Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

2000-11-26 Thread JimRTimes


In a message dated 11/23/00 12:11:48 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

if mile splits were done away with  overnight and km splits

introduced I have every confidence that the VAST majority of American fans

would have no problem in adapting to them.

I have been to several road races where this has been done, and the runners 
adapt just fine (some of them even post charts where the mile pace equivalent 
of metric paces are listed)

Mile (or for that matter km) pace doesn't mean much by itself, but has to be 
seen in the context of the total distance. What's fast for 26.2 miles (or 
42,195m, officially) is relatively pedestrian for 5K. Even the average 
weekend road warrior can only interpret his mile splits based on his total 
time goal.

And given that, it's FAR easier to figure out pace when the total distance is 
evenly divisible.

Jim Gerweck
Running Times
USATF Road Running Technical Council



Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

2000-11-26 Thread DLTFNedit

In a message dated Sun, 26 Nov 2000  9:51:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 
In a message dated 11/23/00 12:11:48 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

if mile splits were done away with  overnight and km splits

introduced I have every confidence that the VAST majority of American fans

would have no problem in adapting to them.

I have been to several road races where this has been done, and the runners 
adapt just fine (some of them even post charts where the mile pace equivalent 
of metric paces are listed)

Mile (or for that matter km) pace doesn't mean much by itself, but has to be 
seen in the context of the total distance. What's fast for 26.2 miles (or 
42,195m, officially) is relatively pedestrian for 5K. Even the average 
weekend road warrior can only interpret his mile splits based on his total 
time goal.

And given that, it's FAR easier to figure out pace when the total distance is 
evenly divisible.

Jim Gerweck
Running Times
USATF Road Running Technical Council
 

Sure, the runners will adapt fine, but what about the average fan (or the 
casual fan that we're trying to entice to come back)? Can you imagine what an 
incredible thud would result from announcing, "The leaders just passed 6K in 
18:13"? I love metric (and have to convert to metric to understand the field 
events), but let's be realistic. In order to not alienate those in attendance 
at meets, English measurements and announcements should be used as much as 
possible.
sideshow




RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

2000-11-24 Thread David Dallman

  Funny you should say that Malmo, I do relate to that, in fact this IS my
pace for a 1 hour run! Of course, I'm talking about km pace. If you mean
miles, you're in way, way better shape than I am.
 David Dallman

On Thu, 23 Nov 2000, malmo wrote:

 Go out on a one hour run at 3:35 pace. Anyone relate to that? I rest my
 case.
 
 malmo
 
 
 
  Come on, [malmo].  The idea that Americans can't relate to metric splits
 is
  absurd.  Who doesn't relate to the total time in a metric race?
  If you know
  that 30:00 is a good time for a 10k cross country race, you will
  realize that
  3:00 kilometer splits is the pace that will get you there, even
  if you are a
  Palm Beach Co. voter.
 
  --
  Wayne T. Armbrust, Ph.D.
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Computomarx™
  3604 Grant Ct.
  Columbia MO 65203-5800 USA
  (573) 445-6675 (voice  FAX)
  http://www.Computomarx.com
  "Know the difference between right and wrong...
  Always give your best effort...
  Treat others the way you'd like to be treated..."
  - Coach Bill Sudeck
 
 
 
 
 

David Dallman
CERN - SIS





RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

2000-11-24 Thread Michael Casey

I bet Keith Kelly can. :)

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of malmo
Sent: 23 November 2000 20:07
To: Wayne T. Armbrust; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info


Go out on a one hour run at 3:35 pace. Anyone relate to that? I rest my
case.

malmo



 Come on, [malmo].  The idea that Americans can't relate to metric splits
is
 absurd.  Who doesn't relate to the total time in a metric race?
 If you know
 that 30:00 is a good time for a 10k cross country race, you will
 realize that
 3:00 kilometer splits is the pace that will get you there, even
 if you are a
 Palm Beach Co. voter.

 --
 Wayne T. Armbrust, Ph.D.
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Computomarx™
 3604 Grant Ct.
 Columbia MO 65203-5800 USA
 (573) 445-6675 (voice  FAX)
 http://www.Computomarx.com
 "Know the difference between right and wrong...
 Always give your best effort...
 Treat others the way you'd like to be treated..."
 - Coach Bill Sudeck







RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

2000-11-24 Thread malmo

Expect nothing less from man who study Kung Fu at CERN Monastery.

Master Po



   Funny you should say that Malmo, I do relate to that, in fact this IS my
 pace for a 1 hour run! Of course, I'm talking about km pace. If you mean
 miles, you're in way, way better shape than I am.
  David Dallman

 On Thu, 23 Nov 2000, malmo wrote:

  Go out on a one hour run at 3:35 pace. Anyone relate to that? I rest my
  case.
 
  malmo
 
 
 
   Come on, [malmo].  The idea that Americans can't relate to
 metric splits
  is
   absurd.  Who doesn't relate to the total time in a metric race?
   If you know
   that 30:00 is a good time for a 10k cross country race, you will
   realize that
   3:00 kilometer splits is the pace that will get you there, even
   if you are a
   Palm Beach Co. voter.
  
   --
   Wayne T. Armbrust, Ph.D.
   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Computomarx™
   3604 Grant Ct.
   Columbia MO 65203-5800 USA
   (573) 445-6675 (voice  FAX)
   http://www.Computomarx.com
   "Know the difference between right and wrong...
   Always give your best effort...
   Treat others the way you'd like to be treated..."
   - Coach Bill Sudeck
  
  
  
 
 

 David Dallman
 CERN - SIS







Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

2000-11-23 Thread David Dallman

  I agree 1 km spilts could be a bit too frequent. So, why not give splits
every 2 km?
David Dallman

On Wed, 22 Nov 2000, Bettwy, Bob wrote:

 Allow me to explain why we used mile splits for the announcing at the NCAA
 XC meet.
 
