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
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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,
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
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
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
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
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?
]]
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
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
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
[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
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;
19 matches
Mail list logo
