RE: t-and-f: Footlocker South - why so fast?
I am posting this for track writer Steve Underwood, who was AT the South Regional at McAlpine last weekend, as well as many other big HS meets in the south and mid-Atlantic the last three XC and track seasons: A couple notes about FL South ... First of all, the wholesale rewriting of the McAlpine all-time list is a little deceptive. Beyond Webb's 14:43 and 14:52 going into this year, there have been a SLEW of times during the course's history between 14:57-15:05, particularly at FL South 99, as well as other races. The 4th-8th finishers in this race were within a couple of ticks of that. Second, despite the rains, the conditions weren't bad for fast times -- better than most big-meet races at McAlpine. Humid, but mild temps and little wind. The pace was also pretty ideal. And it IS an accurate course. Most importantly, a deep and very talented field. Yes, there were some surprises, but most of the top 8 have already broken 9:05 on the track. Several have run between 14:40-15:05 on other courses. Rumor has it that even Debole, who has less credentials, ran close to that in a time trial recently, so he's also a strong sub-9 candidate for spring. Fuqua in 7th has run 9:03. Thorne has run 9:05. Deak won Great American (the slower race, but only a few seconds slower than Curtis). Steier has run 3:52. Admittedly, Hower and Keally were surprises, but we'll see what they do. I wouldn't be surprised if the South has two of the top 3 and 6 of the top 15. Though we don't have a Webb or Ritz next spring to challenge 8:40, don't be surprised to see a handful of these guys (plus Moore, Leal, etc.) at 8:50-8:55, maybe better. Steve Underwood
Re: t-and-f: Footlocker South - why so fast?
In a message dated Tue, 27 Nov 2001 9:49:08 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In a message dated 11/27/01 2:12:41 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: From one year to the next who can remember exactly how to mark the course? Tom's right. That's why XC course records should be taken w/ a grain of salt. Even at place like Van Cortlandt Park, where the trails themselves are pretty much impervious to alteration, who knows exactly where the start is? Jim Gerweck Running Times Yes, cross times should be taken with a grain of salt, but not with an entire salt lick. For courses that have been used for decades, all efforts to preserve the exact course should be made. When you have a course, such as Crystal Springs in Northern California, that has been used for 3 decades and has not changed one bit, one can compare times from the good ol' days with those of today. Sure, weather, rain, use, etc. can affect times, but if distance is constant, all-time lists can be meaningful and cause quite a bit of excitement. If you ever go to a meet at Crystal, just look at the crowd that lingers around the all-time lists. It gives kids and fans something to talk about. sideshow
Re: t-and-f: Footlocker South - why so fast?
In a message dated Tue, 27 Nov 2001 8:58:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It's not just at the Foot Locker South course where course record lists have been rewritten. This year the times at Mt. SAC have been ridiculous. For years, anyone breaking 15 was a true stud. Now you have guys who are good, but not great dipping under the 15-minute barrier. I thought I would go to a directly knowledgeable person- in this case my own son- who ran in the Mt.SAC HS Invational both last year and this year. He said the course this year was identical to last year- they didn't change anything. He ran about a minute and a half faster this year, but then that's probably normal progression going from a freshman runner to a sophomore- and it corollates to his improvement over the previous year on other courses in the area as well, not just Mt. SAC. As for the observation that there's a surge of runners going sub-15, after Ryan Hall broke the long-standing course record last year, maybe the Hall / Webb breakthroughs served to 'poke a hole in the dike', releasing the flood. It's easier for coaches to motivate if there's somebody his runners have seen with their own eyes, not 30-year-old black-and-white Jim Ryun pictures. It wouldn't be the first time. RT I too think the course this year is the same as last year. But the course as it is now is not as it has always been. They're crushing times set back in the halcyon days of SoCal high school distance running, when breaking 9 minutes for 2 miles was nothing. Perhaps Doug Speck might have some thoughts? sideshow
Re: t-and-f: Footlocker South - why so fast?
