|
Post by uhxcrnnr on Oct 20, 2007 14:12:02 GMT -5
Just thought I'd create a place for Regional Results and discussion.
For the Stanford-Olympia Regional Normal U-high took it with 31 points with Delevan in second with 42. Kevin Forde (U-High) won with a 15:34 on a very windy day.
|
|
|
Post by xcrunner30 on Oct 20, 2007 15:07:00 GMT -5
Rock Falls Regional Results:
Race Course
Location of Course: Centennial Park--Rock Falls Length of course (in miles): 3
Top 5 Runners
Pl Runner Yr School Time 1 Tim Hird Jr. Rock Island Alleman 15:13 2 Derek Campbell Sr. Sycamore 15:22 3 Matthew Gilmer Jr. Sycamore 15:32 4 Peter Grimson Jr. Sycamore 15:37 5 Kasey Ferrigan Jr. Dixon 15:47
Advancing Individuals
Runner Yr School Pl Time Coach Jacob Barr Jr. Mendota 11 16:07 Kevin Wohrley Josh Lodge Jr. Geneseo 14 16:24 Don Fredericks Jacob Landis Fr. Sterling 17 16:40 Dennis Hartz Bobby Withingy Jr. Rochelle 22 16:47 Bruce Anderson Ben Schott Sr. Sterling 30 17:12 Dennis Hartz
Team Results
Pl School Scor Head Coach 1 Sycamore 32 Michael Lambdin 2 Dixon 65 Evan Thorpe 3 Kanleland 82 Chad Clarey 4 Rock Island Alleman 87 Tony VanDeWalle 5 Rock Falls 153 Mark Truesdell 6 Geneseo 173 Don Fredericks 7 Sterling 185 Dennis Hartz 8 Rochelle 208 Bruce Anderson 9 Mendota 209 Kevin Wohrley
|
|
|
Post by strauss32 on Oct 20, 2007 15:22:07 GMT -5
park forest regional 1 Illiana Christian 20 2 Lemont 52 3 Midlothian 58 4 Country Club Hills (Hillcrest) 116 5 Park Forest (Rich East) 131 for other stuff.. go.ihsa.org/reports/ccb45871.htm
|
|
|
Post by runningmuth on Oct 20, 2007 16:26:07 GMT -5
Princeton Regional
Teams: 1. Yorkville 31 2. Sandwich 82 3. ACC 92 4. Princeton 110 5. Joliet 111
Top Fifteen: 1. Colin Mickow 15:55 Prin 2. Hunter Mickow 16:00 Prin 3. Max Sliwa 16:10 Yorkville 4. Jake Austin 16:34 Yorkville 5. Aaron Stahl 16:40 Sand 6. Scott Tanis 16:46 Yorkville 7. Ben Pape 16:51 Yorkville 8. Scott Clark 16:55 Lasalle-Peru 9. Steph Clark 17:02 Sand 10. Ryan Tully 17:03 Joliet 11. Mike Addison 17:09 Yorkville 12. Max Gilbert 17:14 ACC 13. Jack Bilinski 17:25 Yorkville 14. Dan Kottkamp 17:27 ACC 15. Scott King 17:27 Yorkville
Individuals Qualifyers: Scott Clark John Myrda Scott Oglivie Adam Leemans Forrest Iandola
|
|
|
Post by uhxcrnnr on Oct 20, 2007 18:59:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by runninxc on Oct 20, 2007 19:00:46 GMT -5
anybody know how holmes ran today? i noticed his time was a bit slower than normal, even though IHSA said the course was .04 miles long, but thats only like 15-20 seconds right? was it a really tough course or something?
|
|
|
Post by badkarma96 on Oct 20, 2007 20:40:40 GMT -5
I'm guessing Holmes only ran fast enough to win. Why crank if you don't have to?
|
|
|
Post by xcrunner15 on Oct 20, 2007 23:38:49 GMT -5
I would say deffinetly that unless Holmes is hurt, he pretty much was jogging. I have run Galesburg many times, and not taht a 16:10 is bad but for a runner of his caliber he practically is walking it. Typical conversions for that specific course are anywhere from 15-30 seconds putting him at 15:40 or a full minute off of where hes been at. I agree and say that Holmes was just doing what he had to do to get through, possibly even packing it up with his teamates for part of the race knowign he was strong enough to pull away and win.
