherwise, I gonna think he means it literally.

And VCP isn't as challenging as it used to be....even the old NE guys on here are saying the course is faster and improvements have been made to it. I'm wondering why these new records are not being at least a little downplayed by the old guard....you would think they want their legacies to remain intact.

Frankly, if that course has crushed stone paths on a decent portion of it, that's an advantage compared to a course that is all grass....you get much faster leg turnover on firm footing than on grass and your legs don't have to work as hard.

[DetroiterInIL]

Are there national caliber meets run of a national caliber anywhere short of a coastal state? The Keebler meet in Elmhurst used to sort of do that...

There's 2500+ miles of country between NY and WA.... we need a meet somewhere. Just think; no one would have to move 3 time zones.

We could have Albuquerque Academy host.... we'll see how the NE, IL, WA, etc... all do there...

[pokerking55]

I'm wondering why these new records are not being at least a little downplayed by the old guard....you would think they want their legacies to remain intact.


well first everyone is also uplaying(if thats a phrase) of this whole resurfacing claiming its more then 5 seconds... maybe on a sloppy day... but theres also the fact that in the last 10 years there still have been some all-timers crossing this course and did not come close to the times these guys ran... I'm too lazy to actually look em up but u got Gras, webb(junior) and who knows the others on the new surface

so i dont think these times need to be downplayed at all

[watchout]

You know...it's really interesting....he probably actually believes schools all over the country travel there to hold their conference championships, that's how some of these guys come off....until he says otherwise, I gonna think he means it literally.

And VCP isn't as challenging as it used to be....even the old NE guys on here are saying the course is faster and improvements have been made to it. I'm wondering why these new records are not being at least a little downplayed by the old guard....you would think they want their legacies to remain intact.

Frankly, if that course has crushed stone paths on a decent portion of it, that's an advantage compared to a course that is all grass....you get much faster leg turnover on firm footing than on grass and your legs don't have to work as hard.

I figured he was just really bad at geography and didn't realize that the nation really is more than just NYC... and that going to California or Oregon isn't going to a whole other country.

[pokerking55]

but i also do not think FLN should be at vanny... i mean it would be nice for a rotating course but then u have trouble comparing records... its a hard topic to debate

[watchout]

Are there national caliber meets run of a national caliber anywhere short of a coastal state? The Keebler meet in Elmhurst used to sort of do that...

There's 2500+ miles of country between NY and WA.... we need a meet somewhere. Just think; no one would have to move 3 time zones.

We could have Albuquerque Academy host.... we'll see how the NE, IL, WA, etc... all do there...

travelling to altitude? ouch... not sure how low-landers (such as myself) would like that

but what about moving something to St. Louis? That's fairly central... as central as you are going to get with a large metropolis, at least. give them USATF Nationals or something... instead of having xc champs in Rhode Island or wherever, and track in Indiana?

That way, no one is quite left out... or at least not as much.

It would do more to follow the ideal of spreading championships around the country, so that every part gets helped out and sees the same effects as other national championships.

[daman]

well first everyone is also uplaying(if thats a phrase) of this whole resurfacing claiming its more then 5 seconds... maybe on a sloppy day... but theres also the fact that in the last 10 years there still have been some all-timers crossing this course and did not come close to the times these guys ran... I'm too lazy to actually look em up but u got Gras, webb(junior) and who knows the others on the new surface

so i dont think these times need to be downplayed at allI thought it was re-surfaced only in the last few years.

Still....Gras and Webb weren't the end-all cross country runners....Webb was smoked that junior year at FL and Gras wasn't a god either in xc.

[daman]

travelling to altitude? ouch... not sure how low-landers (such as myself) would like that

but what about moving something to St. Louis? There ya go.....NE got the hills, SW the altitude, SE has The Klan, NW already has NTN.....let's go to St Louis with the 95% humidity like we get around Chicago. I'll bet we go 1-2-3 :rolleyes:

Or better yet....Chi-town in December with a few inches of snow on the ground and westerly winds of 20 mph and a wind chill of -10.

[watchout]

There ya go.....NE got the hills, SE the altitude, NW already has NTN.....let's go to St Louis with the 95% humidity like we get around Chicago. I'll bet we go 1-2-3 :rolleyes:

SW has the altitude :)

SE is partially below sealevel! ;)

[daman]

SW has the altitude :)

SE is partially below sealevel! ;)I was facing the wrong way....fixed

[watchout]

haha nice

but what about Alaska?

You could have the national championships ON ICE!

[Kalaby]

I thought it was re-surfaced only in the last few years.

Still....Gras and Webb weren't the end-all cross country runners....Webb was smoked that junior year at FL and Gras wasn't a god either in xc.

