As I recover from a cold (and hope it doesn't lead to a sinus infection), it seems appropriate to consider this age-old question: when the body is fighting off illness, should the athlete keep training? Should he or she train differently? If rest is required, how much rest?
I truly wish there were simple answers to these questions, but in my own experience I haven't found anything simple about the experience of training and racing when sick. Let's say that there are two extreme positions: "old school" and "new school." The old school approach is to consider illness to be one more form of weakness that can be overcome by effort. An old school athlete runs when sick, and eventually gets better and is stronger for the experience ("what doesn't kill me makes me stronger"). The new school approach is to consider illness as a warning sign that the body needs healing before it can resume training. The new school athlete takes two days off, gets better, and gradually works up to hard training again. ("What doesn't kill me still leaves me in a weakened, compromised state that inhibits progressive adaptation and improvement.") So which school is better?
I have taken both approaches in my own running career, and have dispensed both "old school" and "new school" advice to athletes I have coached. The results are inconclusive. Worse than that, the results are contradictory. I once ran a brilliant half-marathon while suffering from the early stages of a cold, and recovered surprisingly quickly. I once ran a 10K race with a cold and developed a frightening case of bronchitis that kept me out of action for nearly a month. I have done track workouts while sick that seemed to hasten my cure, and I have done track workouts when sick that seemed to bring on far worse bouts of illness than what would have been expected. I have skipped track workouts when sick in the hope that I would recover faster, and then have failed to recover faster. It has been, as they say, a mixed bag.
One reason to train through illness is that NOT training doesn't always make you feel better. I mean psychologically as well as physically. One reason to AVOID training through an illness is that hard training has been shown to temporarily weaken the immune system, not a good thing when you are harboring nasty germs.
If I had to summarize the moderate approach, I would say that one should fore-go HARD training while sick, but not necessarily take complete reset. I'd also say avoid all racing when sick unless it is a really important race, for example one you have trained for all season. Thus, if you have a cold or a sore throat or a headache, run easy. Easy running means making it completely aerobic - nothing that involves really hard breathing or placing your body in extreme duress. I think there's little risk that such moderate exercise will lengthen the duration of a common cold. On the other hand, don't do that killer 4 x 1M workout that you had planned. Don't go out for a 15 mile long run in sub-freezing temperature. In other words, don't extend yourself. When you're sick, you're more likely to break.
I haven't even mentioned one of the other factors that comes into play: hypochondria. It turns out that many runners are hypochondriacs. When under mental stress, such as when approaching an important workout or race, they experience symptoms of illness without the actual illness. Far from being crazy, these athletes are actually rather typical. One of the important reasons to not automatically shut it down when you are feeling the early signs of a cold, is to counter this natural tendency to "worry yourself sick." Hypochondria, like other forms of self-doubt, needs to be understood and confronted to be overcome.
Finally, there is the rare malady of the athlete who refuses to take time off, even when continuing to train is obviously counter-productive, if not dangerous. If hypochondria is the result of one kind of insecurity, its opposite is the result of another kind of insecurity: the fear that taking any time off at all is an unacceptable form of weakness. This is where a coach can be very helpful in setting limits that an athlete might not want to set for himself or herself.
So, to conclude, should you run when you're sick?
What, do I look like a doctor?
December 30, 2010
December 28, 2010
Omphaloskeptic
(I started writing this in July 2010 when I saw the article about belly button location and sprinting prowess. Unfortunately, I lost my way trying to explain why I thought the science was wrong-headed. I put it aside, and never went back to it... until now... )
"Omphaloskepsis" -- the contemplation of one's own navel, either as an aid to meditation or as the act of the terminally self-absorbed -- is one of those words that's always guaranteed to generate smirks.
And smirking was my first reaction when I started reading reports of a study that attempts to account for the observed Olympic dominance of black sprinters and white swimmers based on the location of their belly buttons.
But, as this summary in the London Telegraph makes clear, the researchers are terribly earnest about their work, and so it would be wrong to dismiss it as the work of cranks.
Indeed, Adrian Bejan, a professor of mechanical engineering at Duke University in North Carolina, and Dr Edward Jones of Howard University seem quite conscious that publishing such work will be a lightning rod for controversy, with some accusing them of racism, and others drawing unwarranted conclusions. As Prof Bejan said, "It’s a physics paper, not an opinion paper. I urge other people to read what I’ve written and then safeguard against attempts to misuse it."
But here's the thing, this is just the latest in a long line of research studies that are, in a sense, ill-conceived from the beginning. Here's how it happens: a pattern is observed in which a particular group dominates some physical or intellectual arena. Researchers attempt to find a single explanation for that dominance. Observations and measurements confirm that the group has some unique characteristic. That characteristic is then identified as the explanation for the behavior. What follows is depressingly predictable. A paper is published. There is controversy about what the research means. The researchers are accused of discrimination. They respond witrh counter-charges that their critics are only interested in political correctness. The researchers claim that they have no bias or political axe to grind; they are only scientists working in the service of objective truth.
Here's the problem with this recent study and all such studies: the observed behavior that makes the research seem compelling -- winning Boston Marathon titles, earning swimming gold medals, or dominating Olympic sprinting -- is not a simple consequence of a single cause; it is the result of a hugely complex network of contributing factors, both physical and social. Thus, the correlation found between, say, ratio of leg length to body height in a population and the number of sprint gold medals in that population, is suggestive, but never conclusive. Physical "gifts" never fully explain why one athlete is a champion and another similarly endowed athlete never makes it. Likewise, physical characteristics never fully explain why one culture dominates a sport.
When I make this argument, I often begin with a question: what country produces the best marathon runners? Over the past 100 year, the answer has shifted dramatically, and each time, some natural trait or genetic advantage has been offered as the explanation. Americans, Canadians, Finns, Japanese, Ethiopians, Djiboutians, and Kenyans have all had periods of dominance. Who knows... maybe someone, some day will demonstrate that there is an inherent advantage is the genes (or the water, or the food) that explains why some particular group is guaranteed to be better than everyone else. But I'm guessing that there will always be doubt, because so many things have to come together for an individual to reach the top -- not just physical gifts, but the right motivation and support.
In science and in sport, it's still true that if you want to be a champion, you must look to your training not to your navel.
"Omphaloskepsis" -- the contemplation of one's own navel, either as an aid to meditation or as the act of the terminally self-absorbed -- is one of those words that's always guaranteed to generate smirks.
And smirking was my first reaction when I started reading reports of a study that attempts to account for the observed Olympic dominance of black sprinters and white swimmers based on the location of their belly buttons.
But, as this summary in the London Telegraph makes clear, the researchers are terribly earnest about their work, and so it would be wrong to dismiss it as the work of cranks.
Indeed, Adrian Bejan, a professor of mechanical engineering at Duke University in North Carolina, and Dr Edward Jones of Howard University seem quite conscious that publishing such work will be a lightning rod for controversy, with some accusing them of racism, and others drawing unwarranted conclusions. As Prof Bejan said, "It’s a physics paper, not an opinion paper. I urge other people to read what I’ve written and then safeguard against attempts to misuse it."
But here's the thing, this is just the latest in a long line of research studies that are, in a sense, ill-conceived from the beginning. Here's how it happens: a pattern is observed in which a particular group dominates some physical or intellectual arena. Researchers attempt to find a single explanation for that dominance. Observations and measurements confirm that the group has some unique characteristic. That characteristic is then identified as the explanation for the behavior. What follows is depressingly predictable. A paper is published. There is controversy about what the research means. The researchers are accused of discrimination. They respond witrh counter-charges that their critics are only interested in political correctness. The researchers claim that they have no bias or political axe to grind; they are only scientists working in the service of objective truth.
Here's the problem with this recent study and all such studies: the observed behavior that makes the research seem compelling -- winning Boston Marathon titles, earning swimming gold medals, or dominating Olympic sprinting -- is not a simple consequence of a single cause; it is the result of a hugely complex network of contributing factors, both physical and social. Thus, the correlation found between, say, ratio of leg length to body height in a population and the number of sprint gold medals in that population, is suggestive, but never conclusive. Physical "gifts" never fully explain why one athlete is a champion and another similarly endowed athlete never makes it. Likewise, physical characteristics never fully explain why one culture dominates a sport.