 Remember, we are using high school kids at the intermediate points with
 walkie talkies.  We instruct them to give us the split, the leaders and the
 team scores or team 1-5 differentials, depending on their abilities.
 
 From our past experience, we have found that the kilo marks are just too
 often (3 minutes) to relay and verify credible information.
 
 Therefore, we use the mile splits.
 
 Now, if we had running chips on everyone's foot and transponder readers at
 each kilo, then splits, leaders and team scores would be a breeze!!!
 
 I hope this helps,
 
 Bob Bettwy
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Director - Program Control
 Washington Group
 SRS Technologies
 (703) 351-7266
 
 
 Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 12:51:16 -0600
 From: "Wayne T. Armbrust" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
 
 David Dallman wrote:
 
   I must say there's something I don't understand about you all in the USA.
  Having spent the first 28 years of my life in England, I don't have any
  problem at all with miles. For cross-country races, where there is less
  need to compare times across courses because the courses vary a lot, I
  don't even have a problem with races STILL being contested over miles. But
  here we have 2 races whose total distance is declared to be a whole number
  of kilometres (6, 10 respectively) yet the splits are recorded every mile!
  So at the end, there's a fraction of a mile left over for which you don't
  get any split. Would have been much more interesting to see kilometre
  splits and to be able to look at the final kilometer split.
 
   David Dallman
 
 
 I have given up trying to argue the logic that you have expressed above.
 Maybe when someone from another country points out how foolish we are to
 give
 mile splits in kilometer races it will get out attention.
 
 By the way David, we also give mile splits in metric road races.  To be
 fair,
 however, I was there (coldest I've been in many years) and some kilometer
 splits were given.  Also, kilometer splits are often given in track races.
 But mile splits are universally given in road races and in almost all cross
 country races.
 
 - --
 Wayne T. Armbrust, Ph.D.
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Computomarx(tm)
 3604 Grant Ct.
 Columbia MO 65203-5800 USA
 (573) 445-6675 (voice  FAX)
 http://www.Computomarx.com
 "Know the difference between right and wrong...
 Always give your best effort...
 Treat others the way you'd like to be treated..."
 - - Coach Bill Sudeck
 

David Dallman
CERN - SIS





RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

2000-11-23 Thread Michael Casey

Bob,
Would a more sensible option be to give 2 k splits??
Mike

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Bettwy, Bob
Sent: 22 November 2000 14:59
To: Track List (E-mail)
Subject: Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info


Allow me to explain why we used mile splits for the announcing at the NCAA
XC meet.

Remember, we are using high school kids at the intermediate points with
walkie talkies.  We instruct them to give us the split, the leaders and the
team scores or team 1-5 differentials, depending on their abilities.

From our past experience, we have found that the kilo marks are just too
often (3 minutes) to relay and verify credible information.

Therefore, we use the mile splits.

Now, if we had running chips on everyone's foot and transponder readers at
each kilo, then splits, leaders and team scores would be a breeze!!!

I hope this helps,

Bob Bettwy
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Director - Program Control
Washington Group
SRS Technologies
(703) 351-7266


Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 12:51:16 -0600
From: "Wayne T. Armbrust" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

David Dallman wrote:

  I must say there's something I don't understand about you all in the USA.
 Having spent the first 28 years of my life in England, I don't have any
 problem at all with miles. For cross-country races, where there is less
 need to compare times across courses because the courses vary a lot, I
 don't even have a problem with races STILL being contested over miles. But
 here we have 2 races whose total distance is declared to be a whole number
 of kilometres (6, 10 respectively) yet the splits are recorded every mile!
 So at the end, there's a fraction of a mile left over for which you don't
 get any split. Would have been much more interesting to see kilometre
 splits and to be able to look at the final kilometer split.

  David Dallman


I have given up trying to argue the logic that you have expressed above.
Maybe when someone from another country points out how foolish we are to
give
mile splits in kilometer races it will get out attention.

By the way David, we also give mile splits in metric road races.  To be
fair,
however, I was there (coldest I've been in many years) and some kilometer
splits were given.  Also, kilometer splits are often given in track races.
But mile splits are universally given in road races and in almost all cross
country races.

- --
Wayne T. Armbrust, Ph.D.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Computomarx(tm)
3604 Grant Ct.
Columbia MO 65203-5800 USA
(573) 445-6675 (voice  FAX)
http://www.Computomarx.com
"Know the difference between right and wrong...
Always give your best effort...
Treat others the way you'd like to be treated..."
- - Coach Bill Sudeck




Re: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

2000-11-23 Thread WMurphy25


In a message dated 11/23/0 5:18:25 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Bob,

Would a more sensible option be to give 2 k splits??

Mike

It wouldn't matter if you gave 1k or 2k splits...the vast majority of people 
in attendance at an American x-country race wouldn't be able to relate to the 
times. And for those who want to argue the mathematical logic of projecting 
the final time (based on the kilometer splits)...who cares what the final 
time is in most x-country races, except for those rare occasions when a 
venerable course record is being challenged?

Walt Murphy
X-Country X-Press

Happy Thanksgiving to all!



Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

2000-11-23 Thread Wayne T. Armbrust



Michael Casey wrote:

 [EMAIL PROTECTED] said

 "who cares what the final
 time is in most x-country races"

 If thats the case who cares what the split times are?  Also I think you
 underestimate the ability of the people in attendance at an American cross
 country race to relate to km splits. My knowledge of American Cross country
 people is that they are very intelligent, and mathematically astute and
 would have NO problem in relating to km splits in metric races and mile
 splits in  imperial races.

 Mike

A lot more people can divide 6 or 10 by 1 or 2 than can divide the same by
1.609344!