VCP was resurfaced prior to the '97 season.

Also, Webb was pretty darn good (agreed not a god though), as a senior, he would've been a national champ in many other years IMO, he just had the misfortune of running against Ritz who is on the short list of best all-time high XC runners.

[daman]

VCP was resurfaced prior to the '97 season.

Also, Webb was pretty darn good (agreed not a god though), as a senior, he would've been a national champ in many other years IMO, he just had the misfortune of running against Ritz who is on the short list of best all-time high XC runners.Well, yeah, that's my point....exactly how many FL champions have run on that 2.5 or even the 3.1 course? On Parkside there is quite a list. So maybe those times are a hair soft.

[watchout]

3 different national champions, last one being in 1997... for the 5k course at VCP I think? I don't think that FLNE was run on the 2.5 course?

Parkside has hosted the most individual champions, and Mt. SAC probably up there with Parkside for the most quantity of top runners (maybe that's some bias, but California runners often running at Mt. SAC twice a year (although the invitational is 2.95 miles I think, instead of 5k...), plus the 2nd most national champions, and although I'm not looking at the list probably 2nd in the amount of top-10 finishers...

[daman]

3 different national champions, last one being in 1997... for the 5k course at VCP I think? I don't think that FLNE was run on the 2.5 course?

Parkside has hosted the most individual champions, and Mt. SAC probably up there with Parkside for the most quantity of top runners (maybe that's some bias, but California runners often running at Mt. SAC twice a year (although the invitational is 2.95 miles I think, instead of 5k...), plus the 2nd most national champions, and although I'm not looking at the list probably 2nd in the amount of top-10 finishers...The 2.5, because that's what everyone is talking about. I'll figure the 3.1 is a tougher mark, because more guys run it and it means a lot more than Manhattan. If they get guys beating that record, then that would be impressive.

[daman]

haha nice

but what about Alaska?

You could have the national championships ON ICE!

Will the 2005 FLMW at Parkside do?

http://footlockercc.com/2005/pictures_mw/action/images/B1a_Ige-Peacock-FLmw05_jpg.jpg

[daman]

http://footlockercc.com/2005/pictures_mw/action/images/B5Finley-Stevens-Roberts-FLmw05_jpg.jpg

[daman]

http://footlockercc.com/2005/pictures_mw/action/images/G2a_Betsy_Bies_midwest_action_jpg.jpg

[daman]

Now THAT'S cross country!!

http://footlockercc.com/2005/pictures_mw/action/images/G2_Jocelyn_Burke_Leads_midwest_jpg.jpg

[Kalaby]

The 2.5, because that's what everyone is talking about. I'll figure the 3.1 is a tougher mark, because more guys run it and it means a lot more than Manhattan. If they get guys beating that record, then that would be impressive.

FLNE has been run on the same VCP 5k course since the inaugural meet in '79. Essentially it is the same course as the 2.5 mile except that you run all the way around the flats in the beginning of the race before heading into the cowpath whereas the 2.5 mile course cuts directly across the field and heads right into the woods. The 5k course finishes in a different spot on the flats, but the different homestretch doesn't add any more difficulty (since both are completely flat) as opposed to the 2.5 mile finish - it's just a bit longer. Depending on who you talk to, the 5k high school record is either held by McDougal 15:08.0 or Tony Smith in 15:14.2. There was some controversy with McDougal's race because the start and finish lines were moved, but the distance was supposedly preserved (this was run at a NYRRC XC Championship race a couple of weeks prior to the 2003 FLNE). Anyway, anything under 15:20 (resurfaced course or the old one) is flying there. In an average FLN year, I'd say anybody running under 15:20 is a likely top 5 candidate with a similar effort.

[Dr. Kenneth Noisewater]

Seriously though, if they held FL at VCP in December, dont you think the results would be quite a bit different rather than having them at Balboa?

[watchout]

I don't have any pictures of running in Alaska past September, but...

http://dyestat.com/3us/5xc/NTN/nationals/teams/g7fairbanks700.jpg

We all know that. And that was before FL Regionals weekend..

[Kalaby]

Seriously though, if they held FL at VCP in December, dont you think the results would be quite a bit different rather than having them at Balboa?

I've always been a proponent of rotating FLN on a 4 year basis. Adding a home course advantage would be like trying to defend your home field in football. The different travel demands and weather conditions would also make things interesting.

I'd have to think the MW would fare the best since it is generally between them and the West most years (in warm weather FLN environments) and they'd be fine in any cold conditions. The West would probably lose a bit of dominance when they headed to the MW and the NE and the Northeast would improve a bit when in cold weather conditions in the NE and MW. At least in theory that's what might happen.