When I make this argument, I often begin with a question: what country produces the best marathon runners? Over the past 100 year, the answer has shifted dramatically, and each time, some natural trait or genetic advantage has been offered as the explanation. Americans, Canadians, Finns, Japanese, Ethiopians, Djiboutians, and Kenyans have all had periods of dominance. Who knows... maybe someone, some day will demonstrate that there is an inherent advantage is the genes (or the water, or the food) that explains why some particular group is guaranteed to be better than everyone else. But I'm guessing that there will always be doubt, because so many things have to come together for an individual to reach the top -- not just physical gifts, but the right motivation and support.
In science and in sport, it's still true that if you want to be a champion, you must look to your training not to your navel.
December 26, 2010
Racing the Mile
(I wrote this in January 2008 after my first mile race of that indoor season. I was about to turn 50 and I had great ambitions for running a fast mile again. For some reason, I never finished the post... About two weeks after I ran that race I sustained an injury that pretty much wrecked the rest of that season and pretty much the rest of the year. Too bad! It would be a long time before I ran another competitive mile.)
I am nervous.
I am two-thirds through my pre-race routine, the familiar sequence of jogging, stretching, and drills designed to get me warmed up and ready to race, and I am surprised at the butterflies in my stomach. There is absolutely nothing at stake in the race I am about to run -- except my self esteem, I guess, and maybe that it is enough. This is a small, obscure meet and I am running the mile against a few ancient road runners (not a pair of spikes among them), I would not be concerned about the pace. The truth is that almost every time I step to the line to run a mile (and small meets are no exception), it is like I am stepping in front of a firing squad.
The obscure meet is the annual MIT Varsity vs. MIT Alumni meet, Saturday January 12. There are only five competitors in the Open mile run, and three of them just finished the mile racewalk and are doubling. The other "fast guy" says he wants to break 5:20.
The mile is my race. I have known it since I was 11 years old. That's when I read a short piece in Sports Illustrated about an 11-year-old boy who had set a record by running a mile in 5:04. I wanted to do that, too. (It took me until I was 14). I knew it when I was in junior high and the coach listed all the events, and after every one, he asked who thought they wanted to run it. Everyone else wanted to do the sprint races; I wanted to do the mile.
I thought of the mile as a long event, long enough to discourage the really fast kids with little endurance. When I started, it was the longest event available. Eventually, I came to think of it as a perfect balance between endurance and speed. To run it well, you had to train to your body with lots of fast running
I forgot how much I liked the mile for a while when I caught the marathon bug. For many years, my only competitive miles were in summer all-comers meets. When I hit 40, I re-discovered the "joys" of miling.
And now, a decade later and about to enter a new age group, I still want to be able to run a fast mile.
Run a fast mile... it sounds so easy. It all feels easy at first, especially if you can keep your mind from dwelling on how your early pace will lead you into greater and greater anaerobic distress.
I haven't raced a mile since March, and I know that I don't yet have the training to do the race justice. But even with training, the only true way to prepare to race a mile is to race a mile, or several, and then you start to figure it out again.
* * *
When the gun goes off, I go immediately to the front trying to figure out whether I am going too fast. The others are leaving me alone, and after the first 100 meters I know that I'm going to be doing this by myself. The first 200m is 37.
In an indoor mile especially, you have to start thinking right away: how did that FEEL? How much effort went into it? You get fooled, sometimes, the pace feeling so easy but too fast. In this case, it didn't feel easy. Although I know that 37 is not fast, I felt like I was laboring a bit around the flat turns. Still, if I start running slower now, I will settle into mediocrity too early. I work a little bit harder on the next lap and am rewarded with another 37.
The good thing is, I'm not nervous any more. The bad thing is that I don't know what's going to happen to me. The mile is short, but full of surprises.
Two more laps and I hit 800m in 2:30. For some reason, this makes me angry. Not even sub-5:00 pace! I start digging in, no longer trying to think of ways to avoid the discomfort. I run lap 5 in 37 again, and I hit 1200m in 3:43.
By now, I am lapping people, but other than a momentary sense that I am moving fast, it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter that this is an insignificant race against weak competition. I really need to run sub-5:00 and will put myself through quite a bit of hurt to do it.
But my legs seem to have forgotten how. Or perhaps that last 200 was unwise. I can feel my legs getting rubbery. It happens very quickly in a mile, and I know when I pass 1400m in 4:20 that despite my best efforts I am slowing down. From here on in, I put all my focus on not slowing down. I try to remember to maintain my form. I try to use my arms to make up for the rubbery feeling in my legs.
And then I'm on the final straight. And as time slides away, I sprint stiffly for the last 20 meters. It's not pretty.
When all is said and done, when I finally stop coughing the dreaded hack of the indoor middle-distance runner, I take home the only prize that matters, a time of 4:57.5 and renewed membership in the community of runners who just love racing the mile.
I am nervous.
I am two-thirds through my pre-race routine, the familiar sequence of jogging, stretching, and drills designed to get me warmed up and ready to race, and I am surprised at the butterflies in my stomach. There is absolutely nothing at stake in the race I am about to run -- except my self esteem, I guess, and maybe that it is enough. This is a small, obscure meet and I am running the mile against a few ancient road runners (not a pair of spikes among them), I would not be concerned about the pace. The truth is that almost every time I step to the line to run a mile (and small meets are no exception), it is like I am stepping in front of a firing squad.
The obscure meet is the annual MIT Varsity vs. MIT Alumni meet, Saturday January 12. There are only five competitors in the Open mile run, and three of them just finished the mile racewalk and are doubling. The other "fast guy" says he wants to break 5:20.
The mile is my race. I have known it since I was 11 years old. That's when I read a short piece in Sports Illustrated about an 11-year-old boy who had set a record by running a mile in 5:04. I wanted to do that, too. (It took me until I was 14). I knew it when I was in junior high and the coach listed all the events, and after every one, he asked who thought they wanted to run it. Everyone else wanted to do the sprint races; I wanted to do the mile.
I thought of the mile as a long event, long enough to discourage the really fast kids with little endurance. When I started, it was the longest event available. Eventually, I came to think of it as a perfect balance between endurance and speed. To run it well, you had to train to your body with lots of fast running
I forgot how much I liked the mile for a while when I caught the marathon bug. For many years, my only competitive miles were in summer all-comers meets. When I hit 40, I re-discovered the "joys" of miling.
And now, a decade later and about to enter a new age group, I still want to be able to run a fast mile.
Run a fast mile... it sounds so easy. It all feels easy at first, especially if you can keep your mind from dwelling on how your early pace will lead you into greater and greater anaerobic distress.
I haven't raced a mile since March, and I know that I don't yet have the training to do the race justice. But even with training, the only true way to prepare to race a mile is to race a mile, or several, and then you start to figure it out again.
* * *
When the gun goes off, I go immediately to the front trying to figure out whether I am going too fast. The others are leaving me alone, and after the first 100 meters I know that I'm going to be doing this by myself. The first 200m is 37.
In an indoor mile especially, you have to start thinking right away: how did that FEEL? How much effort went into it? You get fooled, sometimes, the pace feeling so easy but too fast. In this case, it didn't feel easy. Although I know that 37 is not fast, I felt like I was laboring a bit around the flat turns. Still, if I start running slower now, I will settle into mediocrity too early. I work a little bit harder on the next lap and am rewarded with another 37.
The good thing is, I'm not nervous any more. The bad thing is that I don't know what's going to happen to me. The mile is short, but full of surprises.
Two more laps and I hit 800m in 2:30. For some reason, this makes me angry. Not even sub-5:00 pace! I start digging in, no longer trying to think of ways to avoid the discomfort. I run lap 5 in 37 again, and I hit 1200m in 3:43.
By now, I am lapping people, but other than a momentary sense that I am moving fast, it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter that this is an insignificant race against weak competition. I really need to run sub-5:00 and will put myself through quite a bit of hurt to do it.
But my legs seem to have forgotten how. Or perhaps that last 200 was unwise. I can feel my legs getting rubbery. It happens very quickly in a mile, and I know when I pass 1400m in 4:20 that despite my best efforts I am slowing down. From here on in, I put all my focus on not slowing down. I try to remember to maintain my form. I try to use my arms to make up for the rubbery feeling in my legs.
And then I'm on the final straight. And as time slides away, I sprint stiffly for the last 20 meters. It's not pretty.
When all is said and done, when I finally stop coughing the dreaded hack of the indoor middle-distance runner, I take home the only prize that matters, a time of 4:57.5 and renewed membership in the community of runners who just love racing the mile.
December 24, 2010
Unfinished Business
By now, I should be on a plane bound for Tanzania, leaving cold New England behind for a couple of weeks.
