Page: 1 / 1
Stop calling the Desert Twilight Meet a 5k
Joined: Jan 2008
@flashsantoro I am not MileSplit AZ, but I thought I'd take a try at making a response to your comment. First off, it could be, for all I know, the Desert Twilight/NXR-SW course is short. But I don't think that's nearly as obvious as you're suggesting. Yes, Dani Jones, Katie Rainsberger, and a few other top girls ran very fast times there last year in October. But, here's the rub: they mostly ran several (20 or more) seconds slower on the same course in November. The boys who ran both also tended to run slower at NXR-SW than at DT. So, the same course yielded markedly different times on different occasions. Did Desert Twilight use a shorter course than NXR-SW? I suppose that's possible, but I'm inclined to doubt it. At least not enough shorter to make that kind of difference. The first culprit I'm suggesting for the phenomenon you're pointing out is running under the night air when you're acclimated to warmer temperatures. As long as DT stays under the lights, times are going to run very fast there. Same for Woodbridge in CA. Same for ... Finally, my guess is that a whole bunch of runners did run that course with a GPS watch on. Maybe we can troll out some of that data here?
Joined: Apr 2008
@flashsantoro to clarify...the course has been measured and is a true 3.1 course.NO doubt about it. This year it was actually 5 feet longer to be exact. It is fast for a number of reasons and I am NOT going to list them all as I am sure you can figure them out. People who know XC know there are many reasons for times being faster at certain times on the same course (i.e. Twilight vs NXR) . Seriously look at the college races year in and year out... As the meet director I think it is concerning that as a supporter of the meet you would try and put doubt into peoples heads as to what the meet is. It also takes away from the kids that have ran fast, we have fielded a large number of calls and email in regards to this and to me this is very upsetting. Ellie Hardt Desert Twilight Meet Director
Joined: Jan 2011
as a math teacher--when I saw nfhs rules change front centerline to tangent-to-tangent--that made what used to be 5k courses shorter with so many turns -- gps wont be as accurate as a wheel or chain b, ecause you have to measure directly under rhe flagging. thus--I am confident it is 5k under current nfhs rules, and longer than 5k course of yester decades GREAT MEET--LOVE YOU ELLIE but--no hills? I like challenging courses--cinco millini, bud davis (only a hill but a mountain of pain) u of a's 1986 ncaa course at la Canada, 1980's fountain hills, van courtland park, Stanford golf course, woodward park, balboa with powder puff, terra haute, santa rita in 70s and 80s, pima cc, rim rock farms, mt sac, pontatoc, get some mud--sounding like john madden--hay bails, a running river like chinle okay--I know fast courses are the trend NEVERTHELESS--GREAT MEET--ELLIE, GIVE YOURSELF A RAISE
Joined: Sep 2014
I don't think the issue is that the course is short, rather I think other courses are a bit long. If you look at times that the athletes run from 1 week to the next you can kind of figure out a course offset if you will. Not so much individually as in the aggregate. Doug Conley this year was supposed to be a 3 mile course, but I was told that GPS readings were 3.07 miles. This works out to be about 120 yards longer than 3 miles. I always tell the kids to look how you did as compared to your competition as that is the best indicator. This isn't track with a perfect 400M oval.
Joined: Jan 2011
I thought I said GPS may not be accurate remember--NFHS rules state tangent to tangent--old rule was center line example--new rule lane 1 of 400m track is 400m old rule--8 lane 400m track measured in center line -- lane 5--comes to roughly 415m if you use GPS--go along the tangent lines and be careful of rounding and margin errors--and if you measure in segments--the sum of parts doesn't equal the whole
Page: 1 / 1