Lake Murray Invite
09/23/2012 11:35:50 AM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 109
Looking at the times, it appears this course is EXTREMELY fast or a bit short. Hard to believe how many runners were under 17 on the guys side and how many girls were under 20. From what I can see, most people were 45 seconds to a minute faster than usual.
Looking at the times, it appears this course is EXTREMELY fast or a bit short. Hard to believe how many runners were under 17 on the guys side and how many girls were under 20. From what I can see, most people were 45 seconds to a minute faster than usual.
09/23/2012 2:23:48 PM
User
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 24
It should be obvious something is not right here. The course is short, runners dropping ridiculous amounts of team since Coaches Classic all across the board. My question is what kind of times Lexington could have put up if in attendance (I see their girls ran, but not their guys, reason for this?). Mauldin ran much much faster times than they did at Coaches Classic, and I have trouble believing they are that much better and now the favorite to win the state title.
It should be obvious something is not right here. The course is short, runners dropping ridiculous amounts of team since Coaches Classic all across the board. My question is what kind of times Lexington could have put up if in attendance (I see their girls ran, but not their guys, reason for this?). Mauldin ran much much faster times than they did at Coaches Classic, and I have trouble believing they are that much better and now the favorite to win the state title.
09/23/2012 2:35:00 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 125
It's no secret that Lake Murray is a fast course, much like McAlpine in Charlotte. It was much hotter at Coaches Classic than at Lake Murray as well. However, the previous course record was 15:40 (Chad Holt I believe) and that went down on Saturday.
It's no secret that Lake Murray is a fast course, much like McAlpine in Charlotte. It was much hotter at Coaches Classic than at Lake Murray as well. However, the previous course record was 15:40 (Chad Holt I believe) and that went down on Saturday.
09/23/2012 3:51:26 PM
User
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 19
Course record is from Luke Lovelace. The weather is completely different and the course is faster than sandhills. Its plausible, but when a couple teams I looked at dropped 50sec to 70sec it is suspicious. CC isn't track, times really don't matter. Courses can vary year to year even.
Course record is from Luke Lovelace. The weather is completely different and the course is faster than sandhills. Its plausible, but when a couple teams I looked at dropped 50sec to 70sec it is suspicious. CC isn't track, times really don't matter. Courses can vary year to year even.
09/23/2012 4:48:09 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 39
Big meet, favorable weather, mid-season form and tough competition will yield fast times. But as previously mentioned, time in XC is not as meaningful as time in track. Anyway, it is a great photo album by the website photographer that accentuates the complete lack of major media coverage of this invitational and the Pee Dee Classic held in Florence on the same day. There were dozens of collegiate prospects at both locations. The State paper should change its name, athough Lake Murray is in the Midlands.
Big meet, favorable weather, mid-season form and tough competition will yield fast times. But as previously mentioned, time in XC is not as meaningful as time in track. Anyway, it is a great photo album by the website photographer that accentuates the complete lack of major media coverage of this invitational and the Pee Dee Classic held in Florence on the same day. There were dozens of collegiate prospects at both locations. The State paper should change its name, athough Lake Murray is in the Midlands.
09/23/2012 9:52:24 PM
User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 2
The Lake Murray Invite Course is a fast course. It is a certified course so the distance is accurate. With top teams competing in both the boys and girls races, along with ideal weather conditions it was prime for fast times. It is a well run event with a great location so schools from the midlands, upstate and lower state can travel within a reasonable distance to have a great mid-year meet. Many Top 10 teams were present and it made for very competitive races for all races.
The Lake Murray Invite Course is a fast course. It is a certified course so the distance is accurate. With top teams competing in both the boys and girls races, along with ideal weather conditions it was prime for fast times.
It is a well run event with a great location so schools from the midlands, upstate and lower state can travel within a reasonable distance to have a great mid-year meet. Many Top 10 teams were present and it made for very competitive races for all races.
09/23/2012 10:40:56 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 190
Re: coverage, LM got great press because John from SCrunners was there and took all the great photos, video, etc. himself. Anything you saw in the State was probably from his camera. It would be great if he had a staff who could cover everything, but it's hard to swing that on a shoestring budget. As for the times, that course has been a fast one for a while; but as was previously pointed out, this year's times were, on the whole, even faster than the usual. That's not surprising when you look at the renaissance in SC distance running of late. Put in perspective, 16 flat was 6th place, and if Lexington had run, might not have been top 10. Even on a fast course, that's amazing. When you factor in what we could see with good weather at Great American, on Lexington's course, at State, and at Foot Locker, there will likely be some unbelievable times coming soon.
Re: coverage, LM got great press because John from SCrunners was there and took all the great photos, video, etc. himself. Anything you saw in the State was probably from his camera. It would be great if he had a staff who could cover everything, but it's hard to swing that on a shoestring budget.