While I'm away, I won't have much Internet access, so don't expect daily updates of my runs in the Serengeti (Don't worry, Joni, I know that I can't run in the Serengeti). But don't despair: I've set up the blog to post a few previously unpublished stories from the archives, starting after Christmas and continuing until I get back.
Here's a preview:
- Racing the Mile
- My take on Barefoot Running (with real poetry!)
- Resolutions for 2011
- Avoiding Treadmills
- How I feel about Rio getting the 2016 Summer Olympics
...and others!
I hope you enjoy these posts. In the mean time, I'd like to wish everyone a very happy New Year, wherever you may spend it!
While I'm away, I won't have much Internet access, so don't expect daily updates of my runs in the Serengeti (Don't worry, Joni, I know that I can't run in the Serengeti). But don't despair: I've set up the blog to post a few previously unpublished stories from the archives, starting after Christmas and continuing until I get back.
Here's a preview:
- Racing the Mile
- My take on Barefoot Running (with real poetry!)
- Resolutions for 2011
- Avoiding Treadmills
- How I feel about Rio getting the 2016 Summer Olympics
...and others!
I hope you enjoy these posts. In the mean time, I'd like to wish everyone a very happy New Year, wherever you may spend it!
December 22, 2010
Shut Out of Boston? Don't Blame Charity Runners
"The B.A.A. reserves the right to reject any entry, issue special invitations, cancel the race, expand or further limit the field, or adjust the entry procedures. The Boston Marathon includes a field of elite, invited athletes. Regardless of qualifying performance, selection and entry into the elite field is subject to review, and acceptances will be made on a limited basis. Entry into the field of elite, invited athletes will be at the sole discretion of the B.A.A. Entry into the Boston Marathon will be at the discretion of the B.A.A." (from the BAA web site)
On Sunday, the Boston Globe published a lengthy piece by Shira Springer and Bob Hohler that was thick with criticism of the BAA and the Boston Marathon for, among other things, shutting out runners with qualifying times in favor of those with invitational or charity entries. (Boston is Caught in a Numbers Game, 12/19/10)
I strongly disagree with both the substance and tone of the piece, which pulls out all the stops to make the BAA look, by turns, incompetent, avaricious, elitist, and insensitive. It's easy enough to cherry-pick a few anecdotes and create that impression. But in so doing, the article doesn't shed any light on the true issues involved in managing entries for the marathon, and makes a scapegoat of charity runners, who have little to do with the problem.
But let's back up a bit. On October 18th, the BAA opened online entry to the 2011 race. It was the first year for the online system, and as the day approached word spread on message boards and email threads encouraging runners to enter as soon as the site went live at 9:00 a.m.. That's what people did, and there were problems handling the unexpectedly high volume of entries. In the end, the 22,000 open slots for qualified runners were filled in a little over eight hours, compared to the 66 days it took to fill the 2010 race.
Almost immediately, one began to hear stories of people who had been unable to enter, or who hadn't had a chance to try before registration closed. There was anger, and those who had been shut out started voicing their resentment towards the BAA for providing roughly 5,000 entries for non-qualified runners.
The New York Times published an article describing the rise of charity running (Charities Gain Traction in Marathons), helping to fan the outcry against the dilution of the Boston "race" with competitors who weren't actually there to compete.
But all of this resentment against the roughly 10% of runners who do so for charities misses the forest for the trees. Obviously, the BAA marathon does not have infinite capacity and the limited supply of entries combined with the high demand to run have created a situation in which some people who want to run won't be able to. the Globe article has an unintentionally revealing story about a doctor who missed the online entry because he was in surgery all day. He immediately ponies up $1600 to get a "complimentary" entry from a medical group. Well surely if the value of an entry is $1600 and the BAA is only charging $250, then demand will outstrip supply -- even if there weren't a single charity runner in the race.
As for the purity of the race... please! The Boston Marathon has never been pure. Since its inception in 1897 there have always been fringe elements in the race -- jokers and characters and those who want to call attention to this or that cause. People run with costumes, with funny hats, with three-piece suits, as well as with messages of hope and inspiration. Remember the original marathon? Phidippides didn't run to compete but to deliver a message. Ever since then, people have used the marathon as a symbol of something more than just a race.
In any case, I know plenty of people who have run the BAA race for charity. They are real runners who happen to be motivated by something other than the personal satisfaction of a PR. They train hard -- just like "real" runners -- and they suffer the same injuries, disappointments, and sense of accomplishment. Maybe it dilutes the overall quality of the race, but I have no problem with charity runners, and no problem with the BAA reserving a small fraction of its spots for them.
Ultimately, the BAA will come up with a different scheme that reserves some number of entries for people who run a particular time. the other entries will go by lottery or something. Things will change over the next couple of years, as they figure out the right formula, but these changes are inevitable. In the mean time, one thing the BAA could do is say that anyone who qualified for 2011 but didn't get in is automatically pre-qualified for 2012.
And if that's not good enough, there's the age-old solution for anyone who wants to run but doesn't have a number: run it as a bandit. That's also a tradition as old as the marathon itself.
On Sunday, the Boston Globe published a lengthy piece by Shira Springer and Bob Hohler that was thick with criticism of the BAA and the Boston Marathon for, among other things, shutting out runners with qualifying times in favor of those with invitational or charity entries. (Boston is Caught in a Numbers Game, 12/19/10)
I strongly disagree with both the substance and tone of the piece, which pulls out all the stops to make the BAA look, by turns, incompetent, avaricious, elitist, and insensitive. It's easy enough to cherry-pick a few anecdotes and create that impression. But in so doing, the article doesn't shed any light on the true issues involved in managing entries for the marathon, and makes a scapegoat of charity runners, who have little to do with the problem.
But let's back up a bit. On October 18th, the BAA opened online entry to the 2011 race. It was the first year for the online system, and as the day approached word spread on message boards and email threads encouraging runners to enter as soon as the site went live at 9:00 a.m.. That's what people did, and there were problems handling the unexpectedly high volume of entries. In the end, the 22,000 open slots for qualified runners were filled in a little over eight hours, compared to the 66 days it took to fill the 2010 race.
Almost immediately, one began to hear stories of people who had been unable to enter, or who hadn't had a chance to try before registration closed. There was anger, and those who had been shut out started voicing their resentment towards the BAA for providing roughly 5,000 entries for non-qualified runners.
The New York Times published an article describing the rise of charity running (Charities Gain Traction in Marathons), helping to fan the outcry against the dilution of the Boston "race" with competitors who weren't actually there to compete.
But all of this resentment against the roughly 10% of runners who do so for charities misses the forest for the trees. Obviously, the BAA marathon does not have infinite capacity and the limited supply of entries combined with the high demand to run have created a situation in which some people who want to run won't be able to. the Globe article has an unintentionally revealing story about a doctor who missed the online entry because he was in surgery all day. He immediately ponies up $1600 to get a "complimentary" entry from a medical group. Well surely if the value of an entry is $1600 and the BAA is only charging $250, then demand will outstrip supply -- even if there weren't a single charity runner in the race.
As for the purity of the race... please! The Boston Marathon has never been pure. Since its inception in 1897 there have always been fringe elements in the race -- jokers and characters and those who want to call attention to this or that cause. People run with costumes, with funny hats, with three-piece suits, as well as with messages of hope and inspiration. Remember the original marathon? Phidippides didn't run to compete but to deliver a message. Ever since then, people have used the marathon as a symbol of something more than just a race.
In any case, I know plenty of people who have run the BAA race for charity. They are real runners who happen to be motivated by something other than the personal satisfaction of a PR. They train hard -- just like "real" runners -- and they suffer the same injuries, disappointments, and sense of accomplishment. Maybe it dilutes the overall quality of the race, but I have no problem with charity runners, and no problem with the BAA reserving a small fraction of its spots for them.
Ultimately, the BAA will come up with a different scheme that reserves some number of entries for people who run a particular time. the other entries will go by lottery or something. Things will change over the next couple of years, as they figure out the right formula, but these changes are inevitable. In the mean time, one thing the BAA could do is say that anyone who qualified for 2011 but didn't get in is automatically pre-qualified for 2012.
And if that's not good enough, there's the age-old solution for anyone who wants to run but doesn't have a number: run it as a bandit. That's also a tradition as old as the marathon itself.
December 19, 2010
Winterfest - Large Schools Results - 12/18/10
Wow, kids are running awfully fast for December 18th!
Only a few days into the high school indoor season, the MSTCA Winterfest meet brought out some impressive performances. Both Newton North teams took part and gave tantalizing hints about what lies ahead.