|
|
|
Post by bmhscross on Oct 21, 2007 0:02:45 GMT -5
urbana regional
Mahomet-Seymour- 49 Bishop McNamara- 52
|
|
|
Post by strauss32 on Oct 21, 2007 0:35:57 GMT -5
anybody know how holmes ran today? i noticed his time was a bit slower than normal, even though IHSA said the course was .04 miles long, but thats only like 15-20 seconds right? was it a really tough course or something? .04mi is like 60m. why would you add 15-20 seconds. that distance is less than a kick
|
|
|
Post by xcrunner30 on Oct 21, 2007 8:26:52 GMT -5
I think he's saying 15-20 seconds to be conservative to prove his point that Holmes still ran much slower than usual. Just to clarify, but I do not know what he's thinking so I don't know for sure.
|
|
|
Post by badkarma96 on Oct 21, 2007 8:51:30 GMT -5
anybody know how holmes ran today? i noticed his time was a bit slower than normal, even though IHSA said the course was .04 miles long, but thats only like 15-20 seconds right? was it a really tough course or something? .04mi is like 60m. why would you add 15-20 seconds. that distance is less than a kick Most high school guys can run the last 0.1 of a 5k in about 30 seconds without exerting themselves too much so I'm guessing that's how he got the 15-20 second spread since 0.4 is almost half of 0.1.
|
|
|
Post by runninxc on Oct 21, 2007 22:43:48 GMT -5
well if you guys really want me to lay out the math for you...
IHSA said it was .04 miles long.
.1 miles of a 5 minute mile is exactly 30 seconds.
that means, .05 miles, half that distance, is half that time, 15 seconds.
and if you take 15 seconds off a 16:10, thats a 15:55, which is roughly a 5:20 mile.
therefore, it's actually more than 15 seconds, for .05 miles.
but since it was .04, and about a 5:20 mile, i said (and thank you for pointing out my conservative estimation) 15-20 seconds. work out ok?
|
|
|
Post by dbandre on Oct 22, 2007 9:15:56 GMT -5
Are you kidding me that the last .1 of a 5k is 30s, that is 160m? Only the best 800m runners in XC will run that time over 160m the more appropriate time of the last .1 of a 5K is around 32-35s. That .04 is almost 64m, even with a great kick and a laid back race it is still probably around 10s and likely 8.5+s for a world class 5k runner who is in a dead sprint. If Holmes ran the same pace he did for the whole race it took him 12.75s to run that last 64m. You do the math, it was a regional race on a windy day.
BTW, Kevin Forde's time at Stanford Olympia by himself is spectacular. The Olympia course runs about 27s slower than Detweiler. The results indicate that a dogfight between 3-12 teams at PND for the final 3 state qualifying team spots will be excellent. It looks like Delavan can make it out as they have the best 1-4 runners barely over Normal U-High, but there will be a ton of runners between their 4th and 5th. I found most of the results surprising from the regionals in this sectional.
|
|
|
Post by badkarma96 on Oct 22, 2007 10:14:10 GMT -5
Are you kidding me that the last .1 of a 5k is 30s, that is 160m? Only the best 800m runners in XC will run that time over 160m the more appropriate time of the last .1 of a 5K is around 32-35s. That .04 is almost 64m, even with a great kick and a laid back race it is still probably around 10s and likely 8.5+s for a world class 5k runner who is in a dead sprint. If Holmes ran the same pace he did for the whole race it took him 12.75s to run that last 64m. You do the math, it was a regional race on a windy day. BTW, Kevin Forde's time at Stanford Olympia by himself is spectacular. The Olympia course runs about 27s slower than Detweiler. The results indicate that a dogfight between 3-12 teams at PND for the final 3 state qualifying team spots will be excellent. It looks like Delavan can make it out as they have the best 1-4 runners barely over Normal U-High, but there will be a ton of runners between their 4th and 5th. I found most of the results surprising from the regionals in this sectional. I'm not the runner I was in high school but I can crank out a 30s sprint for the last 0.1 of a 5k. I did it about a month ago in fact. I hit the three mile mark of a local 5k in 18:32 and told myself that I still had a shot to go under 19:00 if I kicked it in real hard. I finished up in 19:02 and I am not a very good 800 meter runner. In the four 5ks I have run this year my slowest 0.1 was 34 seconds and I was completely dead at that point. If a 180 lbs 29 year old can consistently run his last 0.1 in the mid-to-low 30s I see no reason why a svelte, well-trained 130lbs 16 year old can't run it as fast or faster.