[daman]

Seriously though, if they held FL at VCP in December, dont you think the results would be quite a bit different rather than having them at Balboa?Yeah...with the way the MW ran in the conditions in the above photos, they would've killed everyone. They ran 8 of the top 19 all-times bests on the Parkside course in that race.

[watchout]

I've always been a proponent of rotating FLN on a 4 year basis. Adding a home course advantage would be like trying to defend your home field in football. The different travel demands and weather conditions would also make things interesting.

I'd have to think the MW would fare the best since it is generally between them and the West most years (in warm weather FLN environments) and they'd be fine in any cold conditions. The West would probably lose a bit of dominance when they headed to the MW and the NE and the Northeast would improve a bit when in cold weather conditions in the NE and MW. At least in theory that's what might happen.

I don't see the NW as having "home field advantage" when the course is run in southern Cali... but that's just a disadvantage the NW runners have to live with even to qualify, I guess. Many don't even make the trip down there (although pretty much all the elites do)

[Kalaby]

I don't see the NW as having "home field advantage" when the course is run in southern Cali... but that's just a disadvantage the NW runners have to live with even to qualify, I guess. Many don't even make the trip down there (although pretty much all the elites do)

Definitely agree, I guess with only 4 FL regions you are going to get some areas that still have to travel very far within their own region. The Pacific NW is the most glaring due to the long distances between venues out west couple with the fact that they produce strong runners and teams year after year. If they ever added another FL region, it would probably be there.

The one thing you don't have to do is travel all the way across the country and 3 time zones for FLN or NTN. Not making excuses for the NE (at FLN), because I don't think that it makes or breaks things to a large degree, but I think that long travel can lead to some "off performances" from time to time.

[s2fan]

You misunderstood what I was talking about and I since explained to Sully so maybe you should check that out.....


Get off the crack, jack.

Your excuse making was crystal clear - hard to be misunderstood.

backtrACKIng attempt to sully didnt flow, The dude that started in 80th didnt stay there...cuz he didnt belong there. Simple as that. Getting to 11 was a little crazy - but getting to 30th would have done the job in this case.



You score five runners and York put 6 guys ahead of FM's #5 and was less than a second away from putting all 7 ahead of him....had one of FM's guys had a bad race, York would've beaten them easily. FM had no room for error and York did.

FM was the team that was "lucky".

Sorry again. One of FMs had a bad race. 5th all year was Fitzgibbon. 5th that day - KIng. Fitz finished ahead of toga #5 at states and Feds. A normal race by Fitz would have put them closer to toga than York. Reality check needed. Good luck.

[watchout]

Definitely agree, I guess with only 4 FL regions you are going to get some areas that still have to travel very far within their own region. The Pacific NW is the most glaring due to the long distances between venues out west couple with the fact that they produce strong runners and teams year after year. If they ever added another FL region, it would probably be there.

The one thing you don't have to do is travel all the way across the country and 3 time zones for FLN or NTN. Not making excuses for the NE (at FLN), because I don't think that it makes or breaks things to a large degree, but I think that long travel can lead to some "off performances" from time to time.

True. But I don't think it would make that big of an effect if teams (for NTN) came on the Thursday before the meet. That way, by Friday they should relatively be on track, and Saturday wouldn't be as bad.

I don't know, my experience with time changes from different time zones is it only really hits you on that first day. I usually settle in by the second (Friday for NTN's case)

[daman]

Get off the crack, jack.

Your excuse making was crystal clear - hard to be misunderstood.

backtrACKIng attempt to sully didnt flow, The dude that started in 80th didnt stay there...cuz he didnt belong there. Simple as that. Getting to 11 was a little crazy - but getting to 30th would have done the job in this case.



Sorry again. One of FMs had a bad race. 5th all year was Fitzgibbon. 5th that day - KIng. Fitz finished ahead of toga #5 at states and Feds. A normal race by Fitz would have put them closer to toga than York. Reality check needed. Good luck.Don't tell me what I meant, fool....Sully's one helluva a lot more convincing as a rational person than you are.

I guess only NY runners have bad races that affect their scores.....you're the one making excuses.....

York beat FM twice in 2 years.....2-0.....make it 3-0 if Aris gets on knees and blows Bloom to get another bid.....good luck to you and live with it, chump.

[watchout]

Get off the crack, jack.

Your excuse making was crystal clear - hard to be misunderstood.

backtrACKIng attempt to sully didnt flow, The dude that started in 80th didnt stay there...cuz he didnt belong there. Simple as that. Getting to 11 was a little crazy - but getting to 30th would have done the job in this case.



Sorry again. One of FMs had a bad race. 5th all year was Fitzgibbon. 5th that day - KIng. Fitz finished ahead of toga #5 at states and Feds. A normal race by Fitz would have put them closer to toga than York. Reality check needed. Good luck.

not to get involved in this or anything, but...

