PDA

View Full Version : State Rankings



Albert Caruana
10-16-2012, 04:39 PM
Just a couple of comments.

Bellarmine just beat Carlmont by 1 point at the Crystal Springs Invitational and are ranked 6th in state in Division I. Carlmont is not ranked.

The University boys are ranked 4th in state and were just defeated by Lick Wilmerding for the first time in 15 years. LW is not ranked.
http://www.sml1.com/ncxc/infores/lw101112_b_res.htm

Piner just defeated Yreka at the Castro Valley Invitational. Currently Yreka is ranked 3rd and Piner 7th.

Are the teams being ranked on potential place at state or current standings?

Rich Gonzalez
10-16-2012, 05:04 PM
The few hours of sleep the last four days finally caught up with me. Thanks!

Carlmont, previously in the state poll earlier, should have been placed back in. They keep moving back in the right direction, this without Mark Vingralek. Errantly juggled them with De La Salle, so will re-slot those teams tonight. Had Piner back to their previous spot after that performance (affirming earlier ranking) but didn't make that changed when typed in this afternoon.

Hadn't seen Sean's results from the Uni meet. Will check those out (data and lineups) and adjust accordingly tonight.

Greg Beal
10-16-2012, 05:43 PM
Since La Costa Canyon hasn't run its entire anticipated girl's varsity team yet this fall, I wonder why you chose this week to drop them from #2 to #4 in D2. Unless you have additional information, it doesn't seem as if the LCC performance at the So Cal Invite would dictate a drop. After all, they didn't run their projected top 4 at the meet. Seems as if they decided to rest them for Mt. Sac (without knowing Ellie Abrahamson's status).

On another front, looking forward to your preview of Mt. Sac.

Rich Gonzalez
10-16-2012, 05:48 PM
Greg,

Mira Costa and Redondo both took a step up, not necessarily La Costa Canyon going backward. It's a bummer that while all ten state-ranked teams in Girls Division II will run at Mt. SAC this weekend, they are spread in various races. If I recall correctly, five of the ten are in Team Sweeps, one is in Individual Sweeps, then four more in non-seeded races (and mostly in separate non-seeded races, as I recall).

Hope to see you at Mt. SAC!

Mt. SAC preview indeed to come.

SJS
10-16-2012, 05:53 PM
El Dorado and Will C. Wood both beat Placer over the weekend, yet Placer is ranked #8 over El Dorado in Division 3 ??

Bella Vista girls beat Golden Valley#9 and Claremont#10 in Division 2 at Clovis missing one varsity runner and not ranked ahead of these teams??

Rich Gonzalez
10-16-2012, 06:02 PM
The Placer-El Dorado situation has been reviewed multiple times, as well as how Will C. Wood ties into it. Placed a call to Placer coach Randall Fee yesterday and had multiple email exchanges with El Dorado coach Peanut Harms yesterday to get more information. Will address this in the "notes" that are to come.

Bella Vista has been the up-and-down program in D2 this year, sometimes looking as good as #10 and other times not in the top 14. Thus, they've made it difficult as where to best place them.

Claremont, as most are aware, is coming off a clear "step-up" performance in the meet after Clovis, outperforming the league rival that beat it by 400 points in the combined merge at Clovis the week before.

Rich Gonzalez
10-16-2012, 06:06 PM
By the way, Claremont's "step-up" performance wasn't a total shock. They entered the season quite strong on paper and apparently were laying low for a while. They clearly struck with a vengeance at a key meet on their calendar.

xcbreak
10-16-2012, 07:56 PM
All the rankings will change this week after Mt Sac. We will see who is for real or not.

Bozo
10-16-2012, 08:34 PM
Any time there are rankings, people feel slighted. It is great for the kids to see that their team is ranked, but it does not mean SQUAT! I am sure Rich puts in countless hours trying to analyze times and teams. I applaud him for his time and effort as I think his rankings are pretty good. Any ranking system has some level of subjectivity, therefore someone is always going to be upset. I am just happy to see the rankings every week as it fun to compare times from the ranked teams in comparison to my child's team. I am not sure how he can keep up with all the different teams in the different divisions throughout the state.