|
|
|
Post by 800man on Oct 22, 2007 10:46:21 GMT -5
Are you kidding me that the last .1 of a 5k is 30s, that is 160m? Only the best 800m runners in XC will run that time over 160m the more appropriate time of the last .1 of a 5K is around 32-35s. That .04 is almost 64m, even with a great kick and a laid back race it is still probably around 10s and likely 8.5+s for a world class 5k runner who is in a dead sprint. If Holmes ran the same pace he did for the whole race it took him 12.75s to run that last 64m. You do the math, it was a regional race on a windy day. BTW, Kevin Forde's time at Stanford Olympia by himself is spectacular. The Olympia course runs about 27s slower than Detweiler. The results indicate that a dogfight between 3-12 teams at PND for the final 3 state qualifying team spots will be excellent. It looks like Delavan can make it out as they have the best 1-4 runners barely over Normal U-High, but there will be a ton of runners between their 4th and 5th. I found most of the results surprising from the regionals in this sectional. I'm not the runner I was in high school but I can crank out a 30s sprint for the last 0.1 of a 5k. I did it about a month ago in fact. I hit the three mile mark of a local 5k in 18:32 and told myself that I still had a shot to go under 19:00 if I kicked it in real hard. I finished up in 19:02 and I am not a very good 800 meter runner. In the four 5ks I have run this year my slowest 0.1 was 34 seconds and I was completely dead at that point. If a 180 lbs 29 year old can consistently run his last 0.1 in the mid-to-low 30s I see no reason why a svelte, well-trained 130lbs 16 year old can't run it as fast or faster. I think many of you are missing a very large point here. Generally a kick is a kick and runners have a set distance that they will kick, whether it's the last 200, 400 or 800. Adding distance does ( .04 ) to a race does not mean you add that to your kick. It is added to the body of the race and therefore calculated out based on race pace. AS the example earlier stated, if a runner ran a 15:00 3 mile race, the extra .04 or .05 or .1 would be calculated at that 5 minute pace, not at what he could feasible run in the extra distance as a kick/sprint.
|
|
|
Post by dbandre on Oct 22, 2007 11:03:14 GMT -5
Are you kidding me that the last .1 of a 5k is 30s, that is 160m? Only the best 800m runners in XC will run that time over 160m the more appropriate time of the last .1 of a 5K is around 32-35s. That .04 is almost 64m, even with a great kick and a laid back race it is still probably around 10s and likely 8.5+s for a world class 5k runner who is in a dead sprint. If Holmes ran the same pace he did for the whole race it took him 12.75s to run that last 64m. You do the math, it was a regional race on a windy day. BTW, Kevin Forde's time at Stanford Olympia by himself is spectacular. The Olympia course runs about 27s slower than Detweiler. The results indicate that a dogfight between 3-12 teams at PND for the final 3 state qualifying team spots will be excellent. It looks like Delavan can make it out as they have the best 1-4 runners barely over Normal U-High, but there will be a ton of runners between their 4th and 5th. I found most of the results surprising from the regionals in this sectional. I'm not the runner I was in high school but I can crank out a 30s sprint for the last 0.1 of a 5k. I did it about a month ago in fact. I hit the three mile mark of a local 5k in 18:32 and told myself that I still had a shot to go under 19:00 if I kicked it in real hard. I finished up in 19:02 and I am not a very good 800 meter runner. In the four 5ks I have run this year my slowest 0.1 was 34 seconds and I was completely dead at that point. If a 180 lbs 29 year old can consistently run his last 0.1 in the mid-to-low 30s I see no reason why a svelte, well-trained 130lbs 16 year old can't run it as fast or faster. Probably, because the 180 lb male likely has a faster top end speed than a 130 lb svelte HS XC stud. The other thing is the svelte XC kid probably ran a more consistent race and didn't save much for the end like the 30 year old 180 lb male did although at 180 pounds 19 minutes is kick @$$ for a 5k time. Your 5k was also done on road which is a more compliant surface and easier to accelerate on than grass regardless of spikes Holmes at that pace would finish the last .1 in 32s, so he's capable of kicking it, but why burn a match at Regionals? There is no doubt Holmes has ran 3 miles at a clip faster 30s per 160m at about 28.5s, but regardless even the most disciplined runners are more tired at the end of the race than the beginning.
