Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
I agree 1 km spilts could be a bit too frequent. So, why not give splits every 2 km? David Dallman On Wed, 22 Nov 2000, Bettwy, Bob wrote: Allow me to explain why we used mile splits for the announcing at the NCAA XC meet. Remember, we are using high school kids at the intermediate points with walkie talkies. We instruct them to give us the split, the leaders and the team scores or team 1-5 differentials, depending on their abilities. From our past experience, we have found that the kilo marks are just too often (3 minutes) to relay and verify credible information. Therefore, we use the mile splits. Now, if we had running chips on everyone's foot and transponder readers at each kilo, then splits, leaders and team scores would be a breeze!!! I hope this helps, Bob Bettwy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Director - Program Control Washington Group SRS Technologies (703) 351-7266 Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 12:51:16 -0600 From: "Wayne T. Armbrust" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info David Dallman wrote: I must say there's something I don't understand about you all in the USA. Having spent the first 28 years of my life in England, I don't have any problem at all with miles. For cross-country races, where there is less need to compare times across courses because the courses vary a lot, I don't even have a problem with races STILL being contested over miles. But here we have 2 races whose total distance is declared to be a whole number of kilometres (6, 10 respectively) yet the splits are recorded every mile! So at the end, there's a fraction of a mile left over for which you don't get any split. Would have been much more interesting to see kilometre splits and to be able to look at the final kilometer split. David Dallman I have given up trying to argue the logic that you have expressed above. Maybe when someone from another country points out how foolish we are to give mile splits in kilometer races it will get out attention. By the way David, we also give mile splits in metric road races. To be fair, however, I was there (coldest I've been in many years) and some kilometer splits were given. Also, kilometer splits are often given in track races. But mile splits are universally given in road races and in almost all cross country races. - -- Wayne T. Armbrust, Ph.D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Computomarx(tm) 3604 Grant Ct. Columbia MO 65203-5800 USA (573) 445-6675 (voice FAX) http://www.Computomarx.com "Know the difference between right and wrong... Always give your best effort... Treat others the way you'd like to be treated..." - - Coach Bill Sudeck David Dallman CERN - SIS
RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
Bob, Would a more sensible option be to give 2 k splits?? Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Bettwy, Bob Sent: 22 November 2000 14:59 To: Track List (E-mail) Subject: Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info Allow me to explain why we used mile splits for the announcing at the NCAA XC meet. Remember, we are using high school kids at the intermediate points with walkie talkies. We instruct them to give us the split, the leaders and the team scores or team 1-5 differentials, depending on their abilities. From our past experience, we have found that the kilo marks are just too often (3 minutes) to relay and verify credible information. Therefore, we use the mile splits. Now, if we had running chips on everyone's foot and transponder readers at each kilo, then splits, leaders and team scores would be a breeze!!! I hope this helps, Bob Bettwy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Director - Program Control Washington Group SRS Technologies (703) 351-7266 Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 12:51:16 -0600 From: "Wayne T. Armbrust" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info David Dallman wrote: I must say there's something I don't understand about you all in the USA. Having spent the first 28 years of my life in England, I don't have any problem at all with miles. For cross-country races, where there is less need to compare times across courses because the courses vary a lot, I don't even have a problem with races STILL being contested over miles. But here we have 2 races whose total distance is declared to be a whole number of kilometres (6, 10 respectively) yet the splits are recorded every mile! So at the end, there's a fraction of a mile left over for which you don't get any split. Would have been much more interesting to see kilometre splits and to be able to look at the final kilometer split. David Dallman I have given up trying to argue the logic that you have expressed above. Maybe when someone from another country points out how foolish we are to give mile splits in kilometer races it will get out attention. By the way David, we also give mile splits in metric road races. To be fair, however, I was there (coldest I've been in many years) and some kilometer splits were given. Also, kilometer splits are often given in track races. But mile splits are universally given in road races and in almost all cross country races. - -- Wayne T. Armbrust, Ph.D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Computomarx(tm) 3604 Grant Ct. Columbia MO 65203-5800 USA (573) 445-6675 (voice FAX) http://www.Computomarx.com "Know the difference between right and wrong... Always give your best effort... Treat others the way you'd like to be treated..." - - Coach Bill Sudeck
t-and-f: A Zatopek recollection