As for the times, that course has been a fast one for a while; but as was previously pointed out, this year's times were, on the whole, even faster than the usual. That's not surprising when you look at the renaissance in SC distance running of late. Put in perspective, 16 flat was 6th place, and if Lexington had run, might not have been top 10. Even on a fast course, that's amazing. When you factor in what we could see with good weather at Great American, on Lexington's course, at State, and at Foot Locker, there will likely be some unbelievable times coming soon.
09/23/2012 10:40:57 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 190
Re: coverage, LM got great press because John from SCrunners was there and took all the great photos, video, etc. himself. Anything you saw in the State was probably from his camera. It would be great if he had a staff who could cover everything, but it's hard to swing that on a shoestring budget. As for the times, that course has been a fast one for a while; but as was previously pointed out, this year's times were, on the whole, even faster than the usual. That's not surprising when you look at the renaissance in SC distance running of late. Put in perspective, 16 flat was 6th place, and if Lexington had run, might not have been top 10. Even on a fast course, that's amazing. When you factor in what we could see with good weather at Great American, on Lexington's course, at State, and at Foot Locker, there will likely be some unbelievable times coming soon.
Re: coverage, LM got great press because John from SCrunners was there and took all the great photos, video, etc. himself. Anything you saw in the State was probably from his camera. It would be great if he had a staff who could cover everything, but it's hard to swing that on a shoestring budget.

As for the times, that course has been a fast one for a while; but as was previously pointed out, this year's times were, on the whole, even faster than the usual. That's not surprising when you look at the renaissance in SC distance running of late. Put in perspective, 16 flat was 6th place, and if Lexington had run, might not have been top 10. Even on a fast course, that's amazing. When you factor in what we could see with good weather at Great American, on Lexington's course, at State, and at Foot Locker, there will likely be some unbelievable times coming soon.
09/23/2012 11:04:54 PM
User
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 152
Why does everyone on here freak out about times and course distance in cross country? All that matters in cross country is place...track is a bit different
Why does everyone on here freak out about times and course distance in cross country? All that matters in cross country is place...track is a bit different
09/24/2012 6:25:29 AM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 39
The point concerning media coverage was praising the site photo albums (and results) while bemoaning the dearth of South Carolina major media coverage of XC and track---with one exception: The Spartanburg Herald (goupstate.com) does a reasonably good job. And with both its harrier squads currently ranked 6th in Class AA, Cheraw (and other Chesterfield County teams) continues to get decent coverage in a weekly paper.
The point concerning media coverage was praising the site photo albums (and results) while bemoaning the dearth of South Carolina major media coverage of XC and track---with one exception: The Spartanburg Herald (goupstate.com) does a reasonably good job. And with both its harrier squads currently ranked 6th in Class AA, Cheraw (and other Chesterfield County teams) continues to get decent coverage in a weekly paper.
09/24/2012 8:03:56 AM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 109
I understand the whole place thing is more important than time and that courses will vary depending on weather and course conditions. I also understand there was some great competition. My point was simply that these were some pretty outrageous times considering where these teams were just 2-3 weeks earlier. Perhaps we will skip our local meet next year and take a trip to Lake Murray.
I understand the whole place thing is more important than time and that courses will vary depending on weather and course conditions. I also understand there was some great competition. My point was simply that these were some pretty outrageous times considering where these teams were just 2-3 weeks earlier. Perhaps we will skip our local meet next year and take a trip to Lake Murray.
09/24/2012 8:56:49 AM
Coach
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 804
[quote=Jgoodl]It is a certified course so the distance is accurate.[/quote] @Jgoodl Wow. A certified cross country course? Please enlighten us all and let us know exactly how one certifies a cross country course. Certified by whom? USATF? SCHSL? And by what standards and method of calibration?
Jgoodl wrote:
It is a certified course so the distance is accurate.