--
Wayne T. Armbrust, Ph.D.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Computomarx™
3604 Grant Ct.
Columbia MO 65203-5800 USA
(573) 445-6675 (voice  FAX)
http://www.Computomarx.com
"Know the difference between right and wrong...
Always give your best effort...
Treat others the way you'd like to be treated..."
- Coach Bill Sudeck





RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

2000-11-23 Thread Michael Casey

Hi Walt,
The points still remain. I have great faith in the american fans ability to
relate km times to pace.

And I agree with you that final times in crosscountry races are relatively
meaningless, but if this is true, so are the split times.

Mike

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 23 November 2000 15:41
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info



In a message dated 11/23/00 9:32:41 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

 If thats the case who cares what the split times are?  Also I think
you
underestimate the ability of the people in attendance at an American cross
country race to relate to km splits. My knowledge of American Cross country
people is that they are very intelligent, and mathematically astute and
would have NO problem in relating to km splits in metric races and mile
splits in  imperial races. 

This has nothing to with intelligence...in my opinion, most American fans
relate to mile splits (in x-country races) in terms of pace, rather than a
projection of a final time. And I would still argue that final times,
especially in races run in severe conditions, such as those present in Ames,
are relatively meaningless

Unlike races run on the track, it's impossible to compare times from one
course to another. Times can be historically meaningful when they occur on
courses that have a long tradition, such as Mt.SAC and Van Cortlandt Park.

Walt Murphy









Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

2000-11-23 Thread Adam G Beaver

It seems to me that cross-country split times have two important functions:
(1) during the race, they help runners to gauge their effort and strategize,
and (2) after the race, they enable fans/statisticians/coaches to
reconstruct the progress of a race, to see who had the most effective pacing
strategy, and to appreciate things like spectacular mid-race surges and
finishing kicks.

Given those two functions--race pacing and race reconstruction--I can see
why US races stick with mile splits. In terms of athletes pacing themselves,
it shouldn't matter if they are receiving kilo splits or mile splits, but if
it has to be a choice between 2k splits or mile splits, then mile splits are
more frequent and therefore a greater aid.

In terms of reconstructing the race, the same argument holds--splits every
1609 rather than 2000 mean that runners' strategies are more frequently
monitored for later analysis. And, as an unintended fringe benefit, mile
splits in a 10k mean that you also get a split on what is almost the last
quarter mile of each runner, which is very useful in tight races, much like
having the last 300 in a 1500. I for one would like to know the split for
Kelly's last .2!

AGB




Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

2000-11-23 Thread Wayne T. Armbrust

You die-hard mile split people out there (you know who you are) must
really have got bent out of shape when tracks went to 400 m and you
couldn't get mile splits in track races anymore.  Of course, some of you
still take 1600 m splits.  (1600 doesn't divide into integer kilometer
distances very well either).

--
Wayne T. Armbrust, Ph.D.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Computomarx™
3604 Grant Ct.
Columbia MO 65203-5800 USA
(573) 445-6675 (voice  FAX)
http://www.Computomarx.com
"Know the difference between right and wrong...
Always give your best effort...
Treat others the way you'd like to be treated..."
- Coach Bill Sudeck





RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

2000-11-23 Thread Michael Casey

Adam G Beaver said

"splits every
1609 rather than 2000 mean that runners' strategies are more frequently
monitored for later analysis."

Hi Adam

Yes and 1000m is less than 1609 giving even more useful information.

Mike

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Adam G Beaver
Sent: 23 November 2000 16:06
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info


It seems to me that cross-country split times have two important functions:
(1) during the race, they help runners to gauge their effort and strategize,
and (2) after the race, they enable fans/statisticians/coaches to
reconstruct the progress of a race, to see who had the most effective pacing
strategy, and to appreciate things like spectacular mid-race surges and
finishing kicks.

Given those two functions--race pacing and race reconstruction--I can see
why US races stick with mile splits. In terms of athletes pacing themselves,
it shouldn't matter if they are receiving kilo splits or mile splits, but if
it has to be a choice between 2k splits or mile splits, then mile splits are
more frequent and therefore a greater aid.

In terms of reconstructing the race, the same argument holds--splits every
1609 rather than 2000 mean that runners' strategies are more frequently
monitored for later analysis. And, as an unintended fringe benefit, mile
splits in a 10k mean that you also get a split on what is almost the last
quarter mile of each runner, which is very useful in tight races, much like
having the last 300 in a 1500. I for one would like to know the split for
Kelly's last .2!

AGB




RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

2000-11-23 Thread malmo

Everyone has the right to tell someone what they should or shouldn't do!
They call them opinions.

As for "... I know more American fans who relate to km splits than those who
don't."  Don't try to get one past me, Sonny. That's simply untrue.

Keep on runnin' brother.

malmo

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael Casey
 Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2000 9:04 AM
 To: malmo
 Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info


 Hi Malmo,
 I beg to disagree with your "emphatic" statement. Having competed
 in the US
 for 4 years I know more American fans who relate to km splits
 than those who
 don't. Admitting that I know only a miniscule minority of American fans it
 still negates your statement that American fans do not relate to Kilometer
 splits, at least SOME do.
 My point is that if mile splits were done away with  overnight
 and km splits
 introduced I have every confidence that the VAST majority of American fans
 would have no problem in adapting to them.
 With regard to your "emphatic" statement that American fans need
 not relate
 to km splits, I have no argument with that or with the statement that km
 splits "work just fine".
 As to your "emphatic" statement that American fans "should not
 relate to km
 splits" has anyone got the right to tell the American fans what they
 should or shouldn't do??

 Regards
 Mike

 -Original Message-
 From: malmo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: 23 November 2000 16:48
 To: Michael Casey; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info


 Speaking as an American, Mike, and as one who is fluent in metric
 as well as
 imperial, I will say EMPHATICALLY: American fans do not, need not, and
 should not relate to kilometer splits. Mile splits work just fine.

 You're over-estimating the intelligence of Americans. The "land of Jerry
 Springer" does not possess the ability to relate to km splits.

 malmo

  -Original Message-
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael Casey
  Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2000 7:47 AM
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
 
 
  Hi Walt,
  The points still remain. I have great faith in the american fans
  ability to
  relate km times to pace.
 