22 Tom Achtien 08 Elmhurst XC Club 17:13.6 22 185.5 185
45 Mike Fry 07 Elmhurst XC Club 17:32.3 45 179.2 179

Fry was off by a good 10-15 seconds at NTN, would have moved him up nearly 20 spots. That would have put York at 114, 3 behind Saratoga.

But "ifs" don't really matter... you could go through the list with every single team.

Rock Springs would have ended up #16, not way back in #19.
Mead would have finished very close to the front trio.
Ferris would have finished pretty close to Mead.
Warren Central wouldn't be far behind Chapel Hill
Central Catholic would have been top-6 at worst.

Etc. etc.

The ran came out as it came out. You can't always be making excuses.

Fact: The race was close.

That's all that matters. Anyone can go on and on about any team, showing how they could have done better.

sounds weird coming from me, no doubt...

[pokerking55]

York beat FM twice in 2 years.....2-0.....make it 3-0 if Aris gets on knees and blows Bloom to get another bid.....good luck to you and live with it, chump.

loled for that one

[greenman]

not to get involved in this or anything, but...

22 Tom Achtien 08 Elmhurst XC Club 17:13.6 22 185.5 185
45 Mike Fry 07 Elmhurst XC Club 17:32.3 45 179.2 179

Fry was off by a good 10-15 seconds at NTN, would have moved him up nearly 20 spots. That would have put York at 114, 3 behind Saratoga.

But "ifs" don't really matter... you could go through the list with every single team.

Rock Springs would have ended up #16, not way back in #19.
Mead would have finished very close to the front trio.
Ferris would have finished pretty close to Mead.
Warren Central wouldn't be far behind Chapel Hill
Central Catholic would have been top-6 at worst.

Etc. etc.

The ran came out as it came out. You can't always be making excuses.

Fact: The race was close.

That's all that matters. Anyone can go on and on about any team, showing how they could have done better.

sounds weird coming from me, no doubt...Also, Montgomery was a lot closer to the Dettmans earlier and was at least with Kuzcwara at state.

Exactly right, every team probably had guys not run up to par.

You could also say York was not allowed to train under their coaches and their state meet was a month earlier, but that's just the way it is. They ran pretty well in 2004 under those conditions so they don't use that as an excuse.

[watchout]

Also, Montgomery was a lot closer to the Dettmans earlier and was at least with Kuzcwara at state.

Exactly right, every team probably had guys not run up to par.

You could also say York was not allowed to train under their coaches and their state meet was a month earlier, but that's just the way it is. They ran pretty well in 2004 under those conditions so they don't use that as an excuse.

Washington has the same rule for coaches.

[s2fan]

Don't tell me what I meant, fool

oh - perhaps I misunderstood.



Well, York hammered FM in 2004, beat them again last year and only got second because one guy on Toga went nuts and passed 80 guys over the last 2 miles of the race.


lol.

York lost cause a 1:53/4:14/9:15 guy didnt finish 90th at ntn.

[daman]

Hey...let's really crank up some controversy....how about this Murdock?

He helps Toga win a national title, then bolts to Shen who will probably go to NTN this year while Toga sinks back down. Looking at the "rent-a-runner" revolving door at Toga, at least York can say their kids stick with the program and don't leave for other schools and better opportunities.

Wonder why he didn't leave last year....guess a national title is worth dealing with hating the program.

[s2fan]

The ran came out as it came out. You can't always be making excuses.

Fact: The race was close.

That's all that matters. Anyone can go on and on about any team, showing how they could have done better.

sounds weird coming from me, no doubt...

no doubt - and agree with you (for first time, perhaps :) )

Fm ran a great race - comments were just a correction to a previous post.

[daman]

oh - perhaps I misunderstood.



lol.

York lost cause a 1:52/4:14/9:15 guy didnt finish 90th at ntn.York had a 9:11 guy (Montgomery) finish 69th......it does happen.

I give the kid credit for his efforts and you try to downplay it. You don't make a whole lot of sense.

[daman]

no doubt - and agree with you (for first time, perhaps :) )

Fm ran a great race - comments were just a correction to a previous post.He directed that post at you for making the excuse about Fitzgibbons....you're sharp as a marble.

[CaliRunner19]

oh noes isn't it pretty early to be starting these arguments? wait like 2 or 3 weeks :D

[s2fan]

I give the kid credit for his efforts and you try to downplay it. You don't make a whole lot of sense.


Now I understand, We were both trying to give saratoga credit.

I read the post totally wrong. Got it. Thanks for clearing it up.

