If cross country is meant to be run back and forth and back and forth and back and forth and back and forth. In other words, exactly how Cross-Country should be.
I was referring to the weather more than the course.If cross country is meant to be run back and forth and back and forth and back and forth and back and forth
Depends on what you mean by significant, but I would disagree. VOA is fast, but not silly fast. And you can run very fast at Cedarville, too, if the conditions are right. This year, for example, there were a lot of PBs and times darn close to PBs at the Cedarville District.Cedarville is typically significantly slower than VOA. VOA is silly fast every year
I was there and liked the Awards presentation better than any other Regional I've seen. Course might be good for spectating, but compared to the courses I ran, I would hate running it. Course interest doesn't seem to be of any consideration for the runners.I was referring to the weather more than the course.
I know a lot of people have issues with Troy, but personally, I really like it. It's an exciting environment and very easy to spectate.
Columbus Grove has to be one of the fastest. Completely flat and last 300 on a track. (I for one don't think running on a track should be part of a post season CC meet).
Liberty Center seems pretty speedy, but not insanely fast.I'd like to get everyone's thoughts as it is hard to compare across courses. Interested in hearing from those who have been around for a while. Thoughts on regional courses might be nice too.
Those multipliers were nearly useless. Boardman at 60 F with firm ground versus 80 F w/high humidy and soft ground or 35 F and a mudpit isn't going to be described by a single multiplier. When they first came out, I saw the multipliers and just shook my head - they didn't reflect my experiences in most cases.Milesplit used to have course rankings with multipliers so you could compare times from one course to another.
Not sure whatever happened to that, but going forward with Milesplit and the OHSAA partnering for CC and Track and Field registration and results, All the District, and Regional courses should be able to be put into the system and multipliers shown. Each year it should get more and more accurate to where better comparisons can be made. Actually something where having times would matter and please everyone that loves times so much. Something that should be a must if using Milesplit for the OHSAA.
I generally consider Columbus Grove a fast course but I didn't see kids PR'ing left and right on Saturday there like I was expecting especially the girls D2 race. 20:12 was the 12th ranked time going into that race and 21:02 ended up being the 12th and final qualifying spot.
I disagree. Over time a very good idea emerges. They could also figure out a way to filter out outlier years, but I don't think that's even necessary.Those multipliers were nearly useless. Boardman at 60 F with firm ground versus 80 F w/high humidy and soft ground or 35 F and a mudpit isn't going to be described by a single multiplier. When they first came out, I saw the multipliers and just shook my head - they didn't reflect my experiences in most cases.
For Minster girls and Woodridge boys, it's been kind of fun.Not sure why some of you are so intent on knowing exactly where your coaching or rooting interest is going to finish before the race is ever contested. For awhile, my local road racing scene was like that. Just look at the starting line, and you knew exactly where you were going to place. There's no fun in that.
That also could be an indication of the fast courses they ran during the season. Also need to keep in mind those ranking going into the meet are all time PR and it is not uncommon for a girl to have set that PR 2 years prior.
That was not true for the ranking in Milesplit for Findlay district. One girls time I know was from from 2019 she is 2 minutes slow now.The rankings are from this year, not all time PRs.
The CG milesplit rankings used times from this year from all of the ones I spot checked of D2 girls who I know of who ran faster in prior years. I wonder why they were different.That was not true for the ranking in Milesplit for Findlay district. One girls time I know was from from 2019 she is 2 minutes slow now.
Maybe we are looking at different things. I was looking at the times listed on the entries listing under the meet in MS.The CG milesplit rankings used times from this year from all of the ones I spot checked of D2 girls who I know of who ran faster in prior years. I wonder why they were different.
That's explains it. I was looking at rankings using the virtual meet rather than entries.Maybe we are looking at different things. I was looking at the times listed on the entries listing under the meet in MS.
View attachment 35178
Those multipliers are still on there for courses that had enough data before they stopped trying to calculate it. I would very much like to see them brought back. Some kind of a “weather effects “ score would be fun for individual races, but i have no idea how you would implement it except for maybe comparing to the average race on a given course.Milesplit used to have course rankings with multipliers so you could compare times from one course to another.
Not sure whatever happened to that, but going forward with Milesplit and the OHSAA partnering for CC and Track and Field registration and results, All the District, and Regional courses should be able to be put into the system and multipliers shown. Each year it should get more and more accurate to where better comparisons can be made. Actually something where having times would matter and please everyone that loves times so much. Something that should be a must if using Milesplit for the OHSAA.
I was looking at the Darby results on Athletic.net and noticed a drop off in PR rate over the course of the day. The early races were close to 40% while the late races dipped under 10%. Milesplit says the course is 20 to 30 seconds faster than average, based on their data. So your numbers fit right in.An on-line spreadsheet is available that calculates Jack Daniels training paces and also includes a correlation for the impact of temperature on race performance. Based on this calculation, late afternoon temps slowed the Darby DI district performances by an average of 2.8%... 28 seconds at 16:40. My experience says the temperature correlation is useful for comparing the performance of "the field" from course to course, but less useful for evaluating individual performances... some guys just handle the warm temps better than others.
Up until a few years ago, Darby ran at about -2.5% in good conditions, close to, but a little slower than the current Berlin course in cool, dry conditions. The warm afternoon temps made this year's course run slightly slower than average... closest to Newark in our 2022 experience.I was looking at the Darby results on Athletic.net and noticed a drop off in PR rate over the course of the day. The early races were close to 40% while the late races dipped under 10%. Milesplit says the course is 20 to 30 seconds faster than average, based on their data. So your numbers fit right in.
Heat is one factor. It seems like there might be a way to factor temp, wind, course conditions, etc all into one number for a given race. Unfortunately, it would also be impacted by field quality due to the small sample size of a single