  And I agree with you that final times in crosscountry races are
 relatively
  meaningless, but if this is true, so are the split times.
 
  Mike
 
  -Original Message-
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
  Sent: 23 November 2000 15:41
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Subject: Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
 
 
 
  In a message dated 11/23/00 9:32:41 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 
   If thats the case who cares what the split times are?
 Also I think
  you
  underestimate the ability of the people in attendance at an
 American cross
  country race to relate to km splits. My knowledge of American
  Cross country
  people is that they are very intelligent, and mathematically astute and
  would have NO problem in relating to km splits in metric races and mile
  splits in  imperial races. 
 
  This has nothing to with intelligence...in my opinion, most
 American fans
  relate to mile splits (in x-country races) in terms of pace,
 rather than a
  projection of a final time. And I would still argue that final times,
  especially in races run in severe conditions, such as those
  present in Ames,
  are relatively meaningless
 
  Unlike races run on the track, it's impossible to compare times from one
  course to another. Times can be historically meaningful when
 they occur on
  courses that have a long tradition, such as Mt.SAC and Van
 Cortlandt Park.
 
  Walt Murphy
 
 
 
 
 
 
 






RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

2000-11-23 Thread malmo

Speaking as an American, Mike, and as one who is fluent in metric as well as
imperial, I will say EMPHATICALLY: American fans do not, need not, and
should not relate to kilometer splits. Mile splits work just fine.

You're over-estimating the intelligence of Americans. The "land of Jerry
Springer" does not possess the ability to relate to km splits.

malmo

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael Casey
 Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2000 7:47 AM
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info


 Hi Walt,
 The points still remain. I have great faith in the american fans
 ability to
 relate km times to pace.

 And I agree with you that final times in crosscountry races are relatively
 meaningless, but if this is true, so are the split times.

 Mike

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: 23 November 2000 15:41
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info



 In a message dated 11/23/00 9:32:41 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  If thats the case who cares what the split times are?  Also I think
 you
 underestimate the ability of the people in attendance at an American cross
 country race to relate to km splits. My knowledge of American
 Cross country
 people is that they are very intelligent, and mathematically astute and
 would have NO problem in relating to km splits in metric races and mile
 splits in  imperial races. 

 This has nothing to with intelligence...in my opinion, most American fans
 relate to mile splits (in x-country races) in terms of pace, rather than a
 projection of a final time. And I would still argue that final times,
 especially in races run in severe conditions, such as those
 present in Ames,
 are relatively meaningless

 Unlike races run on the track, it's impossible to compare times from one
 course to another. Times can be historically meaningful when they occur on
 courses that have a long tradition, such as Mt.SAC and Van Cortlandt Park.

 Walt Murphy











RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

2000-11-23 Thread Michael Casey

Hi Malmo,

A couple of points.

1. Lets keep this civil.
2. Again I point out that of my aquaintances, I know more American fans who
relate to km splits. Believe me it is not all that difficult. (It is
possible to relate to both). Most of our cross country races and road races
had km splits.

Mike


-Original Message-
From: malmo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 23 November 2000 17:12
To: Michael Casey
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info


Everyone has the right to tell someone what they should or shouldn't do!
They call them opinions.

As for "... I know more American fans who relate to km splits than those who
don't."  Don't try to get one past me, Sonny. That's simply untrue.

Keep on runnin' brother.

malmo

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael Casey
 Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2000 9:04 AM
 To: malmo
 Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info


 Hi Malmo,
 I beg to disagree with your "emphatic" statement. Having competed
 in the US
 for 4 years I know more American fans who relate to km splits
 than those who
 don't. Admitting that I know only a miniscule minority of American fans it
 still negates your statement that American fans do not relate to Kilometer
 splits, at least SOME do.
 My point is that if mile splits were done away with  overnight
 and km splits
 introduced I have every confidence that the VAST majority of American fans
 would have no problem in adapting to them.
 With regard to your "emphatic" statement that American fans need
 not relate
 to km splits, I have no argument with that or with the statement that km
 splits "work just fine".
 As to your "emphatic" statement that American fans "should not
 relate to km
 splits" has anyone got the right to tell the American fans what they
 should or shouldn't do??

 Regards
 Mike

 -Original Message-
 From: malmo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: 23 November 2000 16:48
 To: Michael Casey; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info


 Speaking as an American, Mike, and as one who is fluent in metric
 as well as
 imperial, I will say EMPHATICALLY: American fans do not, need not, and
 should not relate to kilometer splits. Mile splits work just fine.

 You're over-estimating the intelligence of Americans. The "land of Jerry
 Springer" does not possess the ability to relate to km splits.

 malmo

  -Original Message-
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael Casey
  Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2000 7:47 AM
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
 
 
  Hi Walt,
  The points still remain. I have great faith in the american fans
  ability to
  relate km times to pace.
 
  And I agree with you that final times in crosscountry races are
 relatively
  meaningless, but if this is true, so are the split times.
 
  Mike
 
  -Original Message-
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
  Sent: 23 November 2000 15:41
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Subject: Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
 
 
 
  In a message dated 11/23/00 9:32:41 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
 
   If thats the case who cares what the split times are?
 Also I think
  you
  underestimate the ability of the people in attendance at an
 American cross
  country race to relate to km splits. My knowledge of American
  Cross country
  people is that they are very intelligent, and mathematically astute and
  would have NO problem in relating to km splits in metric races and mile
  splits in  imperial races. 
 
  This has nothing to with intelligence...in my opinion, most
 American fans
  relate to mile splits (in x-country races) in terms of pace,
 rather than a
  projection of a final time. And I would still argue that final times,
  especially in races run in severe conditions, such as those
  present in Ames,
  are relatively meaningless
 
  Unlike races run on the track, it's impossible to compare times from one
  course to another. Times can be historically meaningful when
 they occur on
  courses that have a long tradition, such as Mt.SAC and Van
 Cortlandt Park.
 
