Re: t-and-f: Re: NCAA brothers
While these two didn't go 1 and 11, the Pons twins(Chan and Corby) are my favorite NCAA brothers. Despite the fact that neither ever qualified for Kinney/Footlocker, they finished 18(Chan) and 29(Corby) in Bloomington in 1999. Chan did this while racing the last 5 miles with only one shoe. If he had kept both shoes on, I can say without doubt or further qualification that he would have finished in the top 10. Robbie Howell
Re: t-and-f: Once a Runner!!
Wow! A few years back, I borrowed someone's copy of Once a Runner, loved it, and then went and bought 12 copies. Over the years I sold a few, gave a few out as gifts. Hell, I even donated one of them to my old high school library. I checked on the book not too long ago, and it had never been checked out. I should go back and demand to get it back. Watch it disappear from the shelf now, or maybe they'll just throw it out. I still have three copies, one of which is in near mint condition. My personal copy, which I credit with changing my life, I would never sell. It's also signed by John L. Parker. The other two...maybe I'll list them on Ebay or something. I could use a couple hundred dollars, and these things haven't been off the shelf in a while. I've also got both the long sleeve and short sleeve t-shirts, one of which has Gaunt is beautiful on the back. I have to believe that this situation is temporary. As soon as John Parker sees that these things are going for more than $100 on ebay, he's likely to fire up the presses at Cedarwinds. But all of this dollars and cents stuff aside, I honestly credit this book with changing my running career. I was in Raleigh in 1996 running with a group of local guys under the direction of Jack Bacheler. Though it was nothing astounding, I dropped my pr in the 1500 from 3:57 to 3:49. More importantly, I actually started to dream about how good I could be. Like Quenton, I felt like my potential was untapped. Once a Runner somehow romanticized the idea of running 100 miles a week. The summer of 1996, I ran somewhere between 8-10 weeks over 100. Even doing that, I'd read again about what Quenton was doing, and I'd know I could do more. I knew I could be better. Despite what it will do for the value of my unknown rare book collection, I hope that John L. Parker reprints the book, and that kids continue to read it. Read it early and often. Qenton Cassidy is still my hero. robbie howell On Mon, 21 Oct 2002, Matt Stohl wrote: A few years back, I read one of my favorite books, Once a Runner, and passed it along to a cross country teammate to read. So, I graduated and moved to another state without ever thinking about asking for the book back. Then there was the thread on this list about good running books. So I decided I would like to read the book again. I go to a couple of bookstores . . . no copies. I get online . . . no copies. Go to Ebay . . . they have a copy for $125.00! I go to Amazon.com . . . they have a copy $275.00! What the F#$ is going on?!?!?!? If you have a copy, protect it with your life. If you don't have a copy (like myself), well, you are screwed. Just had to share. Matt Stohl _ Get faster connections -- switch to MSN Internet Access! http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/default.asp
Re: t-and-f: Why on the street?
After reading Once a Runner, I asked Jack about this story. In the novel, Cassidy runs over the length of the car. According to Jack, he would just run over the hoods of cars that would pull out in front of him. He compared it to taking the water jump. This makes the story less fantastic, but for a long time after hearing his account I tried to pull up the guts to take a step on the hood of a running but occupied car. I never did it. Here's another entertaining tale. I'm a freshman at Princeton back in the Winter of 1995. Snow covers the sidewalks and the trails, so a group of us are running on the side of the roads. It's a Saturday or Sunday, and we've got a recruit on the run with us named Jason Balkman. Before this guy went on to be a many time all American and win a team title in Cross, he was better known as the guy who won the Foot Locker West Regional and then didn't run at the national meet. We're on this run, and I ask him why he didn't run at the national meet. Balkman tells me this story about how he was elected/appointed to some regional student council advisory board or something like that. Anyhow, there was a meeting on the day of the national meet, and he intended to honor his prior obligation. Unlike Balkman, I might have dropped out of high school if I could have gone to the national meet, but I digress. The point is that it occurs to me what a responsible, conscientious recruit we have here. As we're finishing the run, this jackass comes up directly behind us on the street, and blares the horn. He didn't tap it. He wasn't trying to alert us to danger. He held it down for a good long while. We jump to the side into the snow, and the guy drives by, laughing. Shortly thereafter, near campus(at Palmer and Nassau), the car comes to a stop light. We catch up to it and bend over to pick up chunks of snow/ice, which we proceed to hurl at the car. These chunks made some nice solid thuds; hopefully they did some real damage to the car. The driver then gets out, comes around the car, and starts running after us. We'd just finished a run, but there was no chance this clown was going to catch any of us. We sprinted into the campus and back to the gym. I don't remember whether Balkman actually threw a snow ball at the jackass motorist, or whether he thought the experience was as funny as the rest of us did, but he didn't come to Princeton. Robbie Howell On Tue, 27 Aug 2002, ghill wrote: there's also a story, probably apocryphal, of Shorter and Bacheler running in spikes on a golf course and some guy pulled a car in front of them (not sure how the car was on the course, hence the apoc. nature), and supposedly they ran right over the hood and left a score of spike holes.
