MT SAC COURSE SATELLITE MAP
Distance: 2.95
What is the Crescenta Valley Park cross country course like?
--Rich Gonzalez
"The Crescenta Valley course runs time-wise like the old Mt. SAC course and is an interesting one, with quite an elevation rise during the first half to three-quarters of a mile before a long sweeping run gradually downhill to the bottom of a park where athletes work back up to the top before heading back down and up and into the finish. It is anything but flat"
Distance: 2.95
Most of you heard that I GPS'd the CV course after your league finals.
Over the years, I always wondered about the slow times at CV...
sure, there are hills at CV, but nothing like Mt. SAC's--they're just long gradual types. So, why is there such a time discrepancy between the two courses? If Mt SAC has so many steep hills, then why are the times typically FASTER than CV times? WHY?? I'll tell you why--It's because MT. SAC is .15 shorter than CV!!! Conclusion: CV is definitely a 5k!
It makes sense. Think about it. All the girls ran their fastest mile at the end of CV because of their smart pacing and easy first mile. This led to the fast last mile--which also has the long downhill adjacent to the wash. Yes, there's the uphill part at the end, but it's not long enough to slows things down. And, the 3-mile mark comes up right after the second bridge--then you have the fast final 176 yards all the way DOWN to the finish chute.
Over the years, I always wondered about the slow times at CV...
sure, there are hills at CV, but nothing like Mt. SAC's--they're just long gradual types. So, why is there such a time discrepancy between the two courses? If Mt SAC has so many steep hills, then why are the times typically FASTER than CV times? WHY?? I'll tell you why--It's because MT. SAC is .15 shorter than CV!!! Conclusion: CV is definitely a 5k!
It makes sense. Think about it. All the girls ran their fastest mile at the end of CV because of their smart pacing and easy first mile. This led to the fast last mile--which also has the long downhill adjacent to the wash. Yes, there's the uphill part at the end, but it's not long enough to slows things down. And, the 3-mile mark comes up right after the second bridge--then you have the fast final 176 yards all the way DOWN to the finish chute.
But then this commentary begs the question: Why does MT. SAC seem so much harder? ...um...DUH!
REMEMBER THE STEEP HILLS?!!!
Okay, so while MT. SAC is definitely .15 shorter than CV, it's still only .15. That's not short enough to make up for running a less-than-intelligent first mile.
Okay, so while MT. SAC is definitely .15 shorter than CV, it's still only .15. That's not short enough to make up for running a less-than-intelligent first mile.
Below are quotes I found on DYESTATCAL comparing CV to MT SAC...
What is the Crescenta Valley Park cross country course like?
- "I heard it is an honest course and that finishing times are comparable to that of Mt. S.A.C. course.
- "The course is mostly grass, and the 1st half mile is slightly uphill, about half way through the course is a short dirt section. The course is a 5K (from what I have heard) and is not considered a very fast course due to the grass and being slightly up hill or down hill the whole time."
- "Course is three miles and typically runs 18 seconds slower than Mt. SAC for the guys and 20-22 for the girls. Those are typical averages that hold up well in data sets."
--Rich Gonzalez
"The Crescenta Valley course runs time-wise like the old Mt. SAC course and is an interesting one, with quite an elevation rise during the first half to three-quarters of a mile before a long sweeping run gradually downhill to the bottom of a park where athletes work back up to the top before heading back down and up and into the finish. It is anything but flat"
My take:
CV is a 5k...your times at MT. SAC should be, at the very least, the same time you run at CV; but, I would also agree with Mr. Gonzalez's assessment above--and you can do cross-referencing to verify this that many runners who run both STAUB and MTSAC typically show between 10-30 seconds gains at MTSAC from STAUB performances. Both courses will challenge the runner who attempts to run an uneven pace, but because CV has a downhill after the 1st mile, it's much easier to recoup if you run it too fast. As you know, this is certainly not the case with Mt. SAC. Running the first mile too fast will bring you to your knees (literally, in many cases)...you'll never really recover. So, if you run the same time for both courses, then your pacing was slightly off at MT. SAC.
For fun, subtract your best CV time by 15 seconds...that's an average. Someone do the math for me and post a team time in comment area of the blog. This could be our actual MT SAC time if WE RUN SMART! There's always that big IF.
Here is an update of the MT SAC COURSE ANALYSIS that we spoke of earlier in a team meeting. Note the new stats and goals. I think they are very achievable.
GIRLS' WEEK-AT-A-GLANCE
We will be experiencing a serious tapering effect this week. This Saturday has to be treated like it's our last race. Certainly, I hope we have our best race ahead of us. If all goes well, I truly believe we can go onto to the finals. Of course, we have to run perfectly. I really believe this and in what you can do. Do you?
Under The Lights: Tomorrow we meet in the evening @ 6pm on the track.
The Workout
Warm-up: 2 miles
Stretch well with 3 strides...
8x300m with a 100m slow jog interval...same pace as last week's 2-4-6 workout. (I'll bring times to the workout so you don't have to try to figure it out.)
Cool-down: 1 mile
Stretch and light core
CV is a 5k...your times at MT. SAC should be, at the very least, the same time you run at CV; but, I would also agree with Mr. Gonzalez's assessment above--and you can do cross-referencing to verify this that many runners who run both STAUB and MTSAC typically show between 10-30 seconds gains at MTSAC from STAUB performances. Both courses will challenge the runner who attempts to run an uneven pace, but because CV has a downhill after the 1st mile, it's much easier to recoup if you run it too fast. As you know, this is certainly not the case with Mt. SAC. Running the first mile too fast will bring you to your knees (literally, in many cases)...you'll never really recover. So, if you run the same time for both courses, then your pacing was slightly off at MT. SAC.
For fun, subtract your best CV time by 15 seconds...that's an average. Someone do the math for me and post a team time in comment area of the blog. This could be our actual MT SAC time if WE RUN SMART! There's always that big IF.
Here is an update of the MT SAC COURSE ANALYSIS that we spoke of earlier in a team meeting. Note the new stats and goals. I think they are very achievable.
GIRLS' WEEK-AT-A-GLANCE
We will be experiencing a serious tapering effect this week. This Saturday has to be treated like it's our last race. Certainly, I hope we have our best race ahead of us. If all goes well, I truly believe we can go onto to the finals. Of course, we have to run perfectly. I really believe this and in what you can do. Do you?
Under The Lights: Tomorrow we meet in the evening @ 6pm on the track.
The Workout
Warm-up: 2 miles
Stretch well with 3 strides...
8x300m with a 100m slow jog interval...same pace as last week's 2-4-6 workout. (I'll bring times to the workout so you don't have to try to figure it out.)
Cool-down: 1 mile
Stretch and light core
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteOh this didn't post yesterday as intended.
ReplyDeleteDiConti's calculated realistic team time (Mt. Sac Comparisons link)
1:42:25
CV Park Team Time RHL Finals
1:42:51
CV Park RHL Times -15 sec / runner
1:41:36
Is that right / what you wanted?
perfect!...thanks, gabie!!!!
ReplyDeletethat time is realistic...when we run our very best!