Fortunately quite a lot about the life of Emil Zatopek has been documented for posteriority. I don't need to repeat any of this here. However one small personal anecdote came to mind when I read Randall's autograph posting. I first became a track and field enthusiast in the early 1950s when I was around 13 years of age. It is not surprising that Emil Zatopek was my hero. I also had a book in which I collected the autographs of international athletes, and it had lots in it already. I think it must have been in autumn 1955 at the White City stadium in London when I saw him run. After the meeting we gathered outside the dressing rooms to collect autographs. I was not able to get to Emil before the athletes got onto the coach to take them back to their hotel. However, I beckoned to him at the window and he put out his hand and took my book to sign it. At that moment the coach pulled away. I ran after it and managed to catch it up at a red light about 300 metres down the road. As I arrived at the coach, totally out of breath, I saw Emil looking back down the road with a very worried expression, because he still had my book. When he saw that it was me, he quickly threw it down to me, gave a laugh and said something like I was lucky to have got it back. So even then, in the midst of his fame, he was able to feel exactly what a small boy like me would have felt if I had lost my book this way. Truly a very special person. David Dallman
t-and-f: Athlete wants office purged
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/gam/Sports/20001123/STRAK.html Athlete wants office purged.url
Re: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
In a message dated 11/23/0 5:18:25 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bob, Would a more sensible option be to give 2 k splits?? Mike It wouldn't matter if you gave 1k or 2k splits...the vast majority of people in attendance at an American x-country race wouldn't be able to relate to the times. And for those who want to argue the mathematical logic of projecting the final time (based on the kilometer splits)...who cares what the final time is in most x-country races, except for those rare occasions when a venerable course record is being challenged? Walt Murphy X-Country X-Press Happy Thanksgiving to all!
Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
Michael Casey wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] said "who cares what the final time is in most x-country races" If thats the case who cares what the split times are? Also I think you underestimate the ability of the people in attendance at an American cross country race to relate to km splits. My knowledge of American Cross country people is that they are very intelligent, and mathematically astute and would have NO problem in relating to km splits in metric races and mile splits in imperial races. Mike A lot more people can divide 6 or 10 by 1 or 2 than can divide the same by 1.609344! -- Wayne T. Armbrust, Ph.D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Computomarx 3604 Grant Ct. Columbia MO 65203-5800 USA (573) 445-6675 (voice FAX) http://www.Computomarx.com "Know the difference between right and wrong... Always give your best effort... Treat others the way you'd like to be treated..." - Coach Bill Sudeck
RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
Hi Walt, The points still remain. I have great faith in the american fans ability to relate km times to pace. And I agree with you that final times in crosscountry races are relatively meaningless, but if this is true, so are the split times. Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 23 November 2000 15:41 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info In a message dated 11/23/00 9:32:41 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If thats the case who cares what the split times are? Also I think you underestimate the ability of the people in attendance at an American cross country race to relate to km splits. My knowledge of American Cross country people is that they are very intelligent, and mathematically astute and would have NO problem in relating to km splits in metric races and mile splits in imperial races. This has nothing to with intelligence...in my opinion, most American fans relate to mile splits (in x-country races) in terms of pace, rather than a projection of a final time. And I would still argue that final times, especially in races run in severe conditions, such as those present in Ames, are relatively meaningless Unlike races run on the track, it's impossible to compare times from one course to another. Times can be historically meaningful when they occur on courses that have a long tradition, such as Mt.SAC and Van Cortlandt Park. Walt Murphy
Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
It seems to me that cross-country split times have two important functions: (1) during the race, they help runners to gauge their effort and strategize, and (2) after the race, they enable fans/statisticians/coaches to reconstruct the progress of a race, to see who had the most effective pacing strategy, and to appreciate things like spectacular mid-race surges and finishing kicks. Given those two functions--race pacing and race reconstruction--I can see why US races stick with mile splits. In terms of athletes pacing themselves, it shouldn't matter if they are receiving kilo splits or mile splits, but if it has to be a choice between 2k splits or mile splits, then mile splits are more frequent and therefore a greater aid. In terms of reconstructing the race, the same argument holds--splits every 1609 rather than 2000 mean that runners' strategies are more frequently monitored for later analysis. And, as an unintended fringe benefit, mile splits in a 10k mean that you also get a split on what is almost the last quarter mile of each runner, which is very useful in tight races, much like having the last 300 in a 1500. I for one would like to know the split for Kelly's last .2! AGB
Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
You die-hard mile split people out there (you know who you are) must really have got bent out of shape when tracks went to 400 m and you couldn't get mile splits in track races anymore. Of course, some of you still take 1600 m splits. (1600 doesn't divide into integer kilometer distances very well either). -- Wayne T. Armbrust, Ph.D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Computomarx 3604 Grant Ct. Columbia MO 65203-5800 USA (573) 445-6675 (voice FAX) http://www.Computomarx.com "Know the difference between right and wrong... Always give your best effort... Treat others the way you'd like to be treated..." - Coach Bill Sudeck
RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
Adam G Beaver said "splits every 1609 rather than 2000 mean that runners' strategies are more frequently monitored for later analysis." Hi Adam Yes and 1000m is less than 1609 giving even more useful information. Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Adam G Beaver Sent: 23 November 2000 16:06 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info It seems to me that cross-country split times have two important functions: (1) during the race, they help runners to gauge their effort and strategize, and (2) after the race, they enable fans/statisticians/coaches to reconstruct the progress of a race, to see who had the most effective pacing strategy, and to appreciate things like spectacular mid-race surges and finishing kicks. Given those two functions--race pacing and race reconstruction--I can see why US races stick with mile splits. In terms of athletes pacing themselves, it shouldn't matter if they are receiving kilo splits or mile splits, but if it has to be a choice between 2k splits or mile splits, then mile splits are more frequent and therefore a greater aid. In terms of reconstructing the race, the same argument holds--splits every 1609 rather than 2000 mean that runners' strategies are more frequently monitored for later analysis. And, as an unintended fringe benefit, mile splits in a 10k mean that you also get a split on what is almost the last quarter mile of each runner, which is very useful in tight races, much like having the last 300 in a 1500. I for one would like to know the split for Kelly's last .2! AGB
RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
Everyone has the right to tell someone what they should or shouldn't do! They call them opinions. As for "... I know more American fans who relate to km splits than those who don't." Don't try to get one past me, Sonny. That's simply untrue. Keep on runnin' brother. malmo -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael Casey Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2000 9:04 AM To: malmo Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info Hi Malmo, I beg to disagree with your "emphatic" statement. Having competed in the US for 4 years I know more American fans who relate to km splits than those who don't. Admitting that I know only a miniscule minority of American fans it still negates your statement that American fans do not relate to Kilometer splits, at least SOME do. My point is that if mile splits were done away with overnight and km splits introduced I have every confidence that the VAST majority of American fans would have no problem in adapting to them. With regard to your "emphatic" statement that American fans need not relate to km splits, I have no argument with that or with the statement that km splits "work just fine". As to your "emphatic" statement that American fans "should not relate to km splits" has anyone got the right to tell the American fans what they should or shouldn't do?? Regards Mike -Original Message- From: malmo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 23 November 2000 16:48 To: Michael Casey; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info Speaking as an American, Mike, and as one who is fluent in metric as well as imperial, I will say EMPHATICALLY: American fans do not, need not, and should not relate to kilometer splits. Mile splits work just fine. You're over-estimating the intelligence of Americans. The "land of Jerry Springer" does not possess the ability to relate to km splits. malmo -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael Casey Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2000 7:47 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info Hi Walt, The points still remain. I have great faith in the american fans ability to relate km times to pace. And I agree with you that final times in crosscountry races are relatively meaningless, but if this is true, so are the split times. Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 23 November 2000 15:41 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info In a message dated 11/23/00 9:32:41 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If thats the case who cares what the split times are? Also I think you underestimate the ability of the people in attendance at an American cross country race to relate to km splits. My knowledge of American Cross country people is that they are very intelligent, and mathematically astute and would have NO problem in relating to km splits in metric races and mile splits in imperial races. This has nothing to with intelligence...in my opinion, most American fans relate to mile splits (in x-country races) in terms of pace, rather than a projection of a final time. And I would still argue that final times, especially in races run in severe conditions, such as those present in Ames, are relatively meaningless Unlike races run on the track, it's impossible to compare times from one course to another. Times can be historically meaningful when they occur on courses that have a long tradition, such as Mt.SAC and Van Cortlandt Park. Walt Murphy
RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
Speaking as an American, Mike, and as one who is fluent in metric as well as imperial, I will say EMPHATICALLY: American fans do not, need not, and should not relate to kilometer splits. Mile splits work just fine. You're over-estimating the intelligence of Americans. The "land of Jerry Springer" does not possess the ability to relate to km splits. malmo -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael Casey Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2000 7:47 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info Hi Walt, The points still remain. I have great faith in the american fans ability to relate km times to pace. And I agree with you that final times in crosscountry races are relatively meaningless, but if this is true, so are the split times. Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 23 November 2000 15:41 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info In a message dated 11/23/00 9:32:41 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If thats the case who cares what the split times are? Also I think you underestimate the ability of the people in attendance at an American cross country race to relate to km splits. My knowledge of American Cross country people is that they are very intelligent, and mathematically astute and would have NO problem in relating to km splits in metric races and mile splits in imperial races. This has nothing to with intelligence...in my opinion, most American fans relate to mile splits (in x-country races) in terms of pace, rather than a projection of a final time. And I would still argue that final times, especially in races run in severe conditions, such as those present in Ames, are relatively meaningless Unlike races run on the track, it's impossible to compare times from one course to another. Times can be historically meaningful when they occur on courses that have a long tradition, such as Mt.SAC and Van Cortlandt Park. Walt Murphy
RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
Hi Malmo, A couple of points. 1. Lets keep this civil. 2. Again I point out that of my aquaintances, I know more American fans who relate to km splits. Believe me it is not all that difficult. (It is possible to relate to both). Most of our cross country races and road races had km splits. Mike -Original Message- From: malmo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 23 November 2000 17:12 To: Michael Casey Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info Everyone has the right to tell someone what they should or shouldn't do! They call them opinions. As for "... I know more American fans who relate to km splits than those who don't." Don't try to get one past me, Sonny. That's simply untrue. Keep on runnin' brother. malmo -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael Casey Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2000 9:04 AM To: malmo Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info Hi Malmo, I beg to disagree with your "emphatic" statement. Having competed in the US for 4 years I know more American fans who relate to km splits than those who don't. Admitting that I know only a miniscule minority of American fans it still negates your statement that American fans do not relate to Kilometer splits, at least SOME do. My point is that if mile splits were done away with overnight and km splits introduced I have every confidence that the VAST majority of American fans would have no problem in adapting to them. With regard to your "emphatic" statement that American fans need not relate to km splits, I have no argument with that or with the statement that km splits "work just fine". As to your "emphatic" statement that American fans "should not relate to km splits" has anyone got the right to tell the American fans what they should or shouldn't do?? Regards Mike -Original Message- From: malmo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 23 November 2000 16:48 To: Michael Casey; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info Speaking as an American, Mike, and as one who is fluent in metric as well as imperial, I will say EMPHATICALLY: American fans do not, need not, and should not relate to kilometer splits. Mile splits work just fine. You're over-estimating the intelligence of Americans. The "land of Jerry Springer" does not possess the ability to relate to km splits. malmo -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael Casey Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2000 7:47 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info Hi Walt, The points still remain. I have great faith in the american fans ability to relate km times to pace. And I agree with you that final times in crosscountry races are relatively meaningless, but if this is true, so are the split times. Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 23 November 2000 15:41 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info In a message dated 11/23/00 9:32:41 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If thats the case who cares what the split times are? Also I think you underestimate the ability of the people in attendance at an American cross country race to relate to km splits. My knowledge of American Cross country people is that they are very intelligent, and mathematically astute and would have NO problem in relating to km splits in metric races and mile splits in imperial races. This has nothing to with intelligence...in my opinion, most American fans relate to mile splits (in x-country races) in terms of pace, rather than a projection of a final time. And I would still argue that final times, especially in races run in severe conditions, such as those present in Ames, are relatively meaningless Unlike races run on the track, it's impossible to compare times from one course to another. Times can be historically meaningful when they occur on courses that have a long tradition, such as Mt.SAC and Van Cortlandt Park. Walt Murphy
RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
Thank you Justin. Mike -Original Message- From: Justin Clouder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 23 November 2000 17:46 To: Michael Casey; 'malmo' Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info If I may interject in a private debate... ...one of the things about this metric vs imperial thing which confuses me is why people seem to think that it has to be one or the other. Here in the UK I buy my petrol by the litre yet car makers discuss miles per gallon; I buy milk and beer by the pint and OJ by the litre; I measure long distance and speed in miles yet small distances in centimetres; in conversation people use yards and metres interchangeably; I discuss my height in feet and inches but my weight in kilos; cooking instructions freely mix the two systems. Why, then, is it so difficult for Americans to relate to both as needed? Trivia point: The dollar was the world's first ever decimal currency. In the UK we didn't have one of those until 1971. Justin -- From: malmo Reply To: malmo Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2000 5:12 pm To: Michael Casey Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info Everyone has the right to tell someone what they should or shouldn't do! They call them opinions. As for "... I know more American fans who relate to km splits than those who don't." Don't try to get one past me, Sonny. That's simply untrue. Keep on runnin' brother. malmo -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael Casey Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2000 9:04 AM To: malmo Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info Hi Malmo, I beg to disagree with your "emphatic" statement. Having competed in the US for 4 years I know more American fans who relate to km splits than those who don't. Admitting that I know only a miniscule minority of American fans it still negates your statement that American fans do not relate to Kilometer splits, at least SOME do. My point is that if mile splits were done away with overnight and km splits introduced I have every confidence that the VAST majority of American fans would have no problem in adapting to them. With regard to your "emphatic" statement that American fans need not relate to km splits, I have no argument with that or with the statement that km splits "work just fine". As to your "emphatic" statement that American fans "should not relate to km splits" has anyone got the right to tell the American fans what they should or shouldn't do?? Regards Mike -Original Message- From: malmo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 23 November 2000 16:48 To: Michael Casey; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info Speaking as an American, Mike, and as one who is fluent in metric as well as imperial, I will say EMPHATICALLY: American fans do not, need not, and should not relate to kilometer splits. Mile splits work just fine. You're over-estimating the intelligence of Americans. The "land of Jerry Springer" does not possess the ability to relate to km splits. malmo -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael Casey Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2000 7:47 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info Hi Walt, The points still remain. I have great faith in the american fans ability to relate km times to pace. And I agree with you that final times in crosscountry races are relatively meaningless, but if this is true, so are the split times. Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 23 November 2000 15:41 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info In a message dated 11/23/00 9:32:41 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If thats the case who cares what the split times are? Also I think you underestimate the ability of the people in attendance at an American cross country race to relate to km splits. My knowledge of American Cross country people is that they are very intelligent, and mathematically astute and would have NO problem in relating to km splits in metric races and mile splits in imperial races. This has nothing to with intelligence...in my opinion, most American fans relate to mile splits (in x-country races) in terms of pace, rather than a projection of a final time. And I would still argue that final times, especially in races run in severe conditions, such as those present in Ames, are relatively meaningless Unlike races run on the track, it's impossible to
RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