The NN girls are very, very deep in the sprints, hurdles, and jumping events. Let's start with the hurdles. Kayla Wong had a very nice series of races, running 8.87, 8.82, and 8.84 in the finals to place 3rd. In 4th was Carla Forbes. Seeded at a modest 9.80, Ms. Forbes proceeded to run 9.27 and 9.08 to get into the finals, and then improved to 9.01, which we can presume is personal best. Amy Ren ran 9.23 in the semis, and finsihed 6th in the finals in 9.46.
Ren was also busy elsewhere. She was North's top competitor in the high-jump 5-0 (5th) and long-jump 16-2.5 (3rd). In the high jump North had four jumpers at 4-10 or better, including Ren, Lucia Grigoli (5-0), Forbes (4-10), and Maeve Larkin (4-10). In the long jump, Kayla Prior finished 4th (15-11), with Larkin 6th (15-0.5).
Madi Nadeau finished 5th for the Tigers in the 300 (44.12), while Suzi Bennett ran a nice 45.18 for 14th. In the 1000, Meghan Bellerose (3:15.62) and Maggie Heffernan )3:15.84) finished 5th and 6th. Devika Banerjee was North's top finisher in the mile, running 5:48.25.
But the best finish of the day came from North's 4x200 relay (Nadeau, Wong, Steph Brown, and Forbes), which won the race with a decent early-season time of 1:48.39. I wasn't within ten miles of Reggie, but I'm sure the hand-offs need work and the time will come down.
As for the NN boys, their relays were in mid-season form. The 4x200 team (listed as Ben Clark, Isaiah Penn, Terrell Doyle, and Nate Menninger) won by over two seconds (huge!) in 1:32.92. (Does having access to a better indoor track facility contribute to better relay performances?) The 4x400 team (listed as Clark, Ezra Lichtman, Penn, and Dan Swain -- but surely Penn must have run anchor?) followed suit, winning in 3:33.60. They weren't racing weak teams, either, as 2nd and 3rd went to traditional powers Andover and St. John's Prep.
Individually, North got a great win from Lichtman in the mile (4:28.66), second place finishes from Justin Keefe in the 1000 (2:41.94) and Dan Ranti in the 2-mile (9:52.17). Ranti's time is an indoor personal best, and a great performance this early.
In the 300, sophomore Ryan Lucken placed 5th. In the shot put, North got a strong performance from Young Guang (48'), with Swardick Mayanja placing 5th in 44-10.
Winterfest Large Schools Results
Only a few days into the high school indoor season, the MSTCA Winterfest meet brought out some impressive performances. Both Newton North teams took part and gave tantalizing hints about what lies ahead.
The NN girls are very, very deep in the sprints, hurdles, and jumping events. Let's start with the hurdles. Kayla Wong had a very nice series of races, running 8.87, 8.82, and 8.84 in the finals to place 3rd. In 4th was Carla Forbes. Seeded at a modest 9.80, Ms. Forbes proceeded to run 9.27 and 9.08 to get into the finals, and then improved to 9.01, which we can presume is personal best. Amy Ren ran 9.23 in the semis, and finsihed 6th in the finals in 9.46.
Ren was also busy elsewhere. She was North's top competitor in the high-jump 5-0 (5th) and long-jump 16-2.5 (3rd). In the high jump North had four jumpers at 4-10 or better, including Ren, Lucia Grigoli (5-0), Forbes (4-10), and Maeve Larkin (4-10). In the long jump, Kayla Prior finished 4th (15-11), with Larkin 6th (15-0.5).
Madi Nadeau finished 5th for the Tigers in the 300 (44.12), while Suzi Bennett ran a nice 45.18 for 14th. In the 1000, Meghan Bellerose (3:15.62) and Maggie Heffernan )3:15.84) finished 5th and 6th. Devika Banerjee was North's top finisher in the mile, running 5:48.25.
But the best finish of the day came from North's 4x200 relay (Nadeau, Wong, Steph Brown, and Forbes), which won the race with a decent early-season time of 1:48.39. I wasn't within ten miles of Reggie, but I'm sure the hand-offs need work and the time will come down.
As for the NN boys, their relays were in mid-season form. The 4x200 team (listed as Ben Clark, Isaiah Penn, Terrell Doyle, and Nate Menninger) won by over two seconds (huge!) in 1:32.92. (Does having access to a better indoor track facility contribute to better relay performances?) The 4x400 team (listed as Clark, Ezra Lichtman, Penn, and Dan Swain -- but surely Penn must have run anchor?) followed suit, winning in 3:33.60. They weren't racing weak teams, either, as 2nd and 3rd went to traditional powers Andover and St. John's Prep.
Individually, North got a great win from Lichtman in the mile (4:28.66), second place finishes from Justin Keefe in the 1000 (2:41.94) and Dan Ranti in the 2-mile (9:52.17). Ranti's time is an indoor personal best, and a great performance this early.
In the 300, sophomore Ryan Lucken placed 5th. In the shot put, North got a strong performance from Young Guang (48'), with Swardick Mayanja placing 5th in 44-10.
Winterfest Large Schools Results
December 17, 2010
BSL Indoor Meet Results - 12/16/10
If the results posted on Cool Running are accurate, Newton North's first indoor meet against Braintree was full of promise for the season to come. The NN girls swamped the Wamps (have I used that phrase before?) 78-8 and the NN boys were nearly as dominant in winning 72-14.
Boys Meet
The boys won every event in their dual meet except the relay, where Cool Running reports they were DQ'd for an infraction of the jewelry rule. I'll bet that presented a teaching moment or two for the NN coaching staff. That aside, and acknowledging that Braintree was not a strong team, what was impressive was the balance of the NN effort. There was not a single event in which North did not have a strong competitor. NN athletes had the top league performances in these events:
Mile (Ranti)
1000 (Lichtman)
600 (Penn)
2 Mile (Keefe)
High Jump (Hart)
Shot Put (Mayanja)
Long Jump (Hart)
In the 300, Ryan Lucken had the second fastest time of the night in what I think is a PB 37.07. In the 55, Terrell Doyle ran the 4th fastest time (6.99), and in the 55 hurdles, freshman Nick Fofana also had the 4th fastest time (8.58) in his first meet. If the guys figure out that jewelry thing, they'll be pretty good in the relay, too.
Girls Meet
The girls won every event against Braintree except the shot put, and also had several league-best performances:
Margo Gillis (600)
Carla Forbes (55)
Amy Ren (Long Jump)
4x400 Relay
The Tigers look very, very good in the shorter events and jumps, but could be vulnerable in the distance events and shot.
If I had to guess, I would say that along with proven stars Gills and Forbes, North's strength in big meets will be its relays -- especially the 4x200, 4x400, LJ and HJ. And who knows, sophomores Madi Nadeau (43.60 300) and Meghan Bellerose (1:43.22 600 behind Gillis) look like they might be developing stars in their own rights this year.
Results of boys events
Results of girls events
Boys Meet
The boys won every event in their dual meet except the relay, where Cool Running reports they were DQ'd for an infraction of the jewelry rule. I'll bet that presented a teaching moment or two for the NN coaching staff. That aside, and acknowledging that Braintree was not a strong team, what was impressive was the balance of the NN effort. There was not a single event in which North did not have a strong competitor. NN athletes had the top league performances in these events:
Mile (Ranti)
1000 (Lichtman)
600 (Penn)
2 Mile (Keefe)
High Jump (Hart)
Shot Put (Mayanja)
Long Jump (Hart)
In the 300, Ryan Lucken had the second fastest time of the night in what I think is a PB 37.07. In the 55, Terrell Doyle ran the 4th fastest time (6.99), and in the 55 hurdles, freshman Nick Fofana also had the 4th fastest time (8.58) in his first meet. If the guys figure out that jewelry thing, they'll be pretty good in the relay, too.
Girls Meet
The girls won every event against Braintree except the shot put, and also had several league-best performances:
Margo Gillis (600)
Carla Forbes (55)
Amy Ren (Long Jump)
4x400 Relay
The Tigers look very, very good in the shorter events and jumps, but could be vulnerable in the distance events and shot.
If I had to guess, I would say that along with proven stars Gills and Forbes, North's strength in big meets will be its relays -- especially the 4x200, 4x400, LJ and HJ. And who knows, sophomores Madi Nadeau (43.60 300) and Meghan Bellerose (1:43.22 600 behind Gillis) look like they might be developing stars in their own rights this year.
Results of boys events
Results of girls events
December 15, 2010
Let Them Double
Indoor track is underway, and this week Bay State teams will be trekking to the Reggie Lewis center for their first meets of the new season.