I've gotten a few e-mails about when I said Instead of everyone trying to figure out how the south cheated why don't we praise them for finally learning how to compete? Saying cheated was a bad word choice on my part. What I meant to say was why do we have to try and discount their performances instead of praising them. I hope I did not offend too many people. I simply think the running community too often trys to found ways to discount great performances too often. But since this kind of running doesn't come out of the south all the time I do understand why people were skeptical. The south runners did very well this year. They smashed the course record list. I've been at a lot of meets at McAlpine and I don't really think all 8 guys are part of the top ten runners ever from the south. This was a XC race and times really don't tell everything. This may be the most depth the south has had on the national scene but there have been many other great runners that probably would have been ahead of many of this years top eight in head to head racing. I can't wait to see how they do at nationals and how they do on the track where we can really compare their performances to past years. Greg Hipp
Re: t-and-f: Footlocker South - why so fast?
In a message dated Tue, 27 Nov 2001 12:41:35 AM Eastern Standard Time, Geoff Pietsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Personally I think the South should run on a more challenging course. Tom The McAlpine course is a great course except for being too narrow after the long opening straightaway. It's fast because it's on hardpacked dirt (when it's not muddy from rain). It's not as flat as some suggest; it's sure hillier than the golf course that Footlocker Finals and many college races are run on. Also, despite many responses, no one has really dealt with the improbability I pointed out - the 8 fastest times ever, other than Webb's, all from this one race. Yes it was a very talented field, no question, but it's hard to believe that all eight are faster than every other great southern runner for the past 20 years. Geoff It's not just at the Foot Locker South course where course record lists have been rewritten. This year the times at Mt. SAC have been ridiculous. For years, anyone breaking 15 was a true stud. Now you have guys who are good, but not great dipping under the 15-minute barrier. Sure, Amber Trotter is damn fast, but she's not 30 seconds faster than Anita Siraki, who broke Julia Stamps's CR. The course has been changed somehow, and it's wreaking havoc on the all-time lists. Bummer. sideshow
Re: t-and-f: Footlocker South - why so fast?
all from this one race. Yes it was a very talented field, no question, but it's hard to believe that all eight are faster than every other great southern runner for the past 20 years. Geoff It's not just at the Foot Locker South course where course record lists have been rewritten. This year the times at Mt. SAC have been ridiculous. For years, anyone breaking 15 was a true stud. Now you have guys who are good, but not great dipping under the 15-minute barrier. Sure, Amber Trotter is damn fast, but she's not 30 seconds faster than Anita Siraki, who broke Julia Stamps's CR. The course has been changed somehow, and it's wreaking havoc on the all-time lists. Bummer. sideshow From one year to the next who can remember exactly how to mark the course? Loops do tend to get shorter, curves straightened, and corners cut. That's why we have tracks. Then we can try to remember about how far from the curb they should be measured and where the steeple starts. Tom
Re: t-and-f: Footlocker South - why so fast?
From one year to the next who can remember exactly how to mark the course? Loops do tend to get shorter, curves straightened, and corners cut. That's why we have tracks. Then we can try to remember about how far from the curb they should be measured and where the steeple starts. Tom The McAlpine course has permanent markers every 200 meters. The trails are crushed stone and have a natural border. Unlike many course where the trail must be marked every race with paint or flags the McAlpine course is a dedicated XC facility and the trails never move or get shorter. Their are two big inside turns on the course but they were barricaded to insure that runners could not cut. So for McAlpine the course was the same last Saturday as it was the year before and the year before that, and so on. Instead of everyone trying to figure out how the south cheated why don't we praise them for finally learning how to compete?
Re: t-and-f: Footlocker South - why so fast?