@Jgoodl

Wow. A certified cross country course?
Please enlighten us all and let us know exactly how one certifies a cross country course.
Certified by whom? USATF? SCHSL?
And by what standards and method of calibration?
09/24/2012 5:49:53 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 190
The course map they handed out indicated that it was USATF certified at 5k, probably when previously used for a road race. Although it's true that course measurements don't really matter in XC, it's also nice to know that a team or individual on the database ran soothing you can compare more or less apples to apples. I would guess that crooked creek is very similar to Lexington or McAlpine.
The course map they handed out indicated that it was USATF certified at 5k, probably when previously used for a road race. Although it's true that course measurements don't really matter in XC, it's also nice to know that a team or individual on the database ran soothing you can compare more or less apples to apples. I would guess that crooked creek is very similar to Lexington or McAlpine.
09/24/2012 8:36:06 PM
User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 37
@Bowermansman87 I was told the grasswas mowed very short,the paths were paved,and the weather was perfect. It was a "perfect storm" for the competition to run well.The fast times will alter the "virtual"meets.
@Bowermansman87 I was told the grasswas mowed very short,the paths were paved,and the weather was perfect. It was a "perfect storm" for the competition to run well.The fast times will alter the "virtual"meets.
09/24/2012 11:01:54 PM
User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 2
Thanks Coach Salley for the reply to OnceARunner's question. As coaches and competitors, the main concern during a meet is that we are wanting our athletes to race and compete to place as high as possible for the team to win. With that focus times will take care of themselves and we know times will vary for each course and even amongst the same course based on many factors, such as weather, competition, terrain, etc. As mentioned in another post, everything was right for a "Perfect Storm" and it was. Due to this, we had some great performances on the same course as it has been for years. We are glad that the schools who came performed well and with great respect for each other and the sport. Instead of being critical, be thankful for the growing numbers of runners and improving times across the state. We have a lot to be proud of.
Thanks Coach Salley for the reply to OnceARunner's question. As coaches and competitors, the main concern during a meet is that we are wanting our athletes to race and compete to place as high as possible for the team to win. With that focus times will take care of themselves and we know times will vary for each course and even amongst the same course based on many factors, such as weather, competition, terrain, etc. As mentioned in another post, everything was right for a "Perfect Storm" and it was. Due to this, we had some great performances on the same course as it has been for years. We are glad that the schools who came performed well and with great respect for each other and the sport.
Instead of being critical, be thankful for the growing numbers of runners and improving times across the state. We have a lot to be proud of.
09/24/2012 11:15:26 PM
User
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 152
[quote=OnceARunnr] Wow. A certified cross country course? Please enlighten us all and let us know exactly how one certifies a cross country course. Certified by whom? USATF? SCHSL? And by what standards and method of calibration?[/quote] typical smart*** statement by the know-it-all
OnceARunnr wrote:


Wow. A certified cross country course?
Please enlighten us all and let us know exactly how one certifies a cross country course.
Certified by whom? USATF? SCHSL?
And by what standards and method of calibration?

typical smart*** statement by the know-it-all
09/25/2012 8:11:20 AM
Coach
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 356
@southkakrun why would you call once a runner a smartA--...that was a legit question and the answer gave a lot of us some needed knowledge about CC..
@southkakrun why would you call once a runner a smartA--...that was a legit question
and the answer gave a lot of us some needed knowledge about CC..
09/25/2012 11:00:11 AM
User
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 36
The conditions whether it be course length, weather, time of day, competition, training peaks, or divine intervention were obviously such that increadibly fast times could be run. Fortunately at the State Meet in November Lexington, Mauldin, Dutch Fork, Wade Hampton and anyone else in the meet will line up on the line at the same for the samerace in the same conditions. Mauldin will not run their State Meet at Lake Murray while Lexington runs it at Sandhills, and we wont run our State Meet on our homecourse while everyone else is at Sandhills. From these results the only thing we can tell is who was the best team in that race.
The conditions whether it be course length, weather, time of day, competition, training peaks, or divine intervention were obviously such that increadibly fast times could be run. Fortunately at the State Meet in November Lexington, Mauldin, Dutch Fork, Wade Hampton and anyone else in the meet will line up on the line at the same for the samerace in the same conditions. Mauldin will not run their State Meet at Lake Murray while Lexington runs it at Sandhills, and we wont run our State Meet on our homecourse while everyone else is at Sandhills. From these results the only thing we can tell is who was the best team in that race.
09/25/2012 11:21:56 AM
Coach
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 804
There is a USATF-certifed course at Crooked Creek. However, whether that course was run would be difficult to prove. In fact, the USATF map to the course acknowledges the course's shortcomings and its inadequacies for state road race records. If the meet official say they did recreate the Crooked Creek course, then I believe them. But it would take an extraordinary amount of time and work. If you look at the course map, it requires numerous barriers to be erected on the course to make it accurate. Every single point would need to be measured and that measurement is not taken lightly under USATF rules. You need a steel tape, you have to take temperature readings, and you need to calibrate before each measurement. And that's just in the main field. The grass loop at the outermost point is very suspect as well. I'm not positive you could keep a constant and accurate calibration on that course due to the numerous bumps and dips on the natural surfaces. The USATF course measurement handbook is very explicit in that barriers have to be erected: "certification will require erection of barriers that restrict runners to a path longer than the shortest path available using the whole roadway." No where in the entire manual does it allow or consider a "road race course" on grass or trail surfaces. Bill Marable, the USATF state record keeper, has said emphatically that no cross country courses can be accepted for records, because accurate courses can not be established. And by that he means, they can't be established once, nor can they be duplicated again within the probabiltiy for error. I'm no where close to being the most-experience course measurer in the state. But my business partner and I have done about a dozen courses including the Myrtle Beach Marathon. It is a difficult process to ensure course accuracy even on paved roadways. I can't even believe they tried to do it at that park location. Hats off to them for that, but a certifed course also requires it to be able to be duplicated and that is where this route runs into trouble. The course run Saturday could be 100 percent accurate, long, or short. I don't know. But the odds are against it being exactly 5,000 meters is the point. And most courses end up being short.
There is a USATF-certifed course at Crooked Creek. However, whether that course was run would be difficult to prove. In fact, the USATF map to the course acknowledges the course's shortcomings and its inadequacies for state road race records.