t-and-f: ESPN: Multicolored Sports Bra Dqs Relay Team
I was just over on espn.go.com, looking for a preview of tonight's game 6 of the Carolina v Toronto series, when I see the subject line of my message on the right side of the page under the ESPNews Headlines section. I suppose it is too bad that track only gets negative headlines, but that's not the point of my message. I want to talk about ridiculous uniform rules. Now ESPN has this on their site because it involves a girl's undergarments, and the parents are trying to get an injunction to stop the state meet from taking place without their daughter. This is a loaded ruling. If it involved a boy's t-shirt, it would get a paragraph in the small town weekly paper; but I digress. Uniform rules, especially the ones in high school, are about the most ridiculous things ever. There is no better way to trivialize a sport than to have a team disqualified over an irrelevant black stripe somewhere. This goes along with rules forbidding two piece uniforms, piercings, jewelry, excessive safety pins, bunhuggers, what have you. The people who passed the rules wrote them to justify the existence of whatever committee they were on. Coaches who disqualify(tattle) on opposing athletes for cosmetic violations are whiners at best. At worst they are pathetic losers who need to get a hint as to what this sport is about. I have no patience for it. Track meets are about fast times, big jumps, great throws, and gutsy races, not panties, bra straps, and ear rings. If I were the judge in the lawsuit or the omnipotent dictator of track and field, I would put those girls in the state meet, I would have whoever DQ'd them apologize to them, and I would have whoever reported them and/or whoever enforced the rule banned from the sport forever. Some people will get upset that the parents are litigating this. Not me. I hope they win, because that would be the day every state in this country would get rid of those awful, arbitrary rules. And a good day could only be made better if the judge bans the 1600 and the 3200 in favor of the mile and the 2 mile/3k. And by the way, I believe Walt. Robbie Howell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
t-and-f: Dropping Track Programs
I usually don't weigh in on non-racing issues here on the list, and I promise not to do it too often, but this message from Rich Ceronie resonated with me. Before I go on, I want to be clear that the purpose of this message is not to be divisive, but to encourage the track public and possibly Conference Commissioners and/or Athletic Directors to consider the racial equality implications that terminating track and field has on fairness and equality for black athletes. On Thu, 21 Mar 2002, Rich Ceronie wrote: They also had a very large minority population on the men's track team and there weren't that many sports where a minority could make the team at Miami. Bravo!, Miami(Ohio). Facially, there is no reason a minority student cannot compete on any athletic team. That said, we could look on most college campuses and find empirically that black athletes are predominantly on basketball, football, and track and field teams. Regardless of the financial hardships of some smaller DI football programs, I am willing to assume that football and basketball athletes at the DI level more than pay their own way, all things considered. Relative to the overall student body, blacks are disproportionately well represented on football and basketball teams. I'm not going to say that black kids are getting a bad deal on our college campuses, but I continue to scratch my head when I see hundreds and hundreds of kids running around wearing #40 Joe Forte jerseys while Joe Forte didn't have a pot to piss in while he was in Chapel Hill. I'm not going so far as to say that black athletes are being exploited, given that they come to school of their own volition, but the edge of the precipice is near. Regardless, if countless white athletes playing baseball, soccer, swimming, wrestling, crew, lacrosse, squash, golf, and God knows what else can ride the financial backs of the black athletes playing football and basketball, certainly we could find room in the budget for some black athletes who aren't paying the bill. Where is all of this going? When ADs cut track and field, they are cutting the only sport where blacks are well represented and they don't make money for the University. It's as if the ADs are saying to the black athletes, We've got a spot for you if you can make $ for the school, but if you don't, we've got no use for you. So, when ADs cut track, the effect, though probably not the intent, of the action is to deprive a large number of black kids of the opportunity to go to good schools, often for free or reduced costs. This is not a political editorial about affirmative action; rather, it is an anckowledgement: 1) that racial diversity and equality of opportunity are worthwile objectives for our institutions of higher learning 2) that historically Universities did not promote those ideals, and 3) that college track and field brings many blacks to Universities who otherwise would not be there in a highly constructive way, and this is a good thing. For the reasons stated, and also because I care deeply for track and field, I think Bowling Green and other similarly situated schools should axe Soccer, Swimming, Golfetc. before they get rid of T-n-F. keeping it real, robbie howell