  Walt Murphy
 
 
 
 
 
 
 






RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

2000-11-23 Thread Michael Casey


Thank you Justin.

Mike

-Original Message-
From: Justin Clouder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 23 November 2000 17:46
To: Michael Casey; 'malmo'
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info



If I may interject in a private debate...

...one of the things about this metric vs imperial thing which confuses me
is why people seem to think that it has to be one or the other.

Here in the UK I buy my petrol by the litre yet car makers discuss miles per
gallon; I buy milk and beer by the pint and OJ by the litre; I measure long
distance and speed in miles yet small distances in centimetres; in
conversation people use yards and metres interchangeably; I discuss my
height in feet and inches but my weight in kilos; cooking instructions
freely mix the two systems.

Why, then, is it so difficult for Americans to relate to both as needed?

Trivia point: The dollar was the world's first ever decimal currency. In the
UK we didn't have one of those until 1971.

Justin

 --
 From: malmo
 Reply To: malmo
 Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2000 5:12 pm
 To:   Michael Casey
 Cc:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject:  RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

 Everyone has the right to tell someone what they should or shouldn't do!
 They call them opinions.

 As for "... I know more American fans who relate to km splits than those
 who
 don't."  Don't try to get one past me, Sonny. That's simply untrue.

 Keep on runnin' brother.

 malmo

  -Original Message-
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael Casey
  Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2000 9:04 AM
  To: malmo
  Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
 
 
  Hi Malmo,
  I beg to disagree with your "emphatic" statement. Having competed
  in the US
  for 4 years I know more American fans who relate to km splits
  than those who
  don't. Admitting that I know only a miniscule minority of American fans
 it
  still negates your statement that American fans do not relate to
 Kilometer
  splits, at least SOME do.
  My point is that if mile splits were done away with  overnight
  and km splits
  introduced I have every confidence that the VAST majority of American
 fans
  would have no problem in adapting to them.
  With regard to your "emphatic" statement that American fans need
  not relate
  to km splits, I have no argument with that or with the statement that km
  splits "work just fine".
  As to your "emphatic" statement that American fans "should not
  relate to km
  splits" has anyone got the right to tell the American fans what they
  should or shouldn't do??
 
  Regards
  Mike
 
  -Original Message-
  From: malmo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
  Sent: 23 November 2000 16:48
  To: Michael Casey; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
 
 
  Speaking as an American, Mike, and as one who is fluent in metric
  as well as
  imperial, I will say EMPHATICALLY: American fans do not, need not, and
  should not relate to kilometer splits. Mile splits work just fine.
 
  You're over-estimating the intelligence of Americans. The "land of Jerry
  Springer" does not possess the ability to relate to km splits.
 
  malmo
 
   -Original Message-
   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael Casey
   Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2000 7:47 AM
   To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
  
  
   Hi Walt,
   The points still remain. I have great faith in the american fans
   ability to
   relate km times to pace.
  
   And I agree with you that final times in crosscountry races are
  relatively
   meaningless, but if this is true, so are the split times.
  
   Mike
  
   -Original Message-
   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
   Sent: 23 November 2000 15:41
   To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Subject: Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
  
  
  
   In a message dated 11/23/00 9:32:41 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 writes:
  
If thats the case who cares what the split times are?
  Also I think
   you
   underestimate the ability of the people in attendance at an
  American cross
   country race to relate to km splits. My knowledge of American
   Cross country
   people is that they are very intelligent, and mathematically astute
 and
   would have NO problem in relating to km splits in metric races and
 mile
   splits in  imperial races. 
  
   This has nothing to with intelligence...in my opinion, most
  American fans
   relate to mile splits (in x-country races) in terms of pace,
  rather than a
   projection of a final time. And I would still argue that final times,
   especially in races run in severe conditions, such as those
   present in Ames,
   are relat

RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

2000-11-23 Thread Justin Clouder


If I may interject in a private debate...

...one of the things about this metric vs imperial thing which confuses me
is why people seem to think that it has to be one or the other.

Here in the UK I buy my petrol by the litre yet car makers discuss miles per
gallon; I buy milk and beer by the pint and OJ by the litre; I measure long
distance and speed in miles yet small distances in centimetres; in
conversation people use yards and metres interchangeably; I discuss my
height in feet and inches but my weight in kilos; cooking instructions
freely mix the two systems.

Why, then, is it so difficult for Americans to relate to both as needed?

Trivia point: The dollar was the world's first ever decimal currency. In the
UK we didn't have one of those until 1971.

Justin

 --
 From: malmo
 Reply To: malmo
 Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2000 5:12 pm
 To:   Michael Casey
 Cc:   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject:  RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
 
 Everyone has the right to tell someone what they should or shouldn't do!
 They call them opinions.
 
 As for "... I know more American fans who relate to km splits than those
 who
 don't."  Don't try to get one past me, Sonny. That's simply untrue.
 
 Keep on runnin' brother.
 
 malmo
 
  -Original Message-
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael Casey
  Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2000 9:04 AM
  To: malmo
  Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
 
 
  Hi Malmo,
  I beg to disagree with your "emphatic" statement. Having competed
  in the US
  for 4 years I know more American fans who relate to km splits
  than those who
  don't. Admitting that I know only a miniscule minority of American fans
 it
  still negates your statement that American fans do not relate to
 Kilometer
  splits, at least SOME do.
  My point is that if mile splits were done away with  overnight
  and km splits
  introduced I have every confidence that the VAST majority of American
 fans
  would have no problem in adapting to them.
  With regard to your "emphatic" statement that American fans need
  not relate
  to km splits, I have no argument with that or with the statement that km
  splits "work just fine".
  As to your "emphatic" statement that American fans "should not
  relate to km
  splits" has anyone got the right to tell the American fans what they
  should or shouldn't do??
 