The return of track also marks the return of an ancient argument about whether runners in the Bay State League should be allowed to double in distance events. I've never really understood what's so controversial about allowing high school athletes to run multiple races longer than 300m (400m outdoors). Why does it inspire such heated debate? Those who would preserve this unfair EXCEPTION to the normal participation rules typically make one of the following arguments: coaches would double their best runners too frequently and harm them in some way; or some coaches would double their athletes and others would not (out of principle), thereby creating an unfair advantage for the less principled coach; or doubling is inherently unsafe for athletes of this age. I hope I'm not distorting any of the standard reasons given for the prohibition.
But let's back up, and think about this for a few moments...
Like any other high school sport, Track and Field competition is governed by a set of rules intended to balance a variety of goals, among them:
- Fostering competition
- Encouraging participation
- Ensuring a safe competition environment
- Protecting the health and well-being of athletes
- Respecting the integrity of the sport
Inevitably, situations arise in which these various goals are in conflict. For example, safety concerns have led to much more stringent rules about pole-vaulting. This has probably led to less participation in that event. In this case, the goal of safety trumped the goal of increased participation.
Whether you, personally, agree with the SPECIFIC RULES or not, there is at least a reason for having rules limiting participation in high school track and field competitions. These rules reflect multiple goals, but I think the main ones are respecting the health and well-being of the athlete and fostering team competition by making it harder for a single athlete to dominate a meet. Hence, athletes are limited to a certain number of running events, field events, and relays. Again, whether you agree or disagree with these limits, you should recognize that the rules are there to balance competing interests. Other high school sport also enforce their own limits (for example, number of contests permissible in a week). It's important to acknowledge that the distance double debate is not, fundamentally, about whether ANY participation limits are valid, but whether the particular restriction on distance events is justified.
Speaking of participation, it's worth mentioning that no high school sport mandates MINIMUM or EQUAL participation. In other words, if a high school basketball coach chooses to play only seven of his twelve players in a game, there is no rule violation. If a track and field coach chooses to enter only a single competitor (or no competitor) in the high jump, there is no violation. In other words, there is no guarantee in the rules that every kid gets a chance, admirable as that might be.
So if the debate isn't about participation limits, and if it's not about minimum participation, what is it about?
The distance double debate is, fundamentally, about whether the distance events (600 and up indoors, 800 and up outdoors) require an EXCEPTION to the existing rules, an ADDITIONAL rule that singles out these events for special treatment.
Before answering that, let's consider what IS allowed under the current rules:
The rules allow doubling in two sprinting events, or a sprinting event and a distance event (the 300 and mile, say). The rules allow competing in consecutive events, regardless of how little rest the athlete might have (e.g. the 110 hurdles and 100 outdoors, or the boys 2-mile followed by the 4x400 relay). If I remember them correctly, the BSL rules for outdoor track allow participation in four events that all involve "sprinting" -- the 100, 200, long jump, and triple jump.
The point is, the rules allow all sorts of things that are pretty damn hard and that might be considered not in the best interests of your average high school athlete. However, in order not to become buried in well-meaning prohibitions covering every possible scenario that could create stress, the rules make an assumption that coaches are capable of making participation decisions that balance the interests of the team with the well-being and development of the individual athletes.
And yet... the distance races have been singled out for an exception to the current rules that limits participation beyond what is already in place for other events.
There is only one possible, logical reason for making an exception for the longer events, and that is the argument that there is something inherently different about these events that justifies special treatment and the need to enforce one set of limits for most of the events, and a different set of limits for a few of them. So what is inherently different about distance events?
One thing that is different is that they are the only events in track and field that depend heavily on a well-developed aerobic system. Thus, the distance events are often the refuge of athletes who do not possess superior strength, speed, or leaping ability, but do exhibit persistence in training and a high tolerance for discomfort in competition. Many a high school distance runner never excelled at other sports when younger because almost without exception those other sports require strength, speed, or agility... but not endurance. Compare that to sprinters or jumpers, who are usually stars on other sports teams (football, soccer, basketball...)
Another difference is that distance events have the reputation of being "grueling" in a way that other events are not. Distance runners promote this myth themselves in a bid for greater status. (Think of the XC t-shirt slogans you've seen -- "My sport is your sport's punishment," "If cross country were any easier it would be called FOOTBALL," and so on.) I'll admit that distance runners have an absurdly high tolerance for long, tedious training. But as a miler who used to run on a 4x400 relay, I am willing to state for the record that the mile is cake compared to the final 50m death march at the end of a quarter mile. The two mile? Against most schools the two mile was easier than most of our training runs.
But opponents of distance doubling will still argue that distance doubling is simply not in the best interests of the young distance runner. I do respect that opinion, even if I think it is far too broad a statement to make about all the young distance runners in the world. I would point out, however, that a coach who holds that opinion is never forced to double a distance runner. Opponents of distance doubling argue that if THEY do not double their athletes, they will be at a competitive disadvantage against coaches who DO choose to double their athletes. That might be true. And the same thing is true if I choose not to quadruple my sprinters because I don't think it is in their best interest to compete in so many events. Actually, there are many examples of admirable personal beliefs that put one at a competitive disadvantage. This is another example of how the sport expects coaches to work out the norms for participation based on their knowledge of the individual kids and their experience, rather than have it dictated to them.
(As an aside, I remember when I used to coach an 8th-grade travel basketball team and I insisted -- stubbornly -- on playing every kid on the team about the same amount of time, even though I knew that this might put me at a competitive disadvantage. I never once wanted to change the rules to REQUIRE that other coaches make that decision, I figured there were valid reasons for giving more playing time to the better players, and that requiring equal playing time would WARP the game and lessen its enjoyment for many. So in that case, I felt fine coaching according to my personal beliefs, even if that meant I might at times be at a competitive disadvantage. I'll also admit that I didn't have any stars on my team, so it worked well to have a deep bench. The point is that this kind of trade off happens ALL THE TIME in youth coaching, and the rules can't possibly cover every situation in which such a conflict occurs.)
As a distance runner, I kind of like that other people think that what I do is really hard and give it their respect, but honestly, what I do and what other distance runners do isn't as special as we like to think. I've doubled plenty of times, as have most distance runners, and I haven't seen a shred of evidence that doubling, per se, is dangerous or unhealthy. Distance doubling is common for well-trained runners from the high school level on up. Is it hard? Sometimes. But no harder than other hard things that sprinters, jumpers, and throwers undertake in track and field. As much as I hate to admit it (being a distance runner), there really is no reason to think the distance running has a special mystique. Distance runners train to be able to run distance events, and it's just not that big a deal to run two of them in a single meet. Bad coaches might abuse the privilege, but bad coaches will always do damage and one special rule "protecting" distance runners won't make any difference.
So here's my argument in a nutshell: the CURRENT general participation rules are debatable but consistent. However, a SPECIAL rule that applies only to the distance events is inconsistent and unfair to the individual athletes who have trained to run distance events, to the teams that have exceptional distance runners, and to the nature of the sport.
It's time to remove the restriction.
The return of track also marks the return of an ancient argument about whether runners in the Bay State League should be allowed to double in distance events. I've never really understood what's so controversial about allowing high school athletes to run multiple races longer than 300m (400m outdoors). Why does it inspire such heated debate? Those who would preserve this unfair EXCEPTION to the normal participation rules typically make one of the following arguments: coaches would double their best runners too frequently and harm them in some way; or some coaches would double their athletes and others would not (out of principle), thereby creating an unfair advantage for the less principled coach; or doubling is inherently unsafe for athletes of this age. I hope I'm not distorting any of the standard reasons given for the prohibition.
But let's back up, and think about this for a few moments...
Like any other high school sport, Track and Field competition is governed by a set of rules intended to balance a variety of goals, among them:
- Fostering competition
- Encouraging participation
- Ensuring a safe competition environment
- Protecting the health and well-being of athletes
- Respecting the integrity of the sport
Inevitably, situations arise in which these various goals are in conflict. For example, safety concerns have led to much more stringent rules about pole-vaulting. This has probably led to less participation in that event. In this case, the goal of safety trumped the goal of increased participation.
Whether you, personally, agree with the SPECIFIC RULES or not, there is at least a reason for having rules limiting participation in high school track and field competitions. These rules reflect multiple goals, but I think the main ones are respecting the health and well-being of the athlete and fostering team competition by making it harder for a single athlete to dominate a meet. Hence, athletes are limited to a certain number of running events, field events, and relays. Again, whether you agree or disagree with these limits, you should recognize that the rules are there to balance competing interests. Other high school sport also enforce their own limits (for example, number of contests permissible in a week). It's important to acknowledge that the distance double debate is not, fundamentally, about whether ANY participation limits are valid, but whether the particular restriction on distance events is justified.