It's not just at the Foot Locker South course where course record lists have been rewritten. This year the times at Mt. SAC have been ridiculous. For years, anyone breaking 15 was a true stud. Now you have guys who are good, but not great dipping under the 15-minute barrier. I thought I would go to a directly knowledgeable person- in this case my own son- who ran in the Mt.SAC HS Invational both last year and this year. He said the course this year was identical to last year- they didn't change anything. He ran about a minute and a half faster this year, but then that's probably normal progression going from a freshman runner to a sophomore- and it corollates to his improvement over the previous year on other courses in the area as well, not just Mt. SAC. As for the observation that there's a surge of runners going sub-15, after Ryan Hall broke the long-standing course record last year, maybe the Hall / Webb breakthroughs served to 'poke a hole in the dike', releasing the flood. It's easier for coaches to motivate if there's somebody his runners have seen with their own eyes, not 30-year-old black-and-white Jim Ryun pictures. It wouldn't be the first time. RT
Re: t-and-f: Footlocker South - why so fast?
indeed. or it could be a case of the race developing more ideally under near-perfect conditions? oftentimes championship-type races, especially ones where qualifying for the next level depends on place, not finishing time, tend to go out slow and pick up noticably towards the finish, resulting in less-than-incredible times; or there is only one truly good heavyweight in the field who isn't challenged by the field, resulting in non-eyebrow-raising results; or the heavyweights in the race tend to hang back and let others do the early work, also resulting in rather typical times. in the comparitively rare instance that several choose to push the pace from the start, we get something like what happened on the mcalpine course this past w/e. i wasn't there, but that's what i assume to have happened. It is absurd to divide people into good or bad. People are either charming or tedious. -- Oscar Wilde --- Greg Hipp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From one year to the next who can remember exactly how to mark the course? Loops do tend to get shorter, curves straightened, and corners cut. That's why we have tracks. Then we can try to remember about how far from the curb they should be measured and where the steeple starts. Tom The McAlpine course has permanent markers every 200 meters. The trails are crushed stone and have a natural border. Unlike many course where the trail must be marked every race with paint or flags the McAlpine course is a dedicated XC facility and the trails never move or get shorter. Their are two big inside turns on the course but they were barricaded to insure that runners could not cut. So for McAlpine the course was the same last Saturday as it was the year before and the year before that, and so on. Instead of everyone trying to figure out how the south cheated why don't we praise them for finally learning how to compete? _ Sign up for a 6mb FREE email from http://www.spl.at
Re: t-and-f: Footlocker South - why so fast?
In a message dated 11/27/01 2:12:41 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: From one year to the next who can remember exactly how to mark the course? Tom's right. That's why XC course records should be taken w/ a grain of salt. Even at place like Van Cortlandt Park, where the trails themselves are pretty much impervious to alteration, who knows exactly where the start is? I recall running some NYRRC open races there where Kurt Steiner would walk everyone out to an unmarked, imaginary starting line in the middle of the soccer fields and announce, the race starts here. A coach I know goes to the CT state meet each year w/ a calibrated bike and measures the course; over the years it has varied as much as 200m! So much for those CRs! This is also a reason USATF will no longer certify XC courses, except for the day of the race, while the markings are in place. Jim Gerweck Running Times
t-and-f: Footlocker South - why so fast?
Sure McAlpine is a fast course, and the conditions were good, but that doesn't explain why 8 boys ran faster than anyone else except Alan Webb has ever run on that course. Some excellent kids have run there in the Footlocker Regionals over 20 years as well as in big meets like the two Great Americans run there, the NC State meet, the Wendy's Invitational, etc. Has the South finally caught up with, or, gasp, even surpassed the other Regions? We'll know after Footlocker Finals. Considering that some super kids didn't qualify out of the South, maybe those 8 guys really are all faster than Brian Jaeger and Teddy Mitchell and Sharif Karie as well as Ricky Brookshire, Eric Henry, the Jefferson and Hauser twins and Rueben Reina etc.. Geoff Pietsch Gainesville FL _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
Re: t-and-f: Footlocker South - why so fast?
on 11/26/01 5:36 PM, Geoff Pietsch at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sure McAlpine is a fast course, and the conditions were good, but that doesn't explain why 8 boys ran faster than anyone else except Alan Webb has ever run on that course. Some excellent kids have run there in the Footlocker Regionals over 20 years as well as in big meets like the two Great Americans run there, the NC State meet, the Wendy's Invitational, etc. Has the South finally caught up with, or, gasp, even surpassed the other Regions? We'll know after Footlocker Finals. Considering that some super kids didn't qualify out of the South, maybe those 8 guys really are all faster than Brian Jaeger and Teddy Mitchell and Sharif Karie as well as Ricky Brookshire, Eric Henry, the Jefferson and Hauser twins and Rueben Reina etc.. Geoff Pietsch Gainesville FL _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp Personally I think the South should run on a more challenging course. Tom
Re: t-and-f: Footlocker South - why so fast?