t-and-f: Heisenberg, Chip Timing
I haven't read about this yet, and since there is no college cross to talk about, what the hell. Heisenberg said, The more precisely the position is determined, the less precisely the momentum is known in this instant, and vice versa. Heisenberg was talking about sub atomic particles, but this has some bearing on this chip timing discussion. Chip timing at certain intervals gives incomplete information, necessarily. One can determine the exact instant that each runner crosses a certain point, and possibly determine that person's position within the race, but one can never know exactly, with chip timing, what the team score is. By the time the 5th runner gets to a given point, the runners ahead of him may have and probably will have changed positions. Chip timing mixes each runner's split(cross section) with the team's result, wich is taken over time(longitudinal). Because a team has five scorers who don't all finish at the same time or cross a given point at the same time, we cannot figure their total score by merely adding their positions at some fixed geographical point. The team exists across time and space. We can know the score at a given time, but not at a given point. We can know each member's place and split at a given point, but that won't necessarily give us the team score. Runners do change positions over time. What does this have to do with anything? Nothing that I know of. But there was so much esoteric crap going around that I figured another piece of it would have a negligible marginal impact on the list. Once I go back to school next week, I won't have enough time to write about things like this anymore, so don't hold your breath waiting for my next post. Since I didn't mention this earlier, we need some indoor meets and a new thread. Keeping it real. Out, Robbie Howell
t-and-f: NCAAs
Wow, what a weekend! I got there on Saturday night just in time to catch Dave and Walt at the Blue Ridge Brewing Company. My wife thinks Dave looks like Donald Sutherland. I didn't get there until about midnight, so I missed most of the crowd. Walt told me that earlier on, there had been at least 25 coaches there. Sunday I went out and dragged my ass around the course. I could have run around the hotel downtown, but it's exciting to go out and do the same thing the runners are going to do, the same thing I did 4 years ago. You may even run into some people you know. The two race related impressions that I had were that it was such a beautiful day. The weather has been incredible here around here for the last month. But the course was dry. I didn't give this much thought as I was running the course, but it made a difference to Boaz on Monday. Monday Men's Race I don't have much experience watching the NCAA meet. I raced in this meet twice, but to be fair, this was only the second time I'd seen it as a spectator. I was far enough away and the crowd was loud enough so that I didn't even hear the gun go off. The first impression I made was that the early race looked like the African cross championships. Both Keyans from Alabama were there, the guy from TCU, maybe one or two other guys, and Boaz. This break took place before the mile mark. I don't know what most of those guys were thinking, maybe that it would make a good picture. They couldn't have been thinking about how to finish well. The runners leave my sight between the 2k mark and the 4k mark. By the time they came around to 4k, there was Boaz and then there was a lot of grass. I heard that Kimani dropped out. The guy from TCU was shuffling when he came by. The other Kenyan from Alabama was buried somewhere in the field. At 4k, it looked like Stanford was winning. Arkansas had 4 guys in the top 25, but we couldn't find their fifth. Notre Dame had two runners near the front, so did Wisconsin. Looking back, I can see how things developed, but I did not think Colorado was getting it done. Jorge Torres was in the lead pack, but that was it. In fact, and this could arguably have been biased, I thought NC State was in 3rd at the time. They had all 5 right around 40th. I should point out now that I was not watching N. Arizona very closely, and I'm not sure why. These guys always show up well at NCAAs, and they are usually underated during the season. I noticed that they had someone in the top 10 near the finish, but I just wasn't looking for their uniforms. I saw them again at 5.5k then just before 8k, and then with 800m left. During that time, NC State fell apart. Arkansas continued to look ok, especially Cragg, but they had no fifth man. I thought Stanford was going to win, even in the last 800m. Boaz had about 25 seconds on Torres, and Torres had about 20 seconds on the rest of the field when we saw them before 8k. The difference was that Ritz passed about 10 guys in the last 2 miles, Ed Torres moved up to the tail end of the lead pack. He had not been in the lead pack during the race. The sometimes maligned Steve Slattery came on hard to finish in the top 30. The most visible move was the one by Ritz. He was just plain rolling by the time he passed us with 800 to go. Despite all of the CU guys finishing well, I had gotten so used to seeing all of those Stanford guys in the top 30, that I walked back to the finish area confident that they had won. This gives me the opportunity to talk about the board. I didn't go to Iowa, but I was in Indiana