Speaking of participation, it's worth mentioning that no high school sport mandates MINIMUM or EQUAL participation. In other words, if a high school basketball coach chooses to play only seven of his twelve players in a game, there is no rule violation. If a track and field coach chooses to enter only a single competitor (or no competitor) in the high jump, there is no violation. In other words, there is no guarantee in the rules that every kid gets a chance, admirable as that might be.
So if the debate isn't about participation limits, and if it's not about minimum participation, what is it about?
The distance double debate is, fundamentally, about whether the distance events (600 and up indoors, 800 and up outdoors) require an EXCEPTION to the existing rules, an ADDITIONAL rule that singles out these events for special treatment.
Before answering that, let's consider what IS allowed under the current rules:
The rules allow doubling in two sprinting events, or a sprinting event and a distance event (the 300 and mile, say). The rules allow competing in consecutive events, regardless of how little rest the athlete might have (e.g. the 110 hurdles and 100 outdoors, or the boys 2-mile followed by the 4x400 relay). If I remember them correctly, the BSL rules for outdoor track allow participation in four events that all involve "sprinting" -- the 100, 200, long jump, and triple jump.
The point is, the rules allow all sorts of things that are pretty damn hard and that might be considered not in the best interests of your average high school athlete. However, in order not to become buried in well-meaning prohibitions covering every possible scenario that could create stress, the rules make an assumption that coaches are capable of making participation decisions that balance the interests of the team with the well-being and development of the individual athletes.
And yet... the distance races have been singled out for an exception to the current rules that limits participation beyond what is already in place for other events.
There is only one possible, logical reason for making an exception for the longer events, and that is the argument that there is something inherently different about these events that justifies special treatment and the need to enforce one set of limits for most of the events, and a different set of limits for a few of them. So what is inherently different about distance events?
One thing that is different is that they are the only events in track and field that depend heavily on a well-developed aerobic system. Thus, the distance events are often the refuge of athletes who do not possess superior strength, speed, or leaping ability, but do exhibit persistence in training and a high tolerance for discomfort in competition. Many a high school distance runner never excelled at other sports when younger because almost without exception those other sports require strength, speed, or agility... but not endurance. Compare that to sprinters or jumpers, who are usually stars on other sports teams (football, soccer, basketball...)
Another difference is that distance events have the reputation of being "grueling" in a way that other events are not. Distance runners promote this myth themselves in a bid for greater status. (Think of the XC t-shirt slogans you've seen -- "My sport is your sport's punishment," "If cross country were any easier it would be called FOOTBALL," and so on.) I'll admit that distance runners have an absurdly high tolerance for long, tedious training. But as a miler who used to run on a 4x400 relay, I am willing to state for the record that the mile is cake compared to the final 50m death march at the end of a quarter mile. The two mile? Against most schools the two mile was easier than most of our training runs.
But opponents of distance doubling will still argue that distance doubling is simply not in the best interests of the young distance runner. I do respect that opinion, even if I think it is far too broad a statement to make about all the young distance runners in the world. I would point out, however, that a coach who holds that opinion is never forced to double a distance runner. Opponents of distance doubling argue that if THEY do not double their athletes, they will be at a competitive disadvantage against coaches who DO choose to double their athletes. That might be true. And the same thing is true if I choose not to quadruple my sprinters because I don't think it is in their best interest to compete in so many events. Actually, there are many examples of admirable personal beliefs that put one at a competitive disadvantage. This is another example of how the sport expects coaches to work out the norms for participation based on their knowledge of the individual kids and their experience, rather than have it dictated to them.
(As an aside, I remember when I used to coach an 8th-grade travel basketball team and I insisted -- stubbornly -- on playing every kid on the team about the same amount of time, even though I knew that this might put me at a competitive disadvantage. I never once wanted to change the rules to REQUIRE that other coaches make that decision, I figured there were valid reasons for giving more playing time to the better players, and that requiring equal playing time would WARP the game and lessen its enjoyment for many. So in that case, I felt fine coaching according to my personal beliefs, even if that meant I might at times be at a competitive disadvantage. I'll also admit that I didn't have any stars on my team, so it worked well to have a deep bench. The point is that this kind of trade off happens ALL THE TIME in youth coaching, and the rules can't possibly cover every situation in which such a conflict occurs.)
As a distance runner, I kind of like that other people think that what I do is really hard and give it their respect, but honestly, what I do and what other distance runners do isn't as special as we like to think. I've doubled plenty of times, as have most distance runners, and I haven't seen a shred of evidence that doubling, per se, is dangerous or unhealthy. Distance doubling is common for well-trained runners from the high school level on up. Is it hard? Sometimes. But no harder than other hard things that sprinters, jumpers, and throwers undertake in track and field. As much as I hate to admit it (being a distance runner), there really is no reason to think the distance running has a special mystique. Distance runners train to be able to run distance events, and it's just not that big a deal to run two of them in a single meet. Bad coaches might abuse the privilege, but bad coaches will always do damage and one special rule "protecting" distance runners won't make any difference.
So here's my argument in a nutshell: the CURRENT general participation rules are debatable but consistent. However, a SPECIAL rule that applies only to the distance events is inconsistent and unfair to the individual athletes who have trained to run distance events, to the teams that have exceptional distance runners, and to the nature of the sport.
It's time to remove the restriction.
December 13, 2010
Dark, Dark, Dark
In Boston, the first two weeks of December claim the dubious distinction of having the earliest sunsets of the year. Consulting the world clock at timeanddate.com, I read that on December 3rd, sunset in Boston occurred at 4:12 p.m... and it has been stuck there ever since.
I realize that not everyone minds that the afternoons are so short. I'm sure that anyone who is a fan of Christmas lights probably loves these long December nights and the many houses tricked out in their colorful displays. I'm sure that skiers, skaters, and hockey players don't mind the short days as long as they bring the cold temperatures and snow. Even those whose sports take them indoors to shoot hoops or run around cramped tracks in arid field houses seem to enjoy the long nights. Basketball games contested in the stifling heat of a raucous gym wouldn't seem right without the frosty evening outside turning your breath into white steam and freezing your damp hair as you emerge from the warmth of the school and walk to your car.
High school kids, especially, have no fear of early sunsets, nor any sense of awe at the soul-sapping enormity of winter. Weekdays are merely for school, and weekends are mostly for sleeping, if they had their way. Nights are everything else; all the fun and interesting stuff happens when the sun goes down...
But I'm not a high school kid and that's not how it feels to me.
To me, it is a daily burden that the day ends at 4:12 p.m. Monday through Friday afternoons I'm usually thinking about an evening run and trying not to think too longingly about dinner and the warmth of my kitchen. On weekend afternoons, I've done my run but I'm already wondering where the rest of the day went and why didn't I get more done?
But I take solace from the fact that today, December 14th, marks the subtle end of the sun's slide into earlier and earlier retirement. Sunset in Boston today will be at 4:12. Sunset in Boston tomorrow will be at 4:13. Even though there is a week to go before the solstice and the shortest day of the year, with an extra minute or so of daylight in the afternoon, we have turned one kind of corner.
It's like reaching the turnaround point on an out-and-back course. You know that the hardest part is still ahead, but now every step is bringing you closer to your goal.
Sometimes I think that perhaps it would be better not to pay so much attention to the calendar. This pining for longer days might be detracting from my ability to enjoy these shorter days to the fullest. And even running at this time of year does have its pleasures. For one, running in the dark creates the illusion of speed -- I feel much faster now running alone on Comm Ave in the early evening. For another, meeting friends in the winter for long Sunday runs is the highlight of my social life. Meeting on Thursday nights at the indoor track is a close second. (Yes, that's what my social life is like...)
Well, it hardly matters what I think about it, the earth's axis will keep swaying back and forth -- now toward the sun, now away from it. But I'll mark today as a special one because the calendar reminds me to endure and be patient. We've made it this far, and in no time, we'll start noticing the sun staying up a little longer as we leave work or school. The coldest days are ahead, but not the darkest ones.
2010 Boston Globe All-Scholastics
This Sunday's Boston Globe includes their special section recognizing All-Scholastic athletes from the Fall 2010 season. I didn't always look forward to these awards, since the selection process seems a little arbitrary to me. Awards that are not determined entirely on the course or on the field of play are always a little suspect, I think.