  Regards
  Mike
 
  -Original Message-
  From: malmo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
  Sent: 23 November 2000 16:48
  To: Michael Casey; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
 
 
  Speaking as an American, Mike, and as one who is fluent in metric
  as well as
  imperial, I will say EMPHATICALLY: American fans do not, need not, and
  should not relate to kilometer splits. Mile splits work just fine.
 
  You're over-estimating the intelligence of Americans. The "land of Jerry
  Springer" does not possess the ability to relate to km splits.
 
  malmo
 
   -Original Message-
   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael Casey
   Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2000 7:47 AM
   To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
  
  
   Hi Walt,
   The points still remain. I have great faith in the american fans
   ability to
   relate km times to pace.
  
   And I agree with you that final times in crosscountry races are
  relatively
   meaningless, but if this is true, so are the split times.
  
   Mike
  
   -Original Message-
   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
   Sent: 23 November 2000 15:41
   To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   Subject: Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info
  
  
  
   In a message dated 11/23/00 9:32:41 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 writes:
  
If thats the case who cares what the split times are?
  Also I think
   you
   underestimate the ability of the people in attendance at an
  American cross
   country race to relate to km splits. My knowledge of American
   Cross country
   people is that they are very intelligent, and mathematically astute
 and
   would have NO problem in relating to km splits in metric races and
 mile
   splits in  imperial races. 
  
   This has nothing to with intelligence...in my opinion, most
  American fans
   relate to mile splits (in x-country races) in terms of pace,
  rather than a
   projection of a final time. And I would still argue that final times,
   especially in races run in severe conditions, such as those
   present in Ames,
   are relatively meaningless
  
   Unlike races run on the track, it's impossible to compare times from
 one
   course to another. Times can be historically meaningful when
  they occur on
   courses that have a long

RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

2000-11-23 Thread Michael Casey

Hi Malmo,
I beg to disagree with your "emphatic" statement. Having competed in the US
for 4 years I know more American fans who relate to km splits than those who
don't. Admitting that I know only a miniscule minority of American fans it
still negates your statement that American fans do not relate to Kilometer
splits, at least SOME do.
My point is that if mile splits were done away with  overnight and km splits
introduced I have every confidence that the VAST majority of American fans
would have no problem in adapting to them.
With regard to your "emphatic" statement that American fans need not relate
to km splits, I have no argument with that or with the statement that km
splits "work just fine".
As to your "emphatic" statement that American fans "should not relate to km
splits" has anyone got the right to tell the American fans what they
should or shouldn't do??

Regards
Mike

-Original Message-
From: malmo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 23 November 2000 16:48
To: Michael Casey; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info


Speaking as an American, Mike, and as one who is fluent in metric as well as
imperial, I will say EMPHATICALLY: American fans do not, need not, and
should not relate to kilometer splits. Mile splits work just fine.

You're over-estimating the intelligence of Americans. The "land of Jerry
Springer" does not possess the ability to relate to km splits.

malmo

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Michael Casey
 Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2000 7:47 AM
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info


 Hi Walt,
 The points still remain. I have great faith in the american fans
 ability to
 relate km times to pace.

 And I agree with you that final times in crosscountry races are relatively
 meaningless, but if this is true, so are the split times.

 Mike

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
 Sent: 23 November 2000 15:41
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info



 In a message dated 11/23/00 9:32:41 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

  If thats the case who cares what the split times are?  Also I think
 you
 underestimate the ability of the people in attendance at an American cross
 country race to relate to km splits. My knowledge of American
 Cross country
 people is that they are very intelligent, and mathematically astute and
 would have NO problem in relating to km splits in metric races and mile
 splits in  imperial races. 

 This has nothing to with intelligence...in my opinion, most American fans
 relate to mile splits (in x-country races) in terms of pace, rather than a
 projection of a final time. And I would still argue that final times,
 especially in races run in severe conditions, such as those
 present in Ames,
 are relatively meaningless

 Unlike races run on the track, it's impossible to compare times from one
 course to another. Times can be historically meaningful when they occur on
 courses that have a long tradition, such as Mt.SAC and Van Cortlandt Park.

 Walt Murphy











Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

2000-11-23 Thread Wayne T. Armbrust

Malmo wrote:


  Speaking as an American, Mike, and as one who is fluent in metric
  as well as
  imperial, I will say EMPHATICALLY: American fans do not, need not, and
  should not relate to kilometer splits. Mile splits work just fine.

  You're over-estimating the intelligence of Americans. The "land of Jerry
  Springer" does not possess the ability to relate to km splits.

  malmo

Come on, George.  The idea that Americans can't relate to metric splits is
absurd.  Who doesn't relate to the total time in a metric race?  If you know
that 30:00 is a good time for a 10k cross country race, you will realize that
3:00 kilometer splits is the pace that will get you there, even if you are a
Palm Beach Co. voter.

--
Wayne T. Armbrust, Ph.D.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Computomarx™
3604 Grant Ct.
Columbia MO 65203-5800 USA
(573) 445-6675 (voice  FAX)
http://www.Computomarx.com
"Know the difference between right and wrong...
Always give your best effort...
Treat others the way you'd like to be treated..."
- Coach Bill Sudeck





Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

2000-11-23 Thread mmrohl

Netters

Wayne writes:

Of course, some of you still take 1600 m splits.  (1600 doesn't divide into integer 
kilometer distances very well either).