two years ago. This was my first race with a board. It was awesome. Seeing instant results come up is an exciting activity in itself. I applaud whoever made that call, and I hope it is a fixture rather than an experiment. And I also want to make mention of the dry conditions. They have these guys leading the race and filming it in these two Gator vehicles. Incredibly enough, these things go faster than Boaz, but that's not why I mention it. Had I been Boaz, I would have been really pissed off after the race. Like I said, it hasn't rained around here since God knows when, and it is dusty. These Gators were kicking up this huge cloud of dust that Boaz was having to run through. Those guys should have gotten way ahead of Boaz or they should have gotten off the course. That dust was ridiculous. The Women's Race I know much less about the participants, so I was doing much more rooting for the Wolfpack than counting runners from other teams. That said, it was impossible to miss the fact that BYU was a clear winner. It seemed that every other runner in the top 20 was from BYU. Tara Chaplin went out really hard. I didn't hear any mile splits, but she had a big lead. There was talk amongst the spectators early on that it was too hard, and that she would get swallowed up by the pack. The situation was eerie in its similarity to 1997 with Arizona's Amy
Re: t-and-f: XC Long-Short Debate
I just don't get it. I'm sure I've read a post that was more condescending than the one RANDY TREADWAY wrote here, but I just can't remember it right now. Opinions are like assholes, everybody's got one. You've got your opinion. It happens to be wrong, but that's no reason to be a jerk. So before you call somebody CHILDREN, think about what you're saying. Now some people on the list have argued that the two race format will be more exciting and broaden participation. Whether it will be more exciting I think will depend on who we ask. I'm not sure either, that it will broaden participation. Most true 800 guys will not want to run cross, unless the cross race is 800m or shorter. Most true 1500 guys run cross even though the 10k is all there is. There are exceptions. I remember former NCAA 800m champ Bryan Woodward kicking down one of my old unamed friends over 10k in the old IC4A JV race. I've always been of the opinion that every 800 guy should run cross, but maybe that's why I'm not the coach. But I digress. Most 800 guys like to lift weights and take it easy in the fall. RANDY says that IT'S NOT ABOUT SPLITTING UP NATIONALS. I suppose to some extent, everything is relative. So for RANDY, as he made abundantly clear, it's not about splitting up nationals. Why he chose to make fun of those who believe otherwise...I don't know. But as for me, I want to see the real DI NCAA championships. If they split the race, every rational 800/1500 guy who used to run 10k will probably run the shorter distance. I did a little digging, and here are a list of some guys who finaled in the 1500 at some point at NCAAs outdoors and were also an All-American in cross. Graham Hood John Wild Jonah Kiptarus Andy Downin Bob Keino Michael Power Kevin Sullivan Eric Kamau Seneca Lassiter Bernard Lagat Bryan Berryhill Daniel Kinyua Brendan Rodgers Sharif Karie James Karanu Adrian Blincoe David Kimani I'm not sure what RANDY is thinking, but I think that having these guys run in some short race would make Cross Country less fun. But I know, Alan Webb is the exception, not the rule. Remember, this is by no means a complete list of 1500 type guys that gutted it out over 10k or had some part in their team's success. For example, as the 85th finisher in 1997 in Greenville, I was NC State's 5th man. We got 6th place. Maybe, I could have been an All-American if I had run in a short cross country race. Bob Henes is going to choke on his lunch at the thought of having less competition but more All-Americans. I know this is going a little long, but a lot of you might appreciate this. Can't you imagine John L. Parker wrting the first few chapters over again. Only this time, Quenton Cassidy, the ultimate miler, and Jerry Mizner don't go on long runs together because Quenton is doing the short race. Instead of Mizner pulling away from Cassidy in the first race of the season, we could just let Cassidy cheer along side. Wow, that would be really exciting! In turn, Mize could cheer for Cassidy when he wins his race, and they would both be winners. Yeah! Winners of what?? Who cares? And as for the silly, poetic notion of a runner like Quenton toughing it out at something that's not his ideal distance? Phooey! That's just a story. We should see if Parker can put out an amended version, Once a Short Course Runner. In 1998 Brad Hauser won the 10k on the track in Buffalo. Earlier that fall, he got 10th at NCAA Cross. He got beat by both Sullivan and Bernard Lagat. And the only reason you got to see those three race is because Cross Country is run the way it is. NCAA Cross is the best race all year because everybody's in the same race. Change it and you'll ruin it. See you in Greenville, Robbie RANDY wrote this: you guys have it all wrong, it's not about splitting up nationals, in fact you're making ME sick with all your whining. It's not about splitting up nationals. IT'S NOT ABOUT SPLITTING UP NATIONALS. NOW REPEAT AFTER ME CHILDREN, It's not about splitting up nationals.. ...now write that fifty times on the chalkboard.