|
|
|
Post by badkarma96 on Oct 22, 2007 17:06:35 GMT -5
I'm not the runner I was in high school but I can crank out a 30s sprint for the last 0.1 of a 5k. I did it about a month ago in fact. I hit the three mile mark of a local 5k in 18:32 and told myself that I still had a shot to go under 19:00 if I kicked it in real hard. I finished up in 19:02 and I am not a very good 800 meter runner. In the four 5ks I have run this year my slowest 0.1 was 34 seconds and I was completely dead at that point. If a 180 lbs 29 year old can consistently run his last 0.1 in the mid-to-low 30s I see no reason why a svelte, well-trained 130lbs 16 year old can't run it as fast or faster. Probably, because the 180 lb male likely has a faster top end speed than a 130 lb svelte HS XC stud. The other thing is the svelte XC kid probably ran a more consistent race and didn't save much for the end like the 30 year old 180 lb male did although at 180 pounds 19 minutes is kick @$$ for a 5k time. Your 5k was also done on road which is a more compliant surface and easier to accelerate on than grass regardless of spikes Holmes at that pace would finish the last .1 in 32s, so he's capable of kicking it, but why burn a match at Regionals? There is no doubt Holmes has ran 3 miles at a clip faster 30s per 160m at about 28.5s, but regardless even the most disciplined runners are more tired at the end of the race than the beginning. HEY NOW! I'm only 29! I don't turn 30 until next summer! ;D Touche'. I agree with you about the surface the race is run on. Roads are definitely faster. I ran okay splits during my race but started hurting right after the 2 mile mark and slowed a bit. 6:00, 6:12, 6:20 and 30. Holmes is a stud, I'm pretty sure he is the guy to beat no matter what he ran at regionals. I'm also pretty sure he isn't going to have to run the last 0.1 of his three mile race at State any faster than :30. Thanks for the compliment on my 5k time, I've been working pretty hard this summer. Hoping to go under 19:00 in a few weeks at my local Jingle Bell Run.
|
|
|
Post by runninxc on Oct 22, 2007 17:24:39 GMT -5
ooooook everybody chill out. my original comment was in no way supposed to degrade holmes for running a slow time. my orginial comment was strictly and completely made out of curiosity, and i never intended to estimate holmes' time on an even 3 mile course. i was simply trying to point out that even with a conservative estimation, his time was still relatively slow to his other times. so convert it however you want, i dont care, i just wanted to know why it was slower.
so if you dont want to answer the question nicely, just dont answer it. all good?
|
|
|
Post by xccrosscountryxc on Oct 22, 2007 18:12:03 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by badkarma96 on Oct 22, 2007 19:19:42 GMT -5
ooooook everybody chill out. my original comment was in no way supposed to degrade holmes for running a slow time. my orginial comment was strictly and completely made out of curiosity, and i never intended to estimate holmes' time on an even 3 mile course. i was simply trying to point out that even with a conservative estimation, his time was still relatively slow to his other times. so convert it however you want, i dont care, i just wanted to know why it was slower. so if you dont want to answer the question nicely, just dont answer it. all good? We're cool, I thought it was a pretty fun conversation myself.
|
|
|
Post by iruninblue on Oct 22, 2007 21:28:05 GMT -5
we do not need any fights on this website! if you two want to tango, do it somewhere else. back to xc i found the regionals very intersting and was greatly surprised by the results and times, but that might have to do with the large variety of course distances and conditions. good luck to everyone at sectionals!
|
|
|
Post by irun11 on Oct 22, 2007 22:19:13 GMT -5
we do not need any fights on this website! if you two want to tango, do it somewhere else. back to xc i found the regionals very intersting and was greatly surprised by the results and times, but that might have to do with the large variety of course distances and conditions. good luck to everyone at sectionals! i concur
|
|
|
Post by badkarma96 on Oct 23, 2007 8:30:33 GMT -5
we do not need any fights on this website! if you two want to tango, do it somewhere else. back to xc i found the regionals very intersting and was greatly surprised by the results and times, but that might have to do with the large variety of course distances and conditions. good luck to everyone at sectionals! i concur It sounds like we irritated some people dbandre. I thought we were having a fun conversation. Good luck at Sectionals everyone.
|
|
|
Post by dbandre on Oct 23, 2007 11:16:32 GMT -5
Some people don't know how to read and some of those who cannot read believe disagreement is a fight. What they cannot understand is debate formed the foundation of this country. Only through debate does a consensus form between groups of different points of view. If need be some of these people need to revisit their history books and look at the long line of debate that existed at the roots of the beginning of this great country of ours. The stifling of debate is censorship. Do we live in a country were Fahrenheit 451 rules? I don't believe so.