Being one of those who uses the 1600 split in training, I will try to
explain the irrational.:)

I came into track just after the transition to the metric system for most
highschools.  To me 4 laps on a track is a mile even if it is only 1600m. 
Why? because the mile is my name for four complete laps those 9m mean about
a 2 seconds to me. A discrepancy I can live with even if it drives
statictians nuts.  It comes down to intuitive familiarity.  I can do 1k
splits and convert to 1600 and back, but a 7:20 1600 means more to me then
a 4:35.  This is hard to explain because it gets into a really intangible
area of comfort.  In a long race on a track it is easier for me to check
splits every 4 laps then every 2 and a half.  It can be hard to try to
remember which side of the track you have to be on to check the split. 
Walkers in general differ then runners in one aspect of there training. 
Most walkers train on small loops, accuartely measured.  The majority of my
training occurs on a 2k out and back - even on my easy days.  This has a
lot to do with the need for more control of surface and terrain.  Walking
doesn't work well where there is poor footing and walking down hills is
pretty painful. But I digress...

In regards to cross country, I have to disagree with Walt about times being
meaningless.  My times in cross country were always important to me and my
coach and our team.  A good experienced coach can "adjust" the times if the
course runs slow or fast, if it is easy or hard.  You can tell whether you
team is improving by comparing to a standard course.  My best road 8k was
27:27 my best x-c was 27:31.  The only time I could really know a
difference was when the course was mismeasured.

As for understanding splits when I am on the track I think of 5ks as 3 1600
splits and a 200 kick and I think of 10k as 6 1600 splits and a 400 kick. 
And I'll bet I am not the on one who thinks that way.  Interestingly though
in 20ks on the road I think in terms of 1k and 2k splits.  Guess it is just
what ever gets you through the race.



RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

2000-11-23 Thread malmo

Go out on a one hour run at 3:35 pace. Anyone relate to that? I rest my
case.

malmo



 Come on, [malmo].  The idea that Americans can't relate to metric splits
is
 absurd.  Who doesn't relate to the total time in a metric race?
 If you know
 that 30:00 is a good time for a 10k cross country race, you will
 realize that
 3:00 kilometer splits is the pace that will get you there, even
 if you are a
 Palm Beach Co. voter.

 --
 Wayne T. Armbrust, Ph.D.
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Computomarx™
 3604 Grant Ct.
 Columbia MO 65203-5800 USA
 (573) 445-6675 (voice  FAX)
 http://www.Computomarx.com
 "Know the difference between right and wrong...
 Always give your best effort...
 Treat others the way you'd like to be treated..."
 - Coach Bill Sudeck







RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

2000-11-23 Thread RunLikeMad

very well put malmo!!  very well put.



RE: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

2000-11-23 Thread whitmank


Here is the basic premise it all boils down to in Track  Field gentlemen:
THE MILE IS STILL KING.

ps  All you folks that get upset when Malmo chides you should go down to
the store and purchase a
Sense of Humor 2000 TM.

Keith Whitman
Head Cross Country Coach
Assistant Track  Field Coach
University of Nebraska at Kearney
Office (308) 865-8070
Home (308) 338-1115
http://www.lopers.com/xcountry/default.htm
Fax # (308) 865-8187




Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

2000-11-22 Thread Bettwy, Bob

Allow me to explain why we used mile splits for the announcing at the NCAA
XC meet.

Remember, we are using high school kids at the intermediate points with
walkie talkies.  We instruct them to give us the split, the leaders and the
team scores or team 1-5 differentials, depending on their abilities.

From our past experience, we have found that the kilo marks are just too
often (3 minutes) to relay and verify credible information.

Therefore, we use the mile splits.

Now, if we had running chips on everyone's foot and transponder readers at
each kilo, then splits, leaders and team scores would be a breeze!!!

I hope this helps,

Bob Bettwy
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Director - Program Control
Washington Group
SRS Technologies
(703) 351-7266


Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 12:51:16 -0600
From: "Wayne T. Armbrust" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

David Dallman wrote:

  I must say there's something I don't understand about you all in the USA.
 Having spent the first 28 years of my life in England, I don't have any
 problem at all with miles. For cross-country races, where there is less
 need to compare times across courses because the courses vary a lot, I
 don't even have a problem with races STILL being contested over miles. But
 here we have 2 races whose total distance is declared to be a whole number
 of kilometres (6, 10 respectively) yet the splits are recorded every mile!
 So at the end, there's a fraction of a mile left over for which you don't
 get any split. Would have been much more interesting to see kilometre
 splits and to be able to look at the final kilometer split.

  David Dallman


I have given up trying to argue the logic that you have expressed above.
Maybe when someone from another country points out how foolish we are to
give
mile splits in kilometer races it will get out attention.

By the way David, we also give mile splits in metric road races.  To be
fair,
however, I was there (coldest I've been in many years) and some kilometer
splits were given.  Also, kilometer splits are often given in track races.
But mile splits are universally given in road races and in almost all cross
country races.

- --
Wayne T. Armbrust, Ph.D.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Computomarx(tm)
3604 Grant Ct.
Columbia MO 65203-5800 USA
(573) 445-6675 (voice  FAX)
http://www.Computomarx.com
"Know the difference between right and wrong...
Always give your best effort...
Treat others the way you'd like to be treated..."
- - Coach Bill Sudeck



Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

2000-11-21 Thread Wayne T. Armbrust



David Dallman wrote:

  I must say there's something I don't understand about you all in the USA.
 Having spent the first 28 years of my life in England, I don't have any
 problem at all with miles. For cross-country races, where there is less
 need to compare times across courses because the courses vary a lot, I
 don't even have a problem with races STILL being contested over miles. But
 here we have 2 races whose total distance is declared to be a whole number
 of kilometres (6, 10 respectively) yet the splits are recorded every mile!
 So at the end, there's a fraction of a mile left over for which you don't
 get any split. Would have been much more interesting to see kilometre
 splits and to be able to look at the final kilometer split.

  David Dallman


I have given up trying to argue the logic that you have expressed above.
Maybe when someone from another country points out how foolish we are to give
mile splits in kilometer races it will get out attention.

By the way David, we also give mile splits in metric road races.  To be fair,
however, I was there (coldest I've been in many years) and some kilometer
splits were given.  Also, kilometer splits are often given in track races.
But mile splits are universally given in road races and in almost all cross
country races.