t-and-f: Coach's comments on Pre-Nats
This is going to be great for discussion. Coaches have differing views on what to do about the state of Division I cross country. First, Coach Braman from FSU says that some runners might have benefited from being in the first race because the pace was slower. While I didn't see the race, I did get a first-hand account who told me in no uncertain terms that the first race was not nearly as conducive to fast times as the second. The first race was hotter, and much more packed in. A slow pace is relaxing when you are in a 5k on the track, you have a big kick, and you are sitting off the right shoulder of the leader. Running in the middle of a pack of people, and not being able to get around is not going to work to anyone's benefit. It's going to wear people out with anxiety and the extra effort needed to pass other runners. I think that this alone is grounds for not ever combining the results of the two races for qualifying purposes. Even gh would agree. He's written in the past about wind making differences in 100m heats run only minutes apart in who advances on time. The Nebraska coach made mention of the shortcomings of the course(too many tight turns and the cart path). I mentioned this a couple of days before the race, but have since been reminded about what cross country is about. If the conditions aren't ideal then tough it up. If it's too crowded in the pack, go run in the lead; there's no crowd in front of the pack. The course isn't perfect, but everyone runs it, and it isn't going to determine who wins. It will be ok with 31 teams. But pretty much everyone is in agreement that if these last three years are indicative of what Pre-Nats are going to be like, then we should somehow change the system. But these same coaches will show up next year if the format isn't changed. So what are the options? 1. Eliminate qualifying at Pre-NCAAs. With this move alone, we can bring teams back to the more traditional big meets such as Paul Short, Michigan Interregional, Murray Keating, Griak, The Cowboy Jamboree, Spiked Shoe, Big Cross, New England's, Notre Dame Invite, Stanford Invite, and the Rocky Mountain Shootout. But the good old days weren't always so good. Coaches and ADs don't have the money to send teams to all of these meets. There is a downside to eliminating Pre-NCAAs. 2. Give each District 3 qualifiers. This would take care of 27 teams, and leave 4 at large berths. There would still be teams that would come to Pre-NCAAs for these berths, but it would inject some reality into the equation for some of the teams. The downside to this, is the Mid-Atlantic division. The third best team in this district is...? I don't think this makes Coach Harwick's idea a bad one, but just know that some very good team in the West, the Mountain, or in the Great Lakes region is going to get left out on a regular basis. 3. Keep the current system. The meet is too large. 74 teams in one race would have been way too many. They did well to split it. But that said, the format and number of teams in that meet have no bearing on who finishes in the top 10 at NCAAs. And wasn't that the point of the original meet, to allow the good teams to run on the course. So Colorado and Stanford didn't run against each other. Who cares? They'll do so in November. And even better, Arkansas and Wisconsin will be there too. And neither one of those teams even went to Pre-Nats, but they'll both get into NCAAs. And I suppose they'll run the course on the Saturday or Sunday before the meet. There's a novel idea. I wonder if John McDonnel tosses and turns at night wondering if he should go to Pre-NCAAs? He might want to solidify his at-large position. Seriously though, he might have nightmares that one of his runners might be leading the race and go the wrong way. That could be a real concern for him. For me, that's one of the coolest things about NCAAs every year. We can wonder who Arkansas is going to bring to the meet. Speaking of which, who is Arkansas going to bring to NCAAs? Lincoln, Cragg...does Jason Bunston have another year? What about Mike Power or Andy Begley? If I was in charge of NCAA cross in a perfect world, the first thing I'd do is give a third spot to the West, the Mountain, and the Great Lakes districts. That still wouldn't do justice to the teams in those districsts, but it'd be a start. I'd then appoint an independent group of writers and cross country followers, and I'd let them pick the 35 most qualified teams who submitted entries. We could adjust the number upward as is permitted by the course. And that would be the field for Pre-NCAAs. Sure, people would whine and cry, but it would get rid of so many pretenders. And let'd be honest, there were a lot of pretenders at this meet. A lot. And while I say that, in the same thought I want to ask, Where in the hell did Santa Barbara come from? Alright, this has gone on for too long, robbie