[CaliRunner19]

you are really being a cack

[CoachK]

travelling to altitude? ouch... not sure how low-landers (such as myself) would like that

but what about moving something to St. Louis? That's fairly central... as central as you are going to get with a large metropolis, at least. give them USATF Nationals or something... instead of having xc champs in Rhode Island or wherever, and track in Indiana?

That way, no one is quite left out... or at least not as much.

It would do more to follow the ideal of spreading championships around the country, so that every part gets helped out and sees the same effects as other national championships.
USATF XC Nationals rotate among different regions of the country every 3 years, West, Central, East. Went from Atlanta (East) in 2002, to Albuquerque (West) in 2003, Chicago (Central) in 2004, Rhode Island (back to East) in 2005. This year will be in Spokane (West), and next year is already set for University of Kansas (Central). Bids for the return east in 2008 will be decided at this year's conventions. I think they do a very good job of spreading things out, as the last 6 years represent 6 totally different areas. You can only bid for the meet when it falls in your region's year.

Atlanta - Southeast
Albuquerque - Southwest
Chicago - Great Lakes
Rhode Island - Northeast
Spokane - Northwest
Kansas - Midwest / Heartland

As for the elevation issues, 2003 in Albuquerque was a very difficult experience. Wouldn't want to repeat that again anytime soon.

[tudman]

This is a big apology to Rich Gonzalez about a previous post of mine about his Manhattan analysis. Atypical of me, I didn't read his complete article and listened to some other people's interpretation of it. Again, my apologies.
I think his analysis is right on the money as far as the teams running so well. NTN has raised the bar, considerably. Obviously, Forys, Gruenwald, and Murdoch established themselves as among the greatest Vanny runners ever. But I've always wondered what the all-time Footlocker greats would have run if they ran at Manhattan. As far as breaking 12:00, time will tell.

[NYrunner]

This is a big apology to Rich Gonzalez about a previous post of mine about his Manhattan analysis. Atypical of me, I didn't read his complete article and listened to some other people's interpretation of it. Again, my apologies.
I think his analysis is right on the money as far as the teams running so well. NTN has raised the bar, considerably. Obviously, Forys, Gruenwald, and Murdoch established themselves as among the greatest Vanny runners ever. But I've always wondered what the all-time Footlocker greats would have run if they ran at Manhattan. As far as breaking 12:00, time will tell.


I just hope that if the NYS teams run really fast at Bowdoin someone from dyestat gives us a 20 paragraph explanation of how that is not such a big deal. We need to make sure people don't make the mistake of thinking the NE is that good, relative to the rest of the country. We all know this is a down year for the NE.

[backtoback]

All this talk of having the site of NTN rotate around the country is pointless. As long as Nike's sponsoring it, the race will be held in Portland. That's where their headquarters is. If they had to fly all their support people, etc. to a different location for the race, it'd probably double the cost for them.

One thing to keep in mind is alot of NTN's support people are flying TO Portland to run the meet. The vast majority dont come from the area.

[Jew]

Seriously though, if they held FL at VCP in December, dont you think the results would be quite a bit different rather than having them at Balboa?

yes


and watchout, what I meant was top runners from all over the country who are recruited to run for northeast teams in college.

[Dr. Kenneth Noisewater]

Hey...let's really crank up some controversy....how about this Murdock?

He helps Toga win a national title, then bolts to Shen who will probably go to NTN this year while Toga sinks back down. Looking at the "rent-a-runner" revolving door at Toga, at least York can say their kids stick with the program and don't leave for other schools and better opportunities.

Wonder why he didn't leave last year....guess a national title is worth dealing with hating the program.



I cant believe you just said that. You obviously have no idea what you are talking about. Murdock had no national title aspirations when he transferred to shen, he was moving there anyway and there were problems in Toga with the coaches which Ive probably mentioned in previous posts. At the end of his sophmore year, he had no problems and his family was not moving so why would he tranfer?

But while we're on the subject, Im glad you admitted Shen will be in contention for that national title.

[daman]

I cant believe you just said that. You obviously have no idea what you are talking about. Murdock had no national title aspirations when he transferred to shen, he was moving there anyway and there were problems in Toga with the coaches which Ive probably mentioned in previous posts. At the end of his sophmore year, he had no problems and his family was not moving so why would he tranfer?

But while we're on the subject, Im glad you admitted Shen will be in contention for that national title.Actually I just said they will go to NTN, made no prediction on how they will do.

But I don't agree anyway.....too much of a coincidence that he transfers from one NTN team to another. You saying he didn't know Shen would be any good? Think he and his parents hadn't checked out the program and where it was going?

I'm not saying he did anything illegal, and actually I don't care that he runs for Shen...but that NTN title for Toga should have an asterisk next to it for "this program uses free agents".