--
Wayne T. Armbrust, Ph.D.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Computomarx™
3604 Grant Ct.
Columbia MO 65203-5800 USA
(573) 445-6675 (voice  FAX)
http://www.Computomarx.com
"Know the difference between right and wrong...
Always give your best effort...
Treat others the way you'd like to be treated..."
- Coach Bill Sudeck





Re: t-and-f: NCAA XC Splits and Leader Info

2000-11-20 Thread David Dallman

 I must say there's something I don't understand about you all in the USA.
Having spent the first 28 years of my life in England, I don't have any
problem at all with miles. For cross-country races, where there is less
need to compare times across courses because the courses vary a lot, I
don't even have a problem with races STILL being contested over miles. But
here we have 2 races whose total distance is declared to be a whole number
of kilometres (6, 10 respectively) yet the splits are recorded every mile!
So at the end, there's a fraction of a mile left over for which you don't
get any split. Would have been much more interesting to see kilometre
splits and to be able to look at the final kilometer split.

 David Dallman

On Mon, 20 Nov 2000, Bettwy, Bob wrote:

 For those who care...information gathered by the announcing crew...
 
 Woman's Race - 6,000 Meters
 
 1K - Time 3:27
 Leaders:
 Sabrina Monro (Montana)
 Glady's Keitany (TCU)
 Laura Harmon (Oregon)
 Christina Bowen (UCLA)
 Leslie Patterson (Wisconsin)
 Lilli Kleinmann (Arkansas)
 Tracy Robertson (Arkansas)
 
 1M - Time 5:31
 Leaders:
 Erica Palmer (Wisconsin)
 Monroe
 Keitany
 Bethany Brewster (Wisconsin)
 Sheela Agrawal (Duke)
 Erin White (Michigan)
 [Score, no runners displaced, Stanford 149, Colorado 169]
 
 2M - Time 11:15
 Leaders:
 Palmer
 Brewster
 Kara Grgas-Wheeler (Colorado)
 Shalane Flanagan (UNC)
 Monro
 Agrawal
 Kleinmann
 Lisa Aguilera (ASU)
 Mary Jane Harrelson (Appalachian St.)
 Keitany
 
 2.5M
 Leaders:
 Brewster
 Palmer
 Keitany
 Wheeler
 Kleinmann
 Monro
 Agrawal
 
 3M - Time 16:42
 Leaders:
 Wheeler
 Palmer
 Monro
 Flanagan
 Aguilera
 Agrawal
 Brewster
 Kleinmann
 Sara Gorton (Colorado)
 Amy Mortimer (K State)
 [Team 1-5 differentials, BYU 31 sec., Stanford 35 sec., Colorado 1:15]
 
 Final
 Official: 20:30.5
 1. Wheeler
 2. Monro
 3. Palmer
 4. Flanagan
 5. Aguilera
 6. Mortimer
 7. Agrawal
 8. Gorton
 9. Brewster
 10. Kleinmann
 Teams: Colorado 117, BYU 167, Stanford 198
 Differentials: BYU 44 seconds, Stanford 1:03, Colorado 1:14
 
 
 Men's Race - 10,000 Meters
 
 1K - Time 3:05
 Leaders:
 Paul Reilly (Providence)
 James Karanu (Arkansas)
 Murray Link (Arkansas)
 Stephen Ondieki (Farleigh Dickinson)
 David Kimani (Alabama)
 Jonathan Riley (Stanford)
 Brian Berryhill (Colorado State)
 Steve Crane (Eastern Michigan)
 
 1M - Time 4:56
 Crane
 Karanu
 Link
 Kimani
 Keith Kelly (Providence)
 Ondieki
 Adrian Blincoe (Villanova)
 [Team Differentials: Colorado 2 sec., Ark 2 sec., Stan 4 sec.]
 
 1.5M
 Fraser Thompson (Butler)
 Ondieki
 Kimani
 Kevin Koeper (Northern Arizona)
 
 2M - Time 10:12
 Franklin Sanchez (Georgetown)
 Daniel Lincoln (Arkansas)
 Koeper
 Blincoe
 Link
 Mike Green (Troy State)
 Kimani
 
 3M - Time 15:04
 Sanchez
 Ondieki
 Link
 Kelly
 Thompson
 Mark Pilja (Michigan)
 Steve Bohan (West Virginia)
 Kimani
 Luke Watson (Notre Dame)
 Karl Savage (St. Joe's)
 [Differentials: Ark 3 sec., Colorado 13 sec., Stan 22 sec.]
 
 4M - Time 19:50
 Sanchez
 Kelly
 Ondieki
 Thompson
 Link
 Jorge Torres (Colorado)
 Kimani
 [Differentials: Ark 5 sec., Colorado 20 sec., Stan 22 sec.]
 
 5M - Time 24:39
 Ondieki
 Kimani
 Sanchez
 Torres
 Kelly
 Blincoe
 Thompson
 Jason Vanderhoof (Wisconsin)
 [Differentials: Colorado 40 sec.]
 
 Final
 Official: 30:14.5
 1. Kelly
 2. Ondieki
 3. Torres
 4. Kimani
 5. Sanchez
 6. Ian Connor (Ohio State)
 7. Watson
 8. Vanderhoof
 9. Blincoe
 10. Riley
 11. Karanu
 12. Hamish Thorpe (Providence)
 13. Sharif Karie (Arkansas)
 14. Thompson
 15. Berryhill
 16. Link
 17. Pilja
 18. Bohan
 Teams: Arkansas 83, Colorado 94, Providence 121, Stanford 149
 Differentials: Arkansas :20, Stanford :44, Colorado :54, Providence 1:12
 
 We received some great help from some area HS kids but the data above is
 subject to errors.  My apologies.
 
 Bob Bettwy
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Director - Program Control
 Washington Group
 SRS Technologies
 (703) 351-7266
 
 

David Dallman
CERN - SIS