t-and-f: The List / Furman in 1997
I've been reading all of these posts lately, and the truth be told, I'm sick of it. I got on this list in the Fall of 1994, I took myself off in the Spring of 1999, and then I signed back up just a month and a half ago. While I too am upset over the state of this list, constantly complaining about it won't help. To my mind, two things have happened to this list since I got on in 1994. 1. Everyone gets results elsewhere. Back then, people were using Mosaic Web Browser. Quite a few people didn't even know what a Web Browser was. This list was the mecca for people who needed results. I remember taking Penn Relay Results out of the sports page of the Sunday NY Times and posting them. The results only went three deep, but that was all anyone on the West Coast had heard in the way of results. Now, just log on to any number of Web Sites and get all of the results you want. Why does this matter? The people who really have a passion for this sport are the ones who want the results. They were the ones who made the list a fun place to be. 2. Since the list has gotten so big, it is no longer a community. Everything is just so impersonal and boring. And the reason it's that way is because the average age of the person posting has probably gone from 21 to 45 in the last seven years. It's just more interesting when the people doing the running are the ones posting(Ned, Teddy, Special K, Scott MacDonald, Joe McVeigh, Bob Henes, Ryan Grote...)Now, instead of talking about races and results, we're talking about all sorts of esoteric garbage. So in the spirit of changing the tone, I am going to try to take everyone back to Fall 1997, the last year NCAAs were at Furman. Grote had just finished school and was an aspiring Track and Field journalist. He was a correspondent for Track and Field News. Goucher had won the Pre-NCAA meet in October. I was a Junior at NC State. Not surprisingly, the top 3 teams in 97(Stanford, Arkansas, and Colorado) are likely to be the top 3 teams in 2001. Arkansas ran Ryan Wilson, Sean Kaley, Phil Price, Murray Link, Adam Daily, and Seneca Lassiter. I can't remember whether Matt Kerr was redshirting, injured, or just wasn't in the top seven. Regardless, it is difficult to imagine how these guys lost. Seriously, did Sean Kaley ever not finish in the top 10 at NCAAs? Though I didn't witness this first hand, the story goes that Arkansas took the race out from the gun. Ryan Wilson was the early leader. So who did Arkansas lose to? Stanford, yeah we all know that, but who were those guys? Nathan Nutter, Jason Balkman, The Hausers(Frick and Frack), and some freshman named Riley. Much had been made of the fact that Stanford ran a completely American team when they won the title in Tuscon the year before. Well they did it again in 1997. How would you like to have been Colorado, who ran 5 all americans, had Goucher, and get third? They ran Goucher, Adam Batliner, Tom Reese, Matt Napier, and Ron Roybal. Clint Wells, who had been a Steeple finalist at the Trials in 1996 had an off race, finishing out of their top five Michigan had a couple of decent runners...Sullivan, Mortimer, and Todd Snyder. Wisconsin was 5th, NC State 6th. Florida broke the then magic number of 600, finishing last. Remember, before 1998, it was still only a 22 team field. Which brings me to the race tomorrow and the upcoming NCAA meet. The golf course at Furman did a good job holding 22 teams, but it will be strained with 31 teams. As I count it now, there are going to be 37 teams in each of the two races tomorrow. That is just going to be nuts, especially the first turn. I'd stay left, initially. Then when the runners make that turn around the green, somebody is likely to take a spill. They had to split the race. Having 74 teams in the field is ridiculous. What I would have done, and I'm not sure that they didn't do this, but I'd make an effort to separate comparable teams that happen to be in the same district(like keeping Eastern Michigan and Michigan State in different races). They'll work out their differences at the district meet. ] Oh well, I'm not sure where this went or what it was intended to accomplish, but I'm cutting it off now. I'm not going to be there tomorrow, but I'll be there for the real thing. Go Pack! robbie howell my apologies to anyone over the age of 25, especially Walt Murphy and Dave Johnson, two great emissaries for the sport.