If I may interject in a private debate... ...one of the things about this metric vs imperial thing which confuses me is why people seem to think that it has to be one or the other. Here in the UK I buy my petrol by the litre yet car makers discuss miles per gallon; I buy milk and beer by the pint and OJ by the litre; I measure long distance and speed in miles yet small distances in centimetres; in conversation people use yards and metres interchangeably; I discuss my height in feet and inches but my weight in kilos; cooking instructions freely mix the two systems. Why, then, is it so difficult for Americans to relate to both as needed? Trivia point: The dollar was the world's first ever decimal currency. In the UK we didn't have one of those until 1971. Justin -- From: malmo Reply To: malmo Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2000 5:12 pm To: Michael Casey Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info Everyone has the right to tell someone what they should or shouldn't do! They call them opinions. As for "... I know more American fans who relate to km splits than those who don't." Don't try to get one past me, Sonny. That's simply untrue. Keep on runnin' brother. malmo -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael Casey Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2000 9:04 AM To: malmo Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info Hi Malmo, I beg to disagree with your "emphatic" statement. Having competed in the US for 4 years I know more American fans who relate to km splits than those who don't. Admitting that I know only a miniscule minority of American fans it still negates your statement that American fans do not relate to Kilometer splits, at least SOME do. My point is that if mile splits were done away with overnight and km splits introduced I have every confidence that the VAST majority of American fans would have no problem in adapting to them. With regard to your "emphatic" statement that American fans need not relate to km splits, I have no argument with that or with the statement that km splits "work just fine". As to your "emphatic" statement that American fans "should not relate to km splits" has anyone got the right to tell the American fans what they should or shouldn't do?? Regards Mike -Original Message- From: malmo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 23 November 2000 16:48 To: Michael Casey; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info Speaking as an American, Mike, and as one who is fluent in metric as well as imperial, I will say EMPHATICALLY: American fans do not, need not, and should not relate to kilometer splits. Mile splits work just fine. You're over-estimating the intelligence of Americans. The "land of Jerry Springer" does not possess the ability to relate to km splits. malmo -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael Casey Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2000 7:47 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info Hi Walt, The points still remain. I have great faith in the american fans ability to relate km times to pace. And I agree with you that final times in crosscountry races are relatively meaningless, but if this is true, so are the split times. Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 23 November 2000 15:41 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info In a message dated 11/23/00 9:32:41 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If thats the case who cares what the split times are? Also I think you underestimate the ability of the people in attendance at an American cross country race to relate to km splits. My knowledge of American Cross country people is that they are very intelligent, and mathematically astute and would have NO problem in relating to km splits in metric races and mile splits in imperial races. This has nothing to with intelligence...in my opinion, most American fans relate to mile splits (in x-country races) in terms of pace, rather than a projection of a final time. And I would still argue that final times, especially in races run in severe conditions, such as those present in Ames, are relatively meaningless Unlike races run on the track, it's impossible to compare times from one course to another. Times can be historically meaningful when they occur on courses that have a long tradition, such as Mt.SAC and Van Cortlandt Park. Walt Murphy
RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
Hi Malmo, I beg to disagree with your "emphatic" statement. Having competed in the US for 4 years I know more American fans who relate to km splits than those who don't. Admitting that I know only a miniscule minority of American fans it still negates your statement that American fans do not relate to Kilometer splits, at least SOME do. My point is that if mile splits were done away with overnight and km splits introduced I have every confidence that the VAST majority of American fans would have no problem in adapting to them. With regard to your "emphatic" statement that American fans need not relate to km splits, I have no argument with that or with the statement that km splits "work just fine". As to your "emphatic" statement that American fans "should not relate to km splits" has anyone got the right to tell the American fans what they should or shouldn't do?? Regards Mike -Original Message- From: malmo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 23 November 2000 16:48 To: Michael Casey; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info Speaking as an American, Mike, and as one who is fluent in metric as well as imperial, I will say EMPHATICALLY: American fans do not, need not, and should not relate to kilometer splits. Mile splits work just fine. You're over-estimating the intelligence of Americans. The "land of Jerry