What's even more amazing is that Bobby Curtis got beat. He's ran 14:44 this year on a course with a decent climb. Look for him to be up there at Footlocker Nationals. Alan === This happens to be the rare year with the South men's division is loaded .. those who finished 9-10-11, Joe Thorne (a 4:11 miler), Ryan Deak (set the frosh indoor 2m nat rec last winter .. 9:20's) and Rolf Steier (3:52 at world Youth Champs in July) would have probably qualified in the other regions. Jim Spier
Re: t-and-f: Footlocker South - why so fast?
In a message dated Mon, 26 Nov 2001 1:19:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What's even more amazing is that Bobby Curtis got beat. He's ran 14:44 this year on a course with a decent climb. Look for him to be up there at Footlocker Nationals. Alan HUH? Bobby Lockhart has been the obvious favorite to take over that region after Webb's departure for two years now. It would have been much more of an upset for Curtis to beat Lockhart at this distance. Platter
RE: t-and-f: Footlocker South - why so fast?
Notwithstanding anything that happened in the FootLocker race, Lockhart is the real deal. He went 4:20 for 1600 as a frosh, and was somewhat overlooked as a real star last season (he had multiple sub-9 3200s) against the backdrop of a 3:53 miler and 13:44 5k kid. I think he went 4:09 as a soph for a full Mile. Curtis is great, but Lockhart is a senior and has great marks in the 1600 AND 3200. Curtis was reportedly ill before the meet and relieved to have qualified. Both of them should watch out for Tim Moore. Top Footlocker returnee and soloed a 9:01 3200m last year. He beat Wisconsin supertalent Solinsky by a long ways. /Brian McEwen P.S. Could the indoor 2M record really be in the 9:20's ... I have Shepard's books and I could have sworn that Jeff Cannada held it with something faster than 9:20. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 2:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Footlocker South - why so fast? In a message dated Mon, 26 Nov 2001 1:19:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What's even more amazing is that Bobby Curtis got beat. He's ran 14:44 this year on a course with a decent climb. Look for him to be up there at Footlocker Nationals. Alan HUH? Bobby Lockhart has been the obvious favorite to take over that region after Webb's departure for two years now. It would have been much more of an upset for Curtis to beat Lockhart at this distance. Platter
Re: t-and-f: Footlocker South - why so fast?
Curtis had two big wins at the Great Race of the Great Bay and the Great American Championships. Curtis was one of the favorites if not the favorite. For him to get beat, especially by more than just Lockhart was a suprise to many of us in the south. The McAlpine course is very fast. I lived two miles from that park for 16 years, all but 5 of them I was a runner. When you put a fast course and a strong south together in one year your going to get fast times. It would be nice to have a more challenging course for the south to be measured up upon. The nationals are on a fast course too so the south really doesn't need to find a different course for the regional. We are sending eight men and eight women who proved themselves on a fast, flat course to race nationals on a flat, fast course. makes sense to me. Hipp - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 2:00 PM Subject: Re: t-and-f: Footlocker South - why so fast? In a message dated Mon, 26 Nov 2001 1:19:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What's even more amazing is that Bobby Curtis got beat. He's ran 14:44 this year on a course with a decent climb. Look for him to be up there at Footlocker Nationals. Alan HUH? Bobby Lockhart has been the obvious favorite to take over that region after Webb's departure for two years now. It would have been much more of an upset for Curtis to beat Lockhart at this distance. Platter
RE: t-and-f: Footlocker South - why so fast?