Thanks for the rankings and keep up the good work.

Greg Beal
10-17-2012, 08:06 AM
Mira Costa and Redondo both took a step up, not necessarily La Costa Canyon going backward.

I think I'm a little less convinced by league meet performances as indicators as it's difficult to know how hard individuals and teams actually ran. Given Mira Costa's performance at Stanford, attaching great value to last week's Bay League meet is the only way to move them past Foothill, let alone past LCC.

On the other hand, considering potential rather than performance as MileSplit currently is doing by ranking LCC #2 nationally is just plain silly.

As has been said, things will be clearer after Mt. Sac.

For D2, Anaheim Canyon is in one varsity race; Mira Costa, Saugus and Tesoro in another; LCC and Redondo in Individual Sweeps; and Claremont, Foothill, Golden Valley and Rancho Bernardo in Team Sweeps (if I read and copied correctly).

My question for Saturday is will any girl's team go under 90:00? Yes, I hope to see you there.

MLW
10-17-2012, 08:35 AM
Don't forget that Will C. Wood beat El Dorado at the Lowell Invite.

Doug Soles
10-17-2012, 09:23 AM
I think I'm a little less convinced by league meet performances as indicators as it's difficult to know how hard individuals and teams actually ran. Given Mira Costa's performance at Stanford, attaching great value to last week's Bay League meet is the only way to move them past Foothill, let alone past LCC.

On the other hand, considering potential rather than performance as MileSplit currently is doing by ranking LCC #2 nationally is just plain silly.

As has been said, things will be clearer after Mt. Sac.

For D2, Anaheim Canyon is in one varsity race; Mira Costa, Saugus and Tesoro in another; LCC and Redondo in Individual Sweeps; and Claremont, Foothill, Golden Valley and Rancho Bernardo in Team Sweeps (if I read and copied correctly).

My question for Saturday is will any girl's team go under 90:00? Yes, I hope to see you there.

I have said before and will say again that Saugus is #1 in CA until someone beats them head to head, some national polls are way off and some are pretty good. Anyone want to talk Saugus into running in the sweepstakes race on Saturday? ;)

I think at least 2 teams will break 90:00 at Mt. SAC this weekend as the weather should lead to faster than last year times (think 2010 times). There are at least 4-5 girls teams in the meet that are talented enough to break 90:00 when at full strength.

Xavier from Arizona should be the favorite going into the race, IMO. Those girls are good!

Doug

Greg Beal
10-17-2012, 10:04 AM
I think at least 2 teams will break 90:00 at Mt. SAC this weekend as the weather should lead to faster than last year times (think 2010 times). There are at least 4-5 girls teams in the meet that are talented enough to break 90:00 when at full strength.

Xavier from Arizona should be the favorite going into the race, IMO. Those girls are good!

With few teams racing hard as often as they once did, it becomes tougher to project meets and times. Xavier Prep is my favorite as well. Under normal conditions (sunny and 70-75 degrees at race time), I think they'll be close to 90:00. If temps are closer to 60 and/or it's overcast, then times will come down. With XP and LCC in Individual Sweeps, they won't push or be pushed by Great Oak and Simi Valley.

VistamarXC
10-17-2012, 03:56 PM
[QUOTE=Greg Beal;192]I think I'm a little less convinced by league meet performances as indicators as it's difficult to know how hard individuals and teams actually ran. Given Mira Costa's performance at Stanford, attaching great value to last week's Bay League meet is the only way to move them past Foothill, let alone past LCC.

Mira Costa was without their #2 runner at both Stanford and the League meet in which they beat Redondo. I believe she will be back at Mt SAC. It really is a shame that so many teams opted out of the sweepstakes race. Although Saugus, Mira Costa and Tesoro are all in the same Varsity heat which is probably the most competitive non sweepstakes races we will see. Saugus has just coasted in the last couple years at Mt Sac so maybe they will race harder with tough head to head competition in their heat.

KeepTheFaith
10-17-2012, 04:58 PM
Although Saugus, Mira Costa and Tesoro are all in the same Varsity heat which is probably the most competitive non sweepstakes races we will see. Saugus has just coasted in the last couple years at Mt Sac so maybe they will race harder with tough head to head competition in their heat.