[minde15]

Actually I just said they will go to NTN, made no prediction on how they will do.

But I don't agree anyway.....too much of a coincidence that he transfers from one NTN team to another. You saying he didn't know Shen would be any good? Think he and his parents hadn't checked out the program and where it was going?

I'm not saying he did anything illegal, and actually I don't care that he runs for Shen...but that NTN title for Toga should have an asterisk next to it for "this program uses free agents".


how is living in saratoga until his senior year of hs make him a free agent that saratoga used??? you cant actually think that makes any sense do you? shen really wasnt going to be anything special until danaher decided to come back to public school AND murdocks family moved to clifton park.

[watchout]

and watchout, what I meant was top runners from all over the country who are recruited to run for northeast teams in college.

but not many West coast runners run for NE teams in college.. some do, but the huge majority stay on the west side, or go to a mid-land school (i.e. Arkansas, Wisconsin, Michigan)

and, again, that's college... not high school. And that's 8k, not 2.5 mile..

[newestmember]

how is living in saratoga until his senior year of hs make him a free agent that saratoga used??? you cant actually think that makes any sense do you? shen really wasnt going to be anything special until danaher decided to come back to public school AND murdocks family moved to clifton park.
TWO free agents? Wow!

[watchout]

I just hope that if the NYS teams run really fast at Bowdoin someone from dyestat gives us a 20 paragraph explanation of how that is not such a big deal. We need to make sure people don't make the mistake of thinking the NE is that good, relative to the rest of the country. We all know this is a down year for the NE.

I guess that if some teams run really fast at Woodward or Sun Willows or Detweiller or anywhere else, that they don't deserve as much consideration because the teams at Bowdoin had good days?

Come on. There's no bias in this thinking at all!

[lharpnad]

Actually I just said they will go to NTN, made no prediction on how they will do.

But I don't agree anyway.....too much of a coincidence that he transfers from one NTN team to another. You saying he didn't know Shen would be any good? Think he and his parents hadn't checked out the program and where it was going?

I'm not saying he did anything illegal, and actually I don't care that he runs for Shen...but that NTN title for Toga should have an asterisk next to it for "this program uses free agents".
I second the notion thats its stupid to say saratoga should have an asterisk. Its not like any of those guys transfered there. And secondly if you were in murdocks or danhers shoes and you had the possiblity of running for a natioanally ranked team with big time media exposure vs. pretty much all by yourself wouldn't you want to be on the good team if you could very easily and legally transfer to another school. Its not like these kids parents were moving around so they can run, I belive both already lived in the school district. I think its smart of them so both can get better training and better exposure for college etc. How would you not want to be on a team that has a chance to go to a national championship?

[daman]

I think its smart of them so both can get better training and better exposure for college etc. How would you not want to be on a team that has a chance to go to a national championship?And that's what they did. That Saratoga program has people in and out of it all the time.

Murdock and Blood..did they or did they not both leave the program the season AFTER winning NTN?

Guilty.....and if you disagree I'll punch you in your babymaker.:)

[Dr. Kenneth Noisewater]

And that's what they did. That Saratoga program has people in and out of it all the time.

Murdock and Blood..did they or did they not both leave the program the season AFTER winning NTN?

Guilty.....and if you disagree I'll punch you in your babymaker.:)




Yeah you're right, Blood obviously left Saratoga so she could join a national caliber team. Oh wait a minute, she ran unnattached with no team affiliation at all. If she wanted to win another championship, she would have just stayed with Toga. Both have to do with conflicts with the coaches, it's not like Murdock thought "hmmm, i like running for toga, but shen has a better team, i think ill transfer there". Please dont talk about things which you are completely uninformed about.

[daman]

Yeah you're right, Blood obviously left Saratoga so she could join a national caliber team. Oh wait a minute, she ran unnattached with no team affiliation at all. If she wanted to win another championship, she would have just stayed with Toga. Both have to do with conflicts with the coaches, it's not like Murdock thought "hmmm, i like running for toga, but shen has a better team, i think ill transfer there". Please dont talk about things which you are completely uninformed about.No, Dr. Kenneth Nosepicker....what's the frequency, Kenneth?

They stuck it out in spite of their dislike to get their championship, then left....and didn't other top girls transfer in? In and out....sounds like a great way to get a championship.....just like the Yankees always try and buy a World Series, must be an NY thang.

[Derrick08]

I don't think this is worth arguing, especially since Illinois has had some pretty talented runners move a couple blocks over and run for a national championship team *cough*Dettmans*cough*

[daman]

I don't think this is worth arguing, especially since Illinois has had some pretty talented runners move a couple blocks over and run for a national championship team *cough*Dettmans*cough*Yeah, but the Dettmans ran middle school in York's district as I remember, and they ran all four years....they didn't transfer in and they didn't leave the program.