If the meet official say they did recreate the Crooked Creek course, then I believe them. But it would take an extraordinary amount of time and work.

If you look at the course map, it requires numerous barriers to be erected on the course to make it accurate. Every single point would need to be measured and that measurement is not taken lightly under USATF rules. You need a steel tape, you have to take temperature readings, and you need to calibrate before each measurement.
And that's just in the main field.
The grass loop at the outermost point is very suspect as well.
I'm not positive you could keep a constant and accurate calibration on that course due to the numerous bumps and dips on the natural surfaces.

The USATF course measurement handbook is very explicit in that barriers have to be erected: "certification will require erection of barriers that restrict runners to a path longer than the shortest path available using the whole roadway."

No where in the entire manual does it allow or consider a "road race course" on grass or trail surfaces. Bill Marable, the USATF state record keeper, has said emphatically that no cross country courses can be accepted for records, because accurate courses can not be established. And by that he means, they can't be established once, nor can they be duplicated again within the probabiltiy for error.

I'm no where close to being the most-experience course measurer in the state. But my business partner and I have done about a dozen courses including the Myrtle Beach Marathon. It is a difficult process to ensure course accuracy even on paved roadways. I can't even believe they tried to do it at that park location. Hats off to them for that, but a certifed course also requires it to be able to be duplicated and that is where this route runs into trouble.

The course run Saturday could be 100 percent accurate, long, or short. I don't know. But the odds are against it being exactly 5,000 meters is the point. And most courses end up being short.
09/25/2012 1:03:34 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 109
When everybody sees the polls, you will see the impact of this very fast course. Rankings obviously DO NOT make a difference when it is time to go head to head, but I believe this can often keep the polls from being accurate. @Oncearunner...I totally agree. I have measured our course several times. I usually measure before each meet. I never get the exact same measurement. We are always within 3-5 meters. I measure have measured with a wheel, a cyclocomputer, and GPS(the most inaccurate by the way), and they are close, but never exactly the same. This is almost an impossibility. It there were only a few who were 1:00-1:30 faster, ok...they had a great race and a new PR. However, when the majority of the field is that much faster, that is a problem. I don't care how good the weather is, how solid the footing is, etc.
When everybody sees the polls, you will see the impact of this very fast course. Rankings obviously DO NOT make a difference when it is time to go head to head, but I believe this can often keep the polls from being accurate. @Oncearunner...I totally agree. I have measured our course several times. I usually measure before each meet. I never get the exact same measurement. We are always within 3-5 meters. I measure have measured with a wheel, a cyclocomputer, and GPS(the most inaccurate by the way), and they are close, but never exactly the same. This is almost an impossibility. It there were only a few who were 1:00-1:30 faster, ok...they had a great race and a new PR. However, when the majority of the field is that much faster, that is a problem. I don't care how good the weather is, how solid the footing is, etc.

You must be logged in to comment.

Click Here to Log In.