But at some point I realized that the best way to think about these post-season honors was as an extra bonus, not something to take the place of championships and honors earned in competition, but an addition to them. This has helped me not to grouse about injustices real or imagined.
In that spirit, let me add my congratulations to the Bay Staters who earned All-Scholastic and League All-Star recognition. On the boys side, Weymouth's Steve Sollowin, the two-time Bay State League champ, was named Division I Cross-Country Runner of the Year. Brookline junior Chernet Sisay was also named an All-Scholastic. On the girls' side, congratulations to Weymouth's Jillian Corcoran and Wellesley's Priyanka Fouda who were recognized as All-Scholastics.
Mike Glennon might easily have been named a Boys Coach of the Year, and would have deserved it, as his team won the State D1 championships for the second time in four years. But this is where we have to take a deep breath and not fret. The honor is subjective, and deserving coaches are not always recognized. So it goes. Until they start running races or taking standardized tests to determine the winners, it's not worth worrying about.
Having said that, it's nice to see someone get recognized. Big congratulations, then, to Weymouth's Mike Miller, who was honored as the Girls Div I coach of the year for guiding the Wildcats to their first state championship in a generation. Mike brings tremendous energy to the Weymouth program and he has built the team into a perennial contender. Congratulations, Coach Miller!
As for league all-Stars, here are the Bay-State runners who were recognized as all-stars for the 2010 season:
Boys:
Brookline: Matt Goroff, Mike Katzeff, Mark Perry, Chernet Sisay, Romey Skylar. Framingham: Ben Groleau. Needham: Sean O'Connor, Jeff Okerman. Newton North: Justin Keefe, Ezra Lichtman, Dan Ranti. Walpole: Justin Connolly, Zach Ganshirt, Dave Wians. Wellesley: James Eisenstein, Peter Kreig. Weymouth: Steven Connolly, Nolan Parsley, Stephen Sollowin.
Girls:
Brookline: Leah Gellineau. Framingham: Sarah Bowhill, Maria Grandoni. Milton: Clara Heiden, Mairead Kiernan. Natick: Annie McElaney. Needham: Hannah Alpert. Newton North: Margo Gillis. Norwood: Kelsey Colbert. Walpole: Courtney Shea. Wellesley: Priyanka Fouda, Jessie Kaliski, Eva Lauer, Eve Roth. Weymouth: Molly Barker, Jill Corcoran, Morgan Fitzgibbon, Bridget Jaklitsch, Julie Tevenan.
But at some point I realized that the best way to think about these post-season honors was as an extra bonus, not something to take the place of championships and honors earned in competition, but an addition to them. This has helped me not to grouse about injustices real or imagined.
In that spirit, let me add my congratulations to the Bay Staters who earned All-Scholastic and League All-Star recognition. On the boys side, Weymouth's Steve Sollowin, the two-time Bay State League champ, was named Division I Cross-Country Runner of the Year. Brookline junior Chernet Sisay was also named an All-Scholastic. On the girls' side, congratulations to Weymouth's Jillian Corcoran and Wellesley's Priyanka Fouda who were recognized as All-Scholastics.
Mike Glennon might easily have been named a Boys Coach of the Year, and would have deserved it, as his team won the State D1 championships for the second time in four years. But this is where we have to take a deep breath and not fret. The honor is subjective, and deserving coaches are not always recognized. So it goes. Until they start running races or taking standardized tests to determine the winners, it's not worth worrying about.
Having said that, it's nice to see someone get recognized. Big congratulations, then, to Weymouth's Mike Miller, who was honored as the Girls Div I coach of the year for guiding the Wildcats to their first state championship in a generation. Mike brings tremendous energy to the Weymouth program and he has built the team into a perennial contender. Congratulations, Coach Miller!
As for league all-Stars, here are the Bay-State runners who were recognized as all-stars for the 2010 season:
Boys:
Brookline: Matt Goroff, Mike Katzeff, Mark Perry, Chernet Sisay, Romey Skylar. Framingham: Ben Groleau. Needham: Sean O'Connor, Jeff Okerman. Newton North: Justin Keefe, Ezra Lichtman, Dan Ranti. Walpole: Justin Connolly, Zach Ganshirt, Dave Wians. Wellesley: James Eisenstein, Peter Kreig. Weymouth: Steven Connolly, Nolan Parsley, Stephen Sollowin.
Girls:
Brookline: Leah Gellineau. Framingham: Sarah Bowhill, Maria Grandoni. Milton: Clara Heiden, Mairead Kiernan. Natick: Annie McElaney. Needham: Hannah Alpert. Newton North: Margo Gillis. Norwood: Kelsey Colbert. Walpole: Courtney Shea. Wellesley: Priyanka Fouda, Jessie Kaliski, Eva Lauer, Eve Roth. Weymouth: Molly Barker, Jill Corcoran, Morgan Fitzgibbon, Bridget Jaklitsch, Julie Tevenan.
December 12, 2010
Notes From Footlocker 2010: Verzibicas Repeats, Cuffe Cruises
I didn't watch yesterday's Footlocker National XC Championships "live" and when I did tune in to the replay of the webcast, I already knew that Luka Verzbicas had won his second straight title. Verzbicas, who was an academic sophomore last year, is now a senior, and became only the third boy to defend a Footlocker championship. He also became the first ever to win both the NXN and Footlocker championship races.
Now one of the most accomplished high school runners in U.S. history, a big question is how Verzbicas will balance his interest in Running with his equally passionate interest in racing triathlons. Offhand, I can't think of any other runner who competed in both sports at such a high level at such an early age. I know that Lance Armstrong was an excellent triathlete before he decided to focus on bike racing. I guess that worked out for him.
But back to the Footlocker race, which you can watch again, below:
The announcers tell us that the first 400m split is around 60 seconds, and 800m is reached in 2:17. At this point, it seems as though the pace should settle down, but instead there is a surprising surge from Mass. State Champion John Murray, who gaps the field briefly before the pack coalesces again through a 4:45 first mile.
Up the first hill, and the top guys have separated themselves, with three guys from the MidWest leading the way: Verzbicas, MW runner-up Futsum Zeinasellassie, and a runner I think is eventual bronze-medalist Tony Smoragiewicz, although it sounds like the announcers mis-identify him as Eddie Owens. Anyway, within another 400m it's Verzbicas and Zeinasellassie pulling away, and then it's just Verzbicas, who is flat out stronger than everyone else and runs the last mile alone. If not for a celebratory final 150 meters, Verzbicas might have been in the low 14:50s, but he lopes in at 14:59 while acknowledging the cheers.
I have to say a few words about John Murray's race. After his early turn leading the race, the Shrewsbury senior fell back in the pack and was apparently in 25th or 30th place in the late stages before rallying with a strong finish to take 21st. For several reasons, I think he is a lot better than that.
It's hard to believe that pushing the pace in the opening 1k of the race didn't hurt Murray's chances for a top-fifteen finish. There's a big difference between running a 2:20 800m surrounded by a lot of other runners doing the same thing, and running 2:17 while out in front driving the train. Also, that quick surge at 800 was impressive but must have been costly. But what do I know? Obviously any kid who makes it to Footlocker has earned the right to run the race any way he or she wants to, but I'm a believer in Murray's talent (I've never seen any H.S. runner look easier closing a 2-mile with a 29s 200) and with the right race, I think he might have been top ten.
Full results of the boys race are here.
In the girls' race, is was all Aisling Cuffe. She went to the front early and never looked back, winning by over half a minute in 16:53. Rachel Johnson was best of the rest, finishing second after her win at NXN last weekend.
It was great to see Peabody sophomore Catarina Rocha represent Massachusetts, as she finished 31st in 18:34. Not bad for her first season of high school cross country.
Here's the finish of the girls race:
Full results of the girls race are here.
Now one of the most accomplished high school runners in U.S. history, a big question is how Verzbicas will balance his interest in Running with his equally passionate interest in racing triathlons. Offhand, I can't think of any other runner who competed in both sports at such a high level at such an early age. I know that Lance Armstrong was an excellent triathlete before he decided to focus on bike racing. I guess that worked out for him.
But back to the Footlocker race, which you can watch again, below:
The announcers tell us that the first 400m split is around 60 seconds, and 800m is reached in 2:17. At this point, it seems as though the pace should settle down, but instead there is a surprising surge from Mass. State Champion John Murray, who gaps the field briefly before the pack coalesces again through a 4:45 first mile.
