I tried to couch it diplomatically, but it still caught attention. Here is
why:
Track racers, no matter what the distance, always face this: Sameness.
No track ever had a hill on it. None of them ever had a deceptively long
homestretch, or a false-flat at the 5M mark that you forgot about, or never
knew of because you hadn't ever run the full course enough times.
Even in the only track distance race WITH obstacles, the Steeple, you know
EXACTLY how high they will be and where they are placed, how many per lap,
the distance from the last WJ to the finish, etc.
In any distance race you gauge your effort expended at that moment, and
where/when/how long you are going to apply a MAX-effort, by a few things:
How you feel RIGHT NOW; how you have felt over the whole race thus far;
where you are in relation to where you ought to be (ahead? behind? right in
it?); and where you are in relation to the watch (splits).
There are lots of other things, but those are the big ones.
As you circle the track in a 3k, Steeple, 5k or 10k, these things are VERY
PREDICTABLE. The next lap will always be 400m, always be flat (excepting
the Steeple), and you can tell exactly how far it is to the finish. You are
also given your cumulative time every lap, sometimes you get more, split
times, kilo splits, etc. If you circle the track in 66, 67, 67, 68, 67, 67
... etc. and feel pretty good, based on experience, you can be pretty
confident you will finish the final 2k @ 67-pace.
They aren't going to build a hill, or a muddy hairpin, or a log jump on the
track as you are winding it up coming into the last mile.
In a big-loop XC race, you have NONE of these things. You can't see the
entire course from where you are running at any moment. You don't know
exactly how high or how long each hill is. You have splits (sometimes), but
they are every K or mile at best and each is a split for a different K/mile.
You judge how you're doing by your own judgment. The last mile will likely
be very different than the opening mile. Hell, the last split you get is
1.1 to 1.2 miles from the finish!
Stage big-time XC races on a 1500m loop and you eliminate all of this. That
would be 6-7 loops for College men. You would like to have at least ONE big
challenge in a XC race, right? Most courses worth their salt DO. You
couldn't have that because that would mean SIX big hills. Too many, IMO.
You couldn't have a long gradual hill, it would be 500m up, then 800m down,
200m flat.
By the 4th circuit, on any course, each racer has learned the hill (that's
what they call it in MTB racing). This results in very tactical racing.
Also, a racer would have a split every lap that was the SAME LAP, over and
over.
In other words, hard-earned skills like self-knowledge, pace-judgment,
XC-experience, and tactical ability (not to mention knowledge of the
course!) would no longer hold as much advantage for the racer who earned
them.
Make a 1500m-2k loop as varied and/or challenging as you want to, and it
will still be a 1500m race on grass, repeated 6 times.
I can't say I ever raced a long circuit-style XC race with any laps shorter
than 1 mile. But I did ran plenty of repetitive 5k courses had no surprises
after the mile mark. BORING. We always preferred the park/forest-type
courses to the golf course-type courses. I know that racers view these two
types differently as I have raced cyclocross and Mtn. bikes over both
extremes. The big-loop race is always more popular and welcomed by the
racers as it rewards the big-gear-pushers and savvy racers instead of the
wheel-suckers.
I can't speak for the athletes, who in this case I presume are NCAA-level
men, and whether they would appreciate and approve of a
more...fan-friendly event. I would have no idea what they all think.
I think (again, just my opinion, not the de facto standard) that a
(6x~1500m) or (5x2k) multi-loop XC race would take a lot of the FUN out of
it for ME. To watch it or run in it. Even if a digital scoreboard could
tell me that Stanford had CU, 76 points to 86, at the 5 mile mark.
/Brian McEwen
P.S. In some XC-mad states you'd have to erect bleachers for the throngs of
fans.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 1:37 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: t-and-f: ChampionChip Timing systems (was European Cross
Coun try Champs)
In a message dated Mon, 17 Dec 2001 10:20:39 AM Eastern Standard Time,
Mcewen, Brian T [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Rather than have a 5 x 2k multi-loop setup for NCAA's that (in my opinion)
turns it into a track race on grass, I don't see why they couldn't have
sensors set up at 4k/6k/8k or 3k/6k/9k or something, on a normal course.
If
the MHSAA can afford it, then the NCAA should be able to. Or should want
to.
Why do you feel a short loop turns a cross race into a track race on grass?
There's still hills, mud, turns, etc. The only difference is a spectator