|
|
|
Post by timothyjohnston3 on Oct 23, 2007 12:07:19 GMT -5
Yes, I am quite the history stud myself, I come from a long line of history buffs. My father, Timothy Johnston IIactually had a phone conversation with President Lyndon Johnson, while my grandfather, Timothy Johnston I, actually helped carve some of the laws of the New Deal by president Franklin Roosevelt. Therefore, I agree that in fact, debate itself has undoubtedly formed the backbone of this great nation.
|
|
|
Post by iruninblue on Oct 23, 2007 13:10:26 GMT -5
Some people don't know how to read and some of those who cannot read believe disagreement is a fight. What they cannot understand is debate formed the foundation of this country. Only through debate does a consensus form between groups of different points of view. If need be some of these people need to revisit their history books and look at the long line of debate that existed at the roots of the beginning of this great country of ours. The stifling of debate is censorship. Do we live in a country were Fahrenheit 451 rules? I don't believe so. wow i never viewed our country in this way, thanks for the great insight!
|
|
|
Post by dbandre on Oct 23, 2007 14:38:40 GMT -5
My god, I hope you are kidding!
There is a reason the first amendment to US constitution in the Bill of Rights is "Freedom of speech, religion, ect..." Not only that the Constitution as an amendable document were we are at 30 plus amendments should also have every once in a great while other constitutional conventions to recreate the Constitution to fit the times we live in. Nevertheless, we have 3 branches of Constitutional law conflicting each other, the Congress, the Executive, and the Judical who seem to rewrite the Constitution on their own whims. That would require debate however, and since both political parties consider debate a bad thing because this requires some agreement and less partisanship to reach such a consensus that would be satisfactory for ratification that it never happens.
Now on to a consensus in XC, Nick Holmes is the best runner in AA and maybe the entire state. He is certainly capable of running 160m left in a race in less than 30s, but at the pace he running for the race that seems unlikely. Furthermore the .04 additional miles over 3 that he ran would amount to around 12.75s at the pace he running. The fact of the matter is that Holmes won by 30s, which is a comfortable margin at the current pace between he and his competitor that is over 170m difference. Regardless of course difficulty the meet that means the most to Holmes is the State Meet and the meet that means the most to his team is Sectional to get to state. Everyone who ran sectionals conserved something to give a little more hopefully at sectionals, some may give everything at regionals and sectionals and not have anything left at State. I don't see that being the case with Holmes although the PND sectional will be tough, it will be tough on teams not named Normal U-High and East Peoria, and it won't be bad on individuals like Nick Holmes unless he has having a very bad day. The Galesburg course overall looks to be about 60s slower than detweiler on paper if that is the case, Holmes would still be considered the favorite going into sectionals if his regional performance was an all out effort.
|
|
bacon
All-Conference
Posts: 55
|
Post by bacon on Oct 24, 2007 9:54:37 GMT -5
Over at ILrunner.com, Chris Derrick has a new post where he talks about his conference race, the one where he ran 13:57.
That course finishes on a track, with the scoreboard clock in plain view. He says he saw the clock hit 13:10 when he hit 300 left. As he finished at 13:57, he ran the last 300 in 47. Assuming his kick was even over the last 300, that would be about a 25 sec. 160.
Clearly, Derrick is one of the best runners in the state (country) and this was on a track, but he is also not exactly known as a blazing fast guy for an 800 (he has yet to break 2 min).
So yeah, fuel for the fire.
|
|
|
Post by dbandre on Oct 24, 2007 10:24:55 GMT -5
Again another math lesson. If derrick ran 13:57 minutes for exactly 3 miles, then he ran the entire race at a 27.75s per 160m clip that would mean he ran 6 consecutive 2:18's and he can't break 2 flat? Don't be foolish, he can break 2:00 flat right now, but I hope he doesn't go out and try it. Amazingly he can kick the last 300m in a 3 mile race at 2:05 pace when he is most tired, but cannot break 2:00 flat. Either he's set to be next 8 and 10K phenom and I am wrong or he can break 2:00 flat, probably better than 1:54 at the moment. It's hard to predict down 3 race distances as it is up 3 distances, but I'd bet 1:54 is closer than 2:00 flat is.
|
|