Up the first hill, and the top guys have separated themselves, with three guys from the MidWest leading the way: Verzbicas, MW runner-up Futsum Zeinasellassie, and a runner I think is eventual bronze-medalist Tony Smoragiewicz, although it sounds like the announcers mis-identify him as Eddie Owens. Anyway, within another 400m it's Verzbicas and Zeinasellassie pulling away, and then it's just Verzbicas, who is flat out stronger than everyone else and runs the last mile alone. If not for a celebratory final 150 meters, Verzbicas might have been in the low 14:50s, but he lopes in at 14:59 while acknowledging the cheers.
I have to say a few words about John Murray's race. After his early turn leading the race, the Shrewsbury senior fell back in the pack and was apparently in 25th or 30th place in the late stages before rallying with a strong finish to take 21st. For several reasons, I think he is a lot better than that.
It's hard to believe that pushing the pace in the opening 1k of the race didn't hurt Murray's chances for a top-fifteen finish. There's a big difference between running a 2:20 800m surrounded by a lot of other runners doing the same thing, and running 2:17 while out in front driving the train. Also, that quick surge at 800 was impressive but must have been costly. But what do I know? Obviously any kid who makes it to Footlocker has earned the right to run the race any way he or she wants to, but I'm a believer in Murray's talent (I've never seen any H.S. runner look easier closing a 2-mile with a 29s 200) and with the right race, I think he might have been top ten.
Full results of the boys race are here.
In the girls' race, is was all Aisling Cuffe. She went to the front early and never looked back, winning by over half a minute in 16:53. Rachel Johnson was best of the rest, finishing second after her win at NXN last weekend.
It was great to see Peabody sophomore Catarina Rocha represent Massachusetts, as she finished 31st in 18:34. Not bad for her first season of high school cross country.
Here's the finish of the girls race:
Full results of the girls race are here.
December 06, 2010
A Wild Stubbornness Has Taken Me This Far
I'm planning to end my streak of consecutive days running on January 2, 2011.
I last took a day off last Christmas. Since then, I have run at least three miles every day, 345 days so far. Over the course of the streak, I've tried to train and race the same way I always have. But to keep the streak alive, I've run on days when it definitely would have made more sense to take the day off. For example, I probably didn't need to run the day after the marathon in October, and I probably would have benefited from trading some of those 11 p.m. runs for an extra hour of sleep. Oh well.
I feel like I could remember every one of my runs if I tried, although some stick out more than others:
I remember running ninety minutes in a snow storm with Terry and Tyler, doing loop after loop following a snow plow around the campus of Babson College. It seemed to snow every weekend for a month, and every weekend we faithfully observed the ritual of the long run.
I remember running in a downpour one late afternoon in April, and coming across the deserted turf fields at Concord-Carlisle High School. Already drenched, I was seized by inspiration and took my shoes off and suddenly a dull and joyless obligation became a barefoot frolic. If anyone happened to see me that day, I am sure they thought I was quite insane.
I remember returning from the New England Prep School XC Championships a month ago, trying to decide whether sprinting back and forth around the course all afternoon watching my runners "counted" as a run, concluding that it didn't, and after saying goodnight to the team, slipping away to the Concord track to run three quiet miles in the dark. When I was done, I lay on my back in the middle of the deserted track, and looked up into the starry night for some time before I got cold and decided it was time to go home.
A lot of memories, mostly good. But now I'm about ready to end this thing. I hope I get to do it on my own terms, but there are obstacles remaining. On December 24th, I'll be departing with my family on a trip to Tanzania to visit Joni. Running that day and the next will be tough. Joni tells me that while we're in Arusha, I'll be able to run as long as I don't mind people pointing at me and yelling, but that from December 28th on when we're in the national parks, the only option is to run tiny loops within the perimeter of the campgrounds. In other words, it's strictly forbidden to assert the right to become lion food.
On those days, I'll try to get my three miles done by running in small circles. Joni says it will be like running 35 laps in the old SOA -- if, that is, the SOA had no walls or ceiling, was plagued by malarial mosquitoes, and was in the middle of the Serengeti. In other words, I might not be able to do my runs, but I'm hopeful and I'm stubborn.
If I'm still alive and the streak is intact, I'd also like to run on New Year's Day because I hate the idea of starting a new year with a day off, but on January 2nd, I'm not going to run, even if I feel like it.
Speaking of stubborn, about the only thing I can point to as a "learning experience" from this streak is that running every day has allowed me to cultivate a whole new level of stubbornness of which I'm becoming immodestly proud. It's pretty funny how it manifests itself in trivial things. For example, only a few nights ago I had another day of non-stop obligations that forced me to head out the door at 9 p.m. for one of my freezing late-night three milers. About two miles into my run, one of my shoelaces came untied. Instead of giving in to the shoelace and stopping to re-tie it, I thought to myself "I am NOT stopping to to tie a @#&*ing shoelace on a three-@#&*ing mile run," and I didn't. I ran the rest of the way with the shoelaces flopping and the shoe threatening to become dislodged from my foot. For one mile on the deserted streets of West Newton it was me against a piece of footwear.
I finished my run with the shoe still in place, stubbornness rewarded.
I last took a day off last Christmas. Since then, I have run at least three miles every day, 345 days so far. Over the course of the streak, I've tried to train and race the same way I always have. But to keep the streak alive, I've run on days when it definitely would have made more sense to take the day off. For example, I probably didn't need to run the day after the marathon in October, and I probably would have benefited from trading some of those 11 p.m. runs for an extra hour of sleep. Oh well.
I feel like I could remember every one of my runs if I tried, although some stick out more than others:
I remember running ninety minutes in a snow storm with Terry and Tyler, doing loop after loop following a snow plow around the campus of Babson College. It seemed to snow every weekend for a month, and every weekend we faithfully observed the ritual of the long run.
I remember running in a downpour one late afternoon in April, and coming across the deserted turf fields at Concord-Carlisle High School. Already drenched, I was seized by inspiration and took my shoes off and suddenly a dull and joyless obligation became a barefoot frolic. If anyone happened to see me that day, I am sure they thought I was quite insane.
I remember returning from the New England Prep School XC Championships a month ago, trying to decide whether sprinting back and forth around the course all afternoon watching my runners "counted" as a run, concluding that it didn't, and after saying goodnight to the team, slipping away to the Concord track to run three quiet miles in the dark. When I was done, I lay on my back in the middle of the deserted track, and looked up into the starry night for some time before I got cold and decided it was time to go home.
A lot of memories, mostly good. But now I'm about ready to end this thing. I hope I get to do it on my own terms, but there are obstacles remaining. On December 24th, I'll be departing with my family on a trip to Tanzania to visit Joni. Running that day and the next will be tough. Joni tells me that while we're in Arusha, I'll be able to run as long as I don't mind people pointing at me and yelling, but that from December 28th on when we're in the national parks, the only option is to run tiny loops within the perimeter of the campgrounds. In other words, it's strictly forbidden to assert the right to become lion food.
On those days, I'll try to get my three miles done by running in small circles. Joni says it will be like running 35 laps in the old SOA -- if, that is, the SOA had no walls or ceiling, was plagued by malarial mosquitoes, and was in the middle of the Serengeti. In other words, I might not be able to do my runs, but I'm hopeful and I'm stubborn.
If I'm still alive and the streak is intact, I'd also like to run on New Year's Day because I hate the idea of starting a new year with a day off, but on January 2nd, I'm not going to run, even if I feel like it.
Speaking of stubborn, about the only thing I can point to as a "learning experience" from this streak is that running every day has allowed me to cultivate a whole new level of stubbornness of which I'm becoming immodestly proud. It's pretty funny how it manifests itself in trivial things. For example, only a few nights ago I had another day of non-stop obligations that forced me to head out the door at 9 p.m. for one of my freezing late-night three milers. About two miles into my run, one of my shoelaces came untied. Instead of giving in to the shoelace and stopping to re-tie it, I thought to myself "I am NOT stopping to to tie a @#&*ing shoelace on a three-@#&*ing mile run," and I didn't. I ran the rest of the way with the shoelaces flopping and the shoe threatening to become dislodged from my foot. For one mile on the deserted streets of West Newton it was me against a piece of footwear.
I finished my run with the shoe still in place, stubbornness rewarded.
December 05, 2010
Five in a Row for Fayetteville-Manlius
I've been to Fayetteville and driven through Manlius, and believe me, there's nothing about those towns that would lead you to mistake them for the Rift Valley. So how can it be that an ordinary town in Central New York produces the very best high school cross-country teams in the country year after year?
In case you missed yesterday's Nike