I believe in '10 Saugus girls ran a varsity race w/o Mahoney and were 90:07 and in '11 were in Individual Sweeps and ran 91:04. Pretty good coasting.

Steve Chavez
10-17-2012, 05:24 PM
Don't we all deserve to see Xavier, Saugus, Simi, and Great Oak all slug it out? I'm a big fan of testing your mettle. Those teams can relatively cruise for 4 weeks before they have to hit the gas again. I'm just sayin...

Remylive
10-17-2012, 05:55 PM
Don't we all deserve to see Xavier, Saugus, Simi, and Great Oak all slug it out? I'm a big fan of testing your mettle. Those teams can relatively cruise for 4 weeks before they have to hit the gas again. I'm just sayin...
Hmmm? I guess it depends on what your goal is. If testing your mettle is it, then seek out the big sweepstakes races. But our goal is to win a state championship each season. Sometimes running the Sweepstakes race at Mt. Sac helps us do that (as we did last year), other times it doesn't (as we skipped it in 2010).

NXN is where all the big teams test their mettle each year nowadays. Can't get bigger than that.

Doug Soles
10-17-2012, 06:43 PM
Hmmm? I guess it depends on what your goal is. If testing your mettle is it, then seek out the big sweepstakes races. But our goal is to win a state championship each season. Sometimes running the Sweepstakes race at Mt. Sac helps us do that (as we did last year), other times it doesn't (as we skipped it in 2010).

NXN is where all the big teams test their mettle each year nowadays. Can't get bigger than that.

Steve Chavez and Rene Paragas debating philosophy on a message board? Hell ya, the old days are back!!! ;)

I know we all have differing philosophies on how and when to race our kids, and that is how it should be. We all have different goals, and each program needs to focus on their team goals. Our kids set their goals each season as a varsity team and we try to ensure as coaches that they have every opportunity to achieve the goals they set.

I personally do not put a lot of stock in NXN as I believe qualifying out of California is a crapshoot at best for most teams. If we had a regional like other areas I personally might look at it differently, but as of now in our program NXN is a fun event. Winning the state meet is the ultimate goal for our program, but long term if we are going to race, we are going to take on the best and see how we stack up. Mt. Sac used to be billed as the meet where the best teams raced head to head to see who was best. Unfortunately on the girls side that no longer seems to be the case. :(

Good luck to all teams this weekend! :)

Remylive
10-17-2012, 07:18 PM
Doug,

There's nothing wrong with having different philosophies. But I try to do what's best for my team.

In 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 we were the Mt. Sac Team Sweeps champs (our boys also won individual sweeps in 2008) and it was great. But the problem is, everyone of those teams ran their best race at the Mt. Sac Inv and were dragging by the time the state meet came around.

In 2010 we skipped sweeps and ran our best race...wait for it...at the state meet. 89:25 on the Clovis course; that's 17:53 average for our top five. Our boys also skipped the invite that year and ran 78:42, which I believe is the 3rd fastest DII time ever on the state meet course. We didn't get to show how fast we could run Mt. Sac because of the rain course, but it is what it is. Now there are times when I want and need my team to run sweepstakes races at Mt. Sac, but it all depends on the situation. This year I felt like we needed to be in the sweeps races. But the PSAT this Saturday and a rescheduled league meet changed my mind.

I do agree that in the old days the Mt. Sac Inv was more competitive. But that was before NXN. The only way teams could vie for national rankings was through invitationals.

I disagree that making NXN is a crapshoot. Win division I or II at the state meet and you've just about guaranteed your spot. I'm not going to do the research, but I'd like to see how many girls team champs from DI or DII haven't qualified for NTN/ NXN over the years.

edit: I lied and did the research
NTN/ NXN has been in existence for 8-years. During that time 24 girls teams from California have qualified for the meet (Ventura chose not to run).
*Division I: 5 out of the 8 years the division one champ made it. 10-total teams from DI have qualified.
*Division II: 5 out of the 8 years the division two champ made it. 10-total teams from DII have qualified.
*Division III: 3 out of the 8 years the division three champ made it. 4-total teams from DIII have qualified.