Do they still live in Elmhurst?

[GeorgieTheK]

They stuck it out in spite of their dislike to get their championship, then left....and didn't other top girls transfer in? In and out....sounds like a great way to get a championship.....just like the Yankees always try and buy a World Series, must be an NY thang.


I must say, this has been some of the best baiting I've seen yet on Dyestat.


No one pushes buttons like Daman.

[daman]

I must say, this has been some of the best baiting I've seen yet on Dyestat.


No one pushes buttons like Daman.;)

[Derrick08]

I believe the dettmans were supposed to go to willowbrook.

[rnn1ngf00l]

So daman...you come home from 'life' and sit on the computer typing your life away on dyestat....


5:45 - 11:45 pretty much posting consistently in every hour last night
and tonight you get home a little earlier so you jump on that chance to sit here from 4:20 until now [11:10] to pick apart some kid's family and school situation that you've never met...


Go for a night run, or study, maybe take a lady out to dinner for christ's sake.

[watchout]

So daman...you come home from 'life' and sit on the computer typing your life away on dyestat....


5:45 - 11:45 pretty much posting consistently in every hour last night
and tonight you get home a little earlier so you jump on that chance to sit here from 4:20 until now [11:10] to pick apart some kid's family and school situation that you've never met...


Go for a night run, or study, maybe take a lady out to dinner for christ's sake.

this is demoralizing.

:(

thanks for making me feel like crap.

[rnn1ngf00l]

Now imagine if I made fun of your team, your family, your decisions to further your life goals, etc...


It gets pretty rough.


You guys are innocently on dyestat all the time, just having fun, going with the flow...you don't realize how pathetic it could be made out to be. Pretty much exactly the same way somebody can make a kid that just moved into a new district and happens to be a good runner can make them seem like a 'championship chaser' or pretty much a criminal.

[daman]

So daman...you come home from 'life' and sit on the computer typing your life away on dyestat....


5:45 - 11:45 pretty much posting consistently in every hour last night
and tonight you get home a little earlier so you jump on that chance to sit here from 4:20 until now [11:10] to pick apart some kid's family and school situation that you've never met...


Go for a night run, or study, maybe take a lady out to dinner for christ's sake.And what do you call someone who takes the time to monitor when another person is online?

Pompous ass.

[watchout]

Now imagine if I made fun of your team, your family, your decisions to further your life goals, etc...


It gets pretty rough.


You guys are innocently on dyestat all the time, just having fun, going with the flow...you don't realize how pathetic it could be made out to be. Pretty much exactly the same way somebody can make a kid that just moved into a new district and happens to be a good runner can make them seem like a 'championship chaser' or pretty much a criminal.

Yes, well, we all have our reasons for doing what we do. Do we need to get into the reasons why you feel the need to talk about how you are so much better than others? Because that could get pretty rough, and luckily for me I enjoy "getting a little rough" sometimes.

[rnn1ngf00l]

"Search: Posts Made By: daman

Showing results 1 to 25 of 500
Search took 0.18 seconds. "


watchout: First off, I'm not better than anyone on here, nor do I pretend to be. I was just pointing out how you can skew innocent actions into something that is completely false. I'm on dyestat alot, more than I probably should be, but it doesn't cut into my life as significantly as anyone would think. Sorry if it was harsh, but so is cutting down a few of my friends like daman has been doing [even if he is just pushing buttons...very well].

[watchout]

"Search: Posts Made By: daman

Showing results 1 to 25 of 500
Search took 0.18 seconds. "


watchout: First off, I'm not better than anyone on here, nor do I pretend to be. I was just pointing out how you can skew innocent actions into something that is completely false. I'm on dyestat alot, more than I probably should be, but it doesn't cut into my life as significantly as anyone would think. Sorry if it was harsh, but so is cutting down a few of my friends like daman has been doing [even if he is just pushing buttons...very well].

It wasn't harsh, it's the fact that you decide that that is something you should willingly attack, when you yourself are on here doing the same thing. Hypocritical to go after someone for being on Dyestat, when you yourself are replying on Dyestat. Makes mucho sense

[g2g4gold]

It is screwed up to talk poorly of other runners. You realize that a lot of the guys that people speak about read these forums even if they dont have a name. Luckily, some guys have the self control to not make a name and come on here and respond. Imagine if you read something that was extremely critical of your life or your running. It would probally hurt pretty bad, not everyone has such a postive attitude as Acosta did and can just laugh it off. Be considerate please.

[watchout]

Hasn't this topic been beaten to #@%$# death by now?

