My experience with HS kids is that everyone wants fast times, so flat, short
courses are preferred.
I directed the state championship meet for South Carolina independent
schools this season. The course was a full 5k, it was hilly and the surface
was uneven and had some loose sand. The main complai
why not run worlds at SUNY Cortland? i hear they have a strem running through the
course that the runners have to go through!
uot; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]@darkwing.uoregon.edu
>Subject: RE: Re: t-and-f: Short/Long course cross country
>Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 06:49:27 -0800
>
>
>
>
>
>There is more to cross country than a long ra
There is more to cross country than a long race on bumpy ground!
John
UHH . . . NO THERE ISN'T!!! THAT'S WHAT CROSS COUNTRY IS BY
DEFINITION, LONG RACES OVER CHALLENGING TERRAIN!! I USUALLY
DON'T MAKE STATEMENTS LIKE THIS BUT . . . YOU ARE FLAT WRONG!
PERIOD!
Dan
World Cross Country is
Dan wrote:
> I think moving up is tougher for most people, especially when it's 4-8x
> the distance. Moving down significantly in distance may make the speed
> seem harsh, but at least you can run the whole thing at a steady clip.
> Also, I would venture to guess that the training of many 12k an
In a message dated Mon, 19 Feb 2001 1:06:57 PM Eastern Standard Time, "Mcewen, Brian
T" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
<< The idea has always been to have a World Championship of XC ... and a race to suit
all the XC runners ... where one best one could be crowned.
I guess it is fair to say that (
In a message dated 2/19/01 1:51:27 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> think moving up is tougher for most people, especially when it's 4-8x
> the distance. Moving down significantly in distance may make the speed
> seem harsh, but at least you can run the whole thing at a
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Moving up is easier. Many milers turn out to be good marathoners. How
> many marthoners come down to the mile.
That argument might make sense if there were the same number of people
moving down as there are moving up, but I'd guess the ratio at least 90/10
in favor
--- "Mcewen, Brian T" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Which is tougher (or a bigger "adjustment to training" as was posted); a
> 1500/5000m runner or Steepler adjusting "up" to the 12k distance ... OR
> A MARATHONER adjusting "down" ?
I think moving up is tougher for most people, especially when it'
though.
P.S. A shoe-in for the 4k winner would seem to be Ali Saidi-Seif ... the
best in the world over 3k ... close to the best at 5k and 1500m. Any word
on whether he is running?
-Original Message-
From: Dan Kaplan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, February 19, 2001 11:22 AM
--- "Mcewen, Brian T" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Over history, there have been many, many steeplers who ran high level
> 12k races in the winter.
[snip]
> but the steeplers and 5k runners should be in the 12k race.
Have you looked over this weekend's results and the disproportionate
number
the steeplers and 5k runners
should be in the 12k race.
-Original Message-
From: R.T. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2001 11:09 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: t-and-f: Short/Long course cross country
Except that the world of specialization has grown in the
That's the problem. Everybody thinks that they're so special. A true distance runner
enters the real race (12K) because they want to see what they can do against the best
runners in the world. Remember Steve Jones, he said he'll run any distance because
he's just a runner, not a marathoner. Th
Except that the world of specialization has grown in the last
couple of decades.
At the top level (not at collegiate where you do whatever your
coach tells you, for team points), if all they have is a 12K
race, everybody from Steeple specialists and shorter (middle
distance) simply won't run. The
Ditch the 4k.
The appeal of the World XC Champs is the bringing together of the world's
best distance runner's over one race. Everyone from 800m runners to
marathoners battling it out. Who is the current men's world xc champ? It's
Mohammed Mourhit not whoever won last year's 4k.
Steve S.
> There is more to cross country than a long race on bumpy ground!
> John
>
> UHH . . . NO THERE ISN'T!!! THAT'S WHAT CROSS COUNTRY IS BY DEFINITION,
LONG RACES OVER CHALLENGING TERRAIN!! I USUALLY DON'T MAKE STATEMENTS LIKE
THIS BUT . . . YOU ARE FLAT WRONG! PERIOD!
>
> Dan
Actually no, a lon
In a message dated Fri, 16 Feb 2001 3:01:31 PM Eastern Standard Time, John Lunn
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
<< Bob,...
There is more to cross country than a long race on bumpy ground!
John
UHH . . . NO THERE ISN'T!!! THAT'S WHAT CROSS COUNTRY IS BY DEFINITION, LONG RACES
OVER CHALLENGING T
>Okay, Goucher, Drossin (U.S. Champs) and O'Sullivan (World Champs)
have won
>impressive doubles, but they've only been contesting both distances
for 3
>years.
My guess is that even Goucher wouldn't call his double against
lesser competition "impressive". More like a snooze.
malmo
>The World Cross Country Championships was always unique because you had marathoners >to milers racing together, that was the idea. Having two races defeats the purpose. I still >consider the 12K to be the Championship and the 4K the kids race.
>If you can't run with the big boys, stay home.
I think that is right. It seems that the IAAF set the "short-course"
distance just low enough that it would be palatable for the 800/1500 type
runners, perhaps because Kenya does not have (did not have in 1996?) a
stranglehold on the 800/1500 like they do on the steeple/5k/10k. And,
perhaps this
, February 16, 2001 2:40 PM
Subject: Re: t-and-f: Short/Long course cross country
> Bob,
> COOL!
> While you are down sizing cross country, why not do the same to track.
> Only 1 weight event. Heck they all spin now, so as long as they spin and
have a weight they must be the sam
In a message dated 01-02-16 15:01:38 EST, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< If they can't run the mile, they shouldn't be on the track.
There is more to cross country than a long race on bumpy ground!
John >>
Actually there isn't much more to cross country than one long race on some
bumpy ground,
Personally, I love the 4k. But I do understand your wish to see everybody
duke it out in one race. Honestly, in the u.S. anyway, I think most of the
athletes do the 12k if they want to be in the more competitive race - thus I
don't see the dilution of competition you're concerned about.
As to th
Bob,
COOL!
While you are down sizing cross country, why not do the same to track.
Only 1 weight event. Heck they all spin now, so as long as they spin and have a weight
they must be the same. Let's not water down the events.
Same with the horizontal jumps. If you can jump once,you can jump 3 time
I agree 100%.
The World Cross Country Championships was always unique because you had marathoners to
milers racing together, that was the idea.
Having two races defeats the purpose. I still consider the 12K to be the Championship
and the 4K the kids race.
If you can't run with the big boys, sta
> ABOLISH THE 4K CROSS COUNTRY!!!
>
> That is my request. The experiment has been a failure. I would guess that
the IAAF's idea was to bring in the mile stars, >such as Morceli and El
Guerrouj, to the harrier season. It hasn't worked. I also suspect they were
hoping it would break >Kenya's strang
12k = varsity
4k = junior varsity
>ABOLISH THE 4K CROSS COUNTRY!!!
>
>That is my request. The experiment has been a failure. I would
guess that the IAAF's idea was to bring in the mile stars, such
as Morceli and El Guerrouj, to the harrier season. It hasn't
worked. I also suspect they were hopin
I'm in full agreement. Cross country - one race, one champion. Beautiful simplicity.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> ABOLISH THE 4K CROSS COUNTRY!!!
>
> That is my request. The experiment has been a failure. I would guess that the IAAF's
>idea was to bring in the mile stars, such as Morceli and El
28 matches
Mail list logo