Springer" does not possess the ability to relate to km splits. malmo -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael Casey Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2000 7:47 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info Hi Walt, The points still remain. I have great faith in the american fans ability to relate km times to pace. And I agree with you that final times in crosscountry races are relatively meaningless, but if this is true, so are the split times. Mike -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 23 November 2000 15:41 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info In a message dated 11/23/00 9:32:41 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: If thats the case who cares what the split times are? Also I think you underestimate the ability of the people in attendance at an American cross country race to relate to km splits. My knowledge of American Cross country people is that they are very intelligent, and mathematically astute and would have NO problem in relating to km splits in metric races and mile splits in imperial races. This has nothing to with intelligence...in my opinion, most American fans relate to mile splits (in x-country races) in terms of pace, rather than a projection of a final time. And I would still argue that final times, especially in races run in severe conditions, such as those present in Ames, are relatively meaningless Unlike races run on the track, it's impossible to compare times from one course to another. Times can be historically meaningful when they occur on courses that have a long tradition, such as Mt.SAC and Van Cortlandt Park. Walt Murphy
Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
Malmo wrote: Speaking as an American, Mike, and as one who is fluent in metric as well as imperial, I will say EMPHATICALLY: American fans do not, need not, and should not relate to kilometer splits. Mile splits work just fine. You're over-estimating the intelligence of Americans. The "land of Jerry Springer" does not possess the ability to relate to km splits. malmo Come on, George. The idea that Americans can't relate to metric splits is absurd. Who doesn't relate to the total time in a metric race? If you know that 30:00 is a good time for a 10k cross country race, you will realize that 3:00 kilometer splits is the pace that will get you there, even if you are a Palm Beach Co. voter. -- Wayne T. Armbrust, Ph.D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Computomarx 3604 Grant Ct. Columbia MO 65203-5800 USA (573) 445-6675 (voice FAX) http://www.Computomarx.com "Know the difference between right and wrong... Always give your best effort... Treat others the way you'd like to be treated..." - Coach Bill Sudeck
t-and-f: Kilo Splits at the NCAA XC
Okay, okay, okay...I give... After a court demanded re-count, here are the kilo splits from the Men's NCAA race. These are taken from mile split extrapolations: 1Km: 3:05 2Km: 6:13 (3:08) 3Km: 9:29 (3:16) 4Km: 12:34 (3:05) 5Km: 15:35 (3:01) 6Km: 18:33 (2:58) 7Km: 21:31 (2:58) 8Km: 24:31 (3:00) 9Km: 27:23 (2:52) 10Km: 30:14.5 (2:51.5) I hope this helps everyone. I will have the meet announcer (Dixon Farmer) announce these prior to next years race in Greenville, South Carolina for posterity! Bob Bettwy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Director - Program Control Washington Group SRS Technologies (703) 351-7266
Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
Netters Wayne writes: Of course, some of you still take 1600 m splits. (1600 doesn't divide into integer kilometer distances very well either). Being one of those who uses the 1600 split in training, I will try to explain the irrational.:) I came into track just after the transition to the metric system for most highschools. To me 4 laps on a track is a mile even if it is only 1600m. Why? because the mile is my name for four complete laps those 9m mean about a 2 seconds to me. A discrepancy I can live with even if it drives statictians nuts. It comes down to intuitive familiarity. I can do 1k splits and convert to 1600 and back, but a 7:20 1600 means more to me then a 4:35. This is hard to explain because it gets into a really intangible area of comfort. In a long race on a track it is easier for me to check splits every 4 laps then every 2 and a half. It can be hard to try to remember which side of the track you have to be on to check the split. Walkers in general differ then runners in one aspect of there training. Most walkers train on small loops, accuartely measured. The majority of my training occurs on a 2k out and back - even on my easy days. This has a lot to do with the need for more control of surface and terrain. Walking doesn't work well where there is poor footing and walking down hills is pretty painful. But I digress... In regards to cross country, I have to disagree with Walt about times being meaningless. My times in cross country were always important to me and my coach and our team. A good experienced coach can "adjust" the times if the course runs slow or fast, if it is easy or hard. You can tell whether you team is improving by comparing to a standard course. My best road 8k was 27:27 my best x-c was 27:31. The only time I could really know a difference was when the course was mismeasured. As for understanding splits when I am on the track I think of 5ks as 3 1600 splits and a 200 kick and I think of 10k as 6 1600 splits and a 400 kick. And I'll bet I am not the on one who thinks that way. Interestingly though in 20ks on the road I think in terms of 1k and 2k splits. Guess it is just what ever gets you through the race.
RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
Go out on a one hour run at 3:35 pace. Anyone relate to that? I rest my case. malmo Come on, [malmo]. The idea that Americans can't relate to metric splits is absurd. Who doesn't relate to the total time in a metric race? If you know that 30:00 is a good time for a 10k cross country race, you will realize that 3:00 kilometer splits is the pace that will get you there, even if you are a Palm Beach Co. voter. -- Wayne T. Armbrust, Ph.D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Computomarx 3604 Grant Ct. Columbia MO 65203-5800 USA (573) 445-6675 (voice FAX) http://www.Computomarx.com "Know the difference between right and wrong... Always give your best effort... Treat others the way you'd like to be treated..." - Coach Bill Sudeck
RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
very well put malmo!! very well put.
t-and-f: Who invented interval training?
Y ask Y: For a little Sunday piece I'm writing on Zatopek, I'm interested in knowing who is credited with "inventing" interval training for distance runners -- a la 100x400 that EZ used to run. (Fred Wilt's "How They Train" in 1973 sez: "According to virtually all sources, it was Emil Zatopek who first employed intensive interval training." ) But I'm unsure how other experts view the situation. Was Igloi's system developed concurrently with Zatopek's? Did Gosta Olander in Sweden pioneer this form of training (as Wilt also hints)? Any help would be appreciated. Ken Stone
RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
Here is the basic premise it all boils down to in Track Field gentlemen: THE MILE IS STILL KING. ps All you folks that get upset when Malmo chides you should go down to the store and purchase a Sense of Humor 2000 TM. Keith Whitman Head Cross Country Coach Assistant Track Field Coach University of Nebraska at Kearney Office (308) 865-8070 Home (308) 338-1115 http://www.lopers.com/xcountry/default.htm Fax # (308) 865-8187
Re: t-and-f: Who invented interval training?
Much of this depends on how you define "interval training." People were using short, repetitive runs in training in the 1800s. The early Fins trained using what many would today call intervals. The real credit though probably has to go to Gerschler who trained Harbig to a 1:46 800m in the 1930s and later coached Gordon Pirie. He certainly influence Zatopek and Igloi. Paul On Thu, 23 Nov 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Y ask Y: For a little Sunday piece I'm writing on Zatopek, I'm interested in knowing who is credited with "inventing" interval training for distance runners -- a la 100x400 that EZ used to run. (Fred Wilt's "How They Train" in 1973 sez: "According to virtually all sources, it was Emil Zatopek who first employed intensive interval training." ) But I'm unsure how other experts view the situation. Was Igloi's system developed concurrently with Zatopek's? Did Gosta Olander in Sweden pioneer this form of training (as Wilt also hints)? Any help would be appreciated. Ken Stone *** Paul Talbot Department of Geography/ Institute of Behavioral Science University of Colorado, Boulder Boulder CO 80309-0260 (303) 492-3248 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: t-and-f: Who invented interval training?
On Thu, 23 Nov 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Igloi's system developed concurrently with Zatopek's? Did Gosta Olander in Sweden pioneer this form of training (as Wilt also hints)? Gosta Holmer was the father of fartlek training, not interval training. Paul *** Paul Talbot Department of Geography/ Institute of Behavioral Science University of Colorado, Boulder Boulder CO 80309-0260 (303) 492-3248 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