Brian, considering Webb ran 8:4? last year indoors, the indoor 2 mile record is most definitely NOT in the 9:20s From: Mcewen, Brian T [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Mcewen, Brian T [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: Footlocker South - why so fast? Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 15:17:37 -0500 Notwithstanding anything that happened in the FootLocker race, Lockhart is the real deal. He went 4:20 for 1600 as a frosh, and was somewhat overlooked as a real star last season (he had multiple sub-9 3200s) against the backdrop of a 3:53 miler and 13:44 5k kid. I think he went 4:09 as a soph for a full Mile. Curtis is great, but Lockhart is a senior and has great marks in the 1600 AND 3200. Curtis was reportedly ill before the meet and relieved to have qualified. Both of them should watch out for Tim Moore. Top Footlocker returnee and soloed a 9:01 3200m last year. He beat Wisconsin supertalent Solinsky by a long ways. /Brian McEwen P.S. Could the indoor 2M record really be in the 9:20's ... I have Shepard's books and I could have sworn that Jeff Cannada held it with something faster than 9:20. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 2:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Footlocker South - why so fast? In a message dated Mon, 26 Nov 2001 1:19:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What's even more amazing is that Bobby Curtis got beat. He's ran 14:44 this year on a course with a decent climb. Look for him to be up there at Footlocker Nationals. Alan HUH? Bobby Lockhart has been the obvious favorite to take over that region after Webb's departure for two years now. It would have been much more of an upset for Curtis to beat Lockhart at this distance. Platter _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
RE: t-and-f: Footlocker South - why so fast?
Thanks Mike ... that should have read FRESHMAN indoor 2M record. It was in response to a post by veteran HS statman Jim Spier that Ryan Deak set an indoor freshman 2M record last year. I am well aware of the HS indoor 2M record. 8:40.0 -Original Message- From: Michael Contopoulos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 3:40 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: Footlocker South - why so fast? Brian, considering Webb ran 8:4? last year indoors, the indoor 2 mile record is most definitely NOT in the 9:20s From: Mcewen, Brian T [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Mcewen, Brian T [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: Footlocker South - why so fast? Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 15:17:37 -0500 Notwithstanding anything that happened in the FootLocker race, Lockhart is the real deal. He went 4:20 for 1600 as a frosh, and was somewhat overlooked as a real star last season (he had multiple sub-9 3200s) against the backdrop of a 3:53 miler and 13:44 5k kid. I think he went 4:09 as a soph for a full Mile. Curtis is great, but Lockhart is a senior and has great marks in the 1600 AND 3200. Curtis was reportedly ill before the meet and relieved to have qualified. Both of them should watch out for Tim Moore. Top Footlocker returnee and soloed a 9:01 3200m last year. He beat Wisconsin supertalent Solinsky by a long ways. /Brian McEwen P.S. Could the indoor 2M record really be in the 9:20's ... I have Shepard's books and I could have sworn that Jeff Cannada held it with something faster than 9:20. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 2:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: Footlocker South - why so fast? In a message dated Mon, 26 Nov 2001 1:19:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, alan tobin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What's even more amazing is that Bobby Curtis got beat. He's ran 14:44 this year on a course with a decent climb. Look for him to be up there at Footlocker Nationals. Alan HUH? Bobby Lockhart has been the obvious favorite to take over that region after Webb's departure for two years now. It would have been much more of an upset for Curtis to beat Lockhart at this distance. Platter _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
Re: t-and-f: Footlocker South - why so fast?
Personally I think the South should run on a more challenging course. Tom The McAlpine course is a great course except for being too narrow after the long opening straightaway. It's fast because it's on hardpacked dirt (when it's not muddy from rain). It's not as flat as some suggest; it's sure hillier than the golf course that Footlocker Finals and many college races are run on. Also, despite many responses, no one has really dealt with the improbability I pointed out - the 8 fastest times ever, other than Webb's, all from this one race. Yes it was a very talented field, no question, but it's hard to believe that all eight are faster than every other great southern runner for the past 20 years. Geoff _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