KeepTheFaith
10-17-2012, 07:23 PM
...Winning the state meet is the ultimate goal for our program, but long term if we are going to race, we are going to take on the best and see how we stack up. Mt. Sac used to be billed as the meet where the best teams raced head to head to see who was best. Unfortunately on the girls side that no longer seems to be the case. :(

Good luck to all teams this weekend! :)

Mt. SAC still is billed that way, I think, and is that, I think (compared to anywhere else, at least). But if, as coach, your (aka the team's) goal was a State championship, and you didn't think it lined up w/that or could be detrimental to it, would you still do it?

I'm not in that situation, though, so I can still enjoy all the races either way. :)

Mark Frankian

Doug Soles
10-17-2012, 08:21 PM
Doug,

There's nothing wrong with having different philosophies. But I try to do what's best for my team.

In 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 we were the Mt. Sac Team Sweeps champs (our boys also won individual sweeps in 2008) and it was great. But the problem is, everyone of those teams ran their best race at the Mt. Sac Inv and were dragging by the time the state meet came around.

In 2010 we skipped sweeps and ran our best race...wait for it...at the state meet. 89:25 on the Clovis course; that's 17:53 average for our top five. Our boys also skipped the invite that year and ran 78:42, which I believe is the 3rd fastest DII time ever on the state meet course. We didn't get to show how fast we could run Mt. Sac because of the rain course, but it is what it is. Now there are times when I want and need my team to run sweepstakes races at Mt. Sac, but it all depends on the situation. This year I felt like we needed to be in the sweeps races. But the PSAT this Saturday and a rescheduled league meet changed my mind.

I do agree that in the old days the Mt. Sac Inv was more competitive. But that was before NXN. The only way teams could vie for national rankings was through invitationals.

I disagree that making NXN is a crapshoot. Win division I or II at the state meet and you've just about guaranteed your spot. I'm not going to do the research, but I'd like to see how many girls team champs from DI or DII haven't qualified for NTN/ NXN over the years.

edit: I lied and did the research
NTN/ NXN has been in existence for 8-years. During that time 24 girls teams from California have qualified for the meet (Ventura chose not to run).
*Division I: 5 out of the 8 years the division one champ made it. 10-total teams from DI have qualified.
*Division II: 5 out of the 8 years the division two champ made it. 10-total teams from DII have qualified.
*Division III: 3 out of the 8 years the division three champ made it. 4-total teams from DIII have qualified.

Rene,

We have had this dialog before, but since the message boards can use a boost I think it is worth posting again. I can't argue with your successes, none of us can. I can share our experience in 2010. We ran and won woodbridge, Mt. Sac D1 Sweeps, and took 3rd at manhattan that year. We also won the D1 State title in 91:29 without our team #1 Anna Johnson. I can honestly say that running Mt. Sac Sweeps did not effect our overall results. That same year Arcadia's boys ran and broke records in virtually every race, including Mt. Sac & NXN.

Ultimately I understand the benefits of sitting back and waiting until November to unleash the team, but to me that is too boring. If that puts us at a disadvantage, then we will have to work harder to overcome it, but the kids don't want to train all season with all the marbles only on state. What happens when you don't win?

Ultimately, we would put a team on the line in sweeps with our top 2 taking the PSAT and 1 girl sick and a league meet on Thursday. In my mind someone else just needs to step up for us.

Again I can't argue your success and you should coach as you feel is best for your team. My personal philosophy is to compete with all comers. :)