A few days ago, yeah.

Now it's just a general "let's talk about our regional biases" type thread, as they all seem to turn into. And plus daman trying to push people's buttons :D

[Scotty]

Chiming in here a little late.

To my friends Kalaby, Daman, Watchout...

The Vanny 2.5 (IMO) is certainly not soft NOW. Not sure that it was before, but it is true, the 96/97 refurb shaved a few sec from the course. Keep in mind, only about 1.5mi of the 2.5mi was improved. The rest was untouched.

The Vanny 3.1 CR is a very strong 15:14.2 (Josh's race was run on a slightly altered course. He ran 15:28pt soon after on the traditional course). A terrific record, IMO. Guys like TG, Forys, STaye (if healthy) will take their shots and I look forward to it. However, I do not believe that any of the three will take Smith's mark down. Many great guys have tried and failed over the yrs. I do not believe any of the three will get closer than 3 or 4 seconds. Just my feeling.

Other guys at Vanny 3.1:

True...15:22pt, Hudson...15:18.0, DiJoseph..15:17.6, Trautman...15:19.6, ATaye...15:21pt, Barnicle...15:24

[GeorgieTheK]

The Vanny 2.5 (IMO) is certainly not soft NOW. Not sure that it was before, but it is true, the 96/97 refurb shaved a few sec from the course. Keep in mind, only about 1.5mi of the 2.5mi was improved. The rest was untouched.


not true. the straightaway is also crushed/packed gravel. in the past it was dirt, sand, or some mix of the two, depending on the conditions and proclivities of the parks dept. so in reality, it's about 2.1 that has been resurfaced. does that make much more of a difference, probably not, but sometimes every little thing helps.

one thing that the course is now (much like holmdel park) is consistent from year to year (and day to day), in all but the worst weather. in the past you could have year when the parks dept was hurting for money and wouldn't do any maintenance at all. or other times when they would dump sand or hay to control erosion. they've used railroad ties, rock bars, and water bars with varying degrees of success. And anyone that had the pleasure of competing on an old cinder track can tell you when the conditions are right, a cinder track can be lightning fast.

all this adds up to what exactly? it'sa guess. obviously, no one knows how much an effect the resurfacing had on the course. there are too many confounding variables to say for sure. most will agree it runs slightly faster.

what is sure is that the potential exists now for more "perfect days" to run the course. in the past, the sun, moon, and stars had to be in alignment to take a legitimate shot at the record. now, you've only got to avoid a heat wave or a nor'easter, and the chances are pretty good.

[Kalaby]

I need to look no further than the 1976, 2002 and 2005 Manhattans to know that the course runs MUCH faster now when the weather is awful.

[gofast11]

[QUOTE=Scotty]Chiming in here a little late.

To my friends Kalaby, Daman, Watchout...

The Vanny 2.5 (IMO) is certainly not soft NOW. Not sure that it was before, but it is true, the 96/97 refurb shaved a few sec from the course. Keep in mind, only about 1.5mi of the 2.5mi was improved. The rest was untouched.





The entire course was improved except for the 400 m run across the field and the short portion on the asphalt after coming out of the woods. It is all crushed bluestone now and before it was all dirt

[Scotty]

George, there may have been stone added to parts of the last straight, but it does not seem one bit faster (I've been on it many times since 97). It looks the same (for the most part) and feels the same as it always did. In addition, heavy rain will cause water to collect in certain spots...just like it always did.

Not saying that stone was not added to parts of the straight (I defer to you on this), but there is no noticeable change. The straight was never a problem in the first place. The cowpath (too sandy) and the backloop were the areas in need.

EDIT: The 500m opening flats are obviously the same. The picnic area, across the bridge, and final downhill are basically the same. Those areas, again, were never a problem.

[Kalaby]

Scotty and Georgie both have this right...

The finishing flats were also resurfaced, but in dry conditions I can't imagine that leads to anything more than a miniscule improvement in time as the former trail was pretty hard packed dirt that provided nice traction as well. As Scotty mentioned, the vast majority of the perceived/real time improvements come from the refurbished cowpath and back hills.

[kk.]

And that's what they did. That Saratoga program has people in and out of it all the time.

Murdock and Blood..did they or did they not both leave the program the season AFTER winning NTN?


I really hope you are joking. Murdock and Blood didn't transfer into Saratoga, they transfered out. I really can't make any sense out of this.. why does it matter that a runner left the team afterwards?


They stuck it out in spite of their dislike to get their championship, then left....and didn't other top girls transfer in? In and out....sounds like a great way to get a championship.....just like the Yankees always try and buy a World Series, must be an NY thang.

The Argyle situation is completely different than kids just wanting to go to a better team.