Tony DiMarco
10-17-2012, 08:29 PM
I love this! This is an interesting topic as you have two very distinct and different points of view about racing. Both have produced incredible results at both the state meet and at CIF Finals.
Rene, do you think your performance at the state meet in 2010 had anything to do with running the rain course instead of the regular Mt. Sac course? Just curious? I have been researching performances at Woodward and Mt. Sac over the last few years and the one result that stands out the most to me was the 2010 State Meet where everyone ran out of their minds! When you look at that year’s results and compare that to let’s say last year’s results in the D1 boys it really stands out that running Mt. Sac the week before the State meet has an effect on performance. D1 boys at CIF finals results for the teams that qualified to the State meet were insane while the results at the state meet were ok at best. Then you compare those to 2010 and wow, state meet performances were clearly better!
So here's my question... Rene do you think your philosophy would be any different if you didn't have to run Mt. Sac three of the last five weeks of the season? If let's say prelims were held at Sac but finals were at let's say Woodbridge or something similar would that make a difference?? I wonder if that would help with NXN?
I agree with Doug that I as a fan of the sport would love to see the best teams going at it this weekend (I'm actually disappointed that some of the top teams won't be at Sac this weekend on the boys side as I would really like to see where we stack up against them) but I totally understand why teams would not run or even just run in the regular races. With so many teams racing less these days, it's a shame that Sac isn't one of those few races where we all get together and see what we can do at the same time on the same course ... Again, I wonder if our current post season schedule has anything to do with current changes in philosophy.
Again, love this post!

Remylive
10-17-2012, 08:40 PM
Rene,

We have had this dialog before, but since the message boards can use a boost I think it is worth posting again. I can't argue with your successes, none of us can. I can share our experience in 2010. We ran and won woodbridge, Mt. Sac D1 Sweeps, and took 3rd at manhattan that year. We also won the D1 State title in 91:29 without our team #1 Anna Johnson. I can honestly say that running Mt. Sac Sweeps did not effect our overall results. That same year Arcadia's boys ran and broke records in virtually every race, including Mt. Sac & NXN.

Ultimately I understand the benefits of sitting back and waiting until November to unleash the team, but to me that is too boring. If that puts us at a disadvantage, then we will have to work harder to overcome it, but the kids don't want to train all season with all the marbles only on state. What happens when you don't win?

Ultimately, we would put a team on the line in sweeps with our top 2 taking the PSAT and 1 girl sick and a league meet on Thursday. In my mind someone else just needs to step up for us.

Again I can't argue your success and you should coach as you feel is best for your team. My personal philosophy is to compete with all comers. :)
I totally get it, as Dennis Kelly says the same thing to me all the time. I've sat on both sides of the fence before.

I knew you'd bring up Arcadia, as many people like to do when speaking about how much to race. So here's my take:
-I believe O'Brien is one of the great high school coaches of our generation. The success he's had with the obstacles he's faced have been extraordinary. The 2010 team was a dream team and season. The man inspires me.
-But...with all their success the Arcadia program up to this point has netted just one state meet title. Now that may change in the years to come and they could run off 10-straight very soon. But right now, one.
-Twice over the past 7-years an underdog Liam Clemmons coached Trabuco Hills squad has risen up and defeated a top 5 national team at the state meet including a very powerful Arcadia squad last year. Whether it was due to race schedule is debatable.
-Finally, the one thing I've learned over the past 9-years is that girls recover different than boys. Many may disagree with me on this. However I already know that in the years to come the way I'm going to become a better coach is to learn more and fine tune my ability to get female athletes to recover from races, workouts and mileage. That is the future for me and having a robust racing schedule doesn't fit into my philosophy about adequate recovery for high school aged female athletes.
-If we look at the flip side of the coin, you don't see FM running races week in and week out. They even skip their "state meet" (feds). Their approach for girls has netted them 6-straight national titles. Six...

Remylive
10-17-2012, 08:56 PM
I love this! This is an interesting topic as you have two very distinct and different points of view about racing. Both have produced incredible results at both the state meet and at CIF Finals.
Rene, do you think your performance at the state meet in 2010 had anything to do with running the rain course instead of the regular Mt. Sac course? Just curious? I have been researching performances at Woodward and Mt. Sac over the last few years and the one result that stands out the most to me was the 2010 State Meet where everyone ran out of their minds! When you look at that year’s results and compare that to let’s say last year’s results in the D1 boys it really stands out that running Mt. Sac the week before the State meet has an effect on performance. D1 boys at CIF finals results for the teams that qualified to the State meet were insane while the results at the state meet were ok at best. Then you compare those to 2010 and wow, state meet performances were clearly better!
So here's my question... Rene do you think your philosophy would be any different if you didn't have to run Mt. Sac three of the last five weeks of the season? If let's say prelims were held at Sac but finals were at let's say Woodbridge or something similar would that make a difference?? I wonder if that would help with NXN?
I agree with Doug that I as a fan of the sport would love to see the best teams going at it this weekend (I'm actually disappointed that some of the top teams won't be at Sac this weekend on the boys side as I would really like to see where we stack up against them) but I totally understand why teams would not run or even just run in the regular races. With so many teams racing less these days, it's a shame that Sac isn't one of those few races where we all get together and see what we can do at the same time on the same course ... Again, I wonder if our current post season schedule has anything to do with current changes in philosophy.
Again, love this post!
Tony first off, awesome season! We have been following your team quite closely over here in Santa Clarita. You've made something out of nothing.

I too have pondered the rain course year and the anomalies that followed. But it could have been weather related as well. If you remember teams ran lights out at the Mt. Sac invite that year too. State, CIF Finals and Mt. Sac Inv all had abnormally overcast cool conditions that year.

As far as would I change my race philosophy if we didn't have finals and/or prelims at Sac. Yes. But more importantly I'd have to change the way I trained. A flatter, easier course would not affect less fit teams as much as Sac does and therefore races would be much closer. I'd have to start from scratch with everything I do at Saugus if we had a change in post-season format.

And yes, our insane Southern Section post-season schedule is the #1 thing holding back our success at the national meet. So far my only solutions to solve this have been:
1) Have such incredible endurance (mileage under your belt) that you can race 3+hard weeks in a row and still recover to go again
2) Be so much better than everyone else that an average team performance still wins you the national meet

Coach Razor
10-18-2012, 06:41 AM
...
-Finally, the one thing I've learned over the past 9-years is that girls recover different than boys. Many may disagree with me on this. However I already know that in the years to come the way I'm going to become a better coach is to learn more and fine tune my ability to get female athletes to recover from races, workouts and mileage. That is the future for me and having a robust racing schedule doesn't fit into my philosophy about adequate recovery for high school aged female athletes.
-If we look at the flip side of the coin, you don't see FM running races week in and week out. They even skip their "state meet" (feds). Their approach for girls has netted them 6-straight national titles. Six...


Rene... re: girls recovering differently... I would have to concur. I've now had the opportunity to gauge this with some at the high end of the physical ability range and of course the mid to low end and have observed the same... Glad to hear you say it too as that strengthens my resolve about it. I removed a particular hill workout we used to do in week 2 of our peak because of this for girls only... Now I had to be crafty with how I presented that to 'em so they didn't feel slighted ;)

I've also noticed that many of my better girls are able to train/perform in workouts at a slightly higher level relative to what their current racing personal bests would suggest. Just curious what your thoughts were on this? I've considered that this may be a contributing factor to the differing recovery... Only speculation at this point. Again, thoughts?

Tim Sharpe
Head Coach XC
Distance Coach T&F
Harvard-Westlake School

"To whom much is given, much is expected"

Albert Caruana
10-18-2012, 08:09 AM
I've also noticed that many of my better girls are able to train/perform in workouts at a slightly higher level relative to what their current racing personal bests would suggest. Just curious what your thoughts were on this? I've considered that this may be a contributing factor to the differing recovery... Only speculation at this point. Again, thoughts?

That's an interesting observation. When I assign the paces for different workouts, it seems like the girls can hit their paces and sometimes surpass them much easier than the boys. I think the paces are right for them so what else could it be?

Coach Razor
10-18-2012, 08:25 AM
I'll post this in part for the humor in it... My mother has taken a keen interest in my coaching career (gotta love moms). Anyways, I had been talking with her about this and she said, "it's simple, women are tougher because we are the ones who give birth." Who knows ;)

I do tend to just go with the flow on this and let the girls hold slightly better than goal pace if it seems to be coming easily for them...

Tim Sharpe
Head Coach XC
Distance Coach T&F
Harvard-Westlake School

"To whom much is given, much is expected"

Doug Soles
10-18-2012, 09:28 AM
I'll post this in part for the humor in it... My mother has taken a keen interest in my coaching career (gotta love moms). Anyways, I had been talking with her about this and she said, "it's simple, women are tougher because we are the ones who give birth." Who knows ;)

I do tend to just go with the flow on this and let the girls hold slightly better than goal pace if it seems to be coming easily for them...

Tim Sharpe
Head Coach XC
Distance Coach T&F
Harvard-Westlake School

"To whom much is given, much is expected"

Hey Tim and Albert,

My experience is similar with the girls. I have always attributed this to girls being pleasers. It seems like subconscious or conscious thought about hitting certain marks pleasing the coach or their parents or their teammates. Guys tend to be more "I could do it if I wanted, but I don't want to today" in comparison to girls.

Girls seem a lot more cut throat in the status of varsity spots as well. Maybe it is just true that girls are more mature and they just get it before the boys do... ;)

Doug

Coach Razor
10-18-2012, 10:43 AM
Doug

I've noticed the same and would agree it is a contributing factor... heck maybe even most of the reason. That said I do find myself wondering if there isn't a real physiological reason as well. Articles I've read on pain threshold and such, comparing the genders, seem inconclusive.

Tim Sharpe
Head Coach XC
Distance Coach T&F
Harvard-Westlake School

"To whom much is given, much is expected"

Bruce Jackson
10-18-2012, 11:22 AM
I'll post this in part for the humor in it... My mother has taken a keen interest in my coaching career (gotta love moms). Anyways, I had been talking with her about this and she said, "it's simple, women are tougher because we are the ones who give birth." Who knows ;)

I do tend to just go with the flow on this and let the girls hold slightly better than goal pace if it seems to be coming easily for them...

Tim Sharpe
Head Coach XC
Distance Coach T&F
Harvard-Westlake School

"To whom much is given, much is expected"

Similar to your mother's comments, I have attributed girls as having a higher pain threshold/tolerance than boys because of childbearing. I have always wonder if there is a difference in how boys and girls handle training that is areobic than anaerobic, which may play a bigger factor in training/performance than the rate of recovery.

But back to the original topic of this posting. As a new California resident I look forward to attending my 1st Mt. Sac XC invite. Although not every ranked team per division will meet head-to-head; it will still be a great meet. I'm sure there will be plenty of coaches, including myself, that will crunch the numbers and compare teams regardless of who is in what race because it's the same course, on the same day, running in the same conditions.

Ed Winczowski
10-18-2012, 01:51 PM
Similar to your mother's comments, I have attributed girls as having a higher pain threshold/tolerance than boys because of childbearing. I have always wonder if there is a difference in how boys and girls handle training that is areobic than anaerobic, which may play a bigger factor in training/performance than the rate of recovery.

But back to the original topic of this posting. As a new California resident I look forward to attending my 1st Mt. Sac XC invite. Although not every ranked team per division will meet head-to-head; it will still be a great meet. I'm sure there will be plenty of coaches, including myself, that will crunch the numbers and compare teams regardless of who is in what race because it's the same course, on the same day, running in the same conditions.

It's not always the same conditions throughout the day. And this weekend could be an example of that. Pray for little to no sun as the day goes on.

seekingadvice
10-19-2012, 01:32 PM
I love this thread. I know this will get a few unfavorable comments but if we all want to see the best races throughout the year as opposed to waiting until mid-November to race, why not come up with a points based system that gets teams to NXN. I am strictly speaking for california so other regions would need to do what they see fit but this is just an idea.
Dual meet wins= 1 point
League title=3 points
Minor Invites= 5pts (sweepstakes races = 2 extra points)
major Invites = 7 pts (sweepstakes races = 2 extra points)
Mt Sac = 10 pts (sweepstakes races = 2 extra points)
State Title= 20 points

Coaches decided which Invites are majors and which are minors
These are not hard and solid numbers more of an idea to kick around.

Mexrunner
10-20-2012, 10:12 AM
I don't know about you guys, but the more I look at things, I feel that high school cross country has become similar to the BCS for college football. Especially after adding Nike Team Nationals. Almost as if teams need to win by big margin (style points) if they don't run the big meets. Is it a bad thing or is it good thing? ... I really don't know :).. Good luck to all the teams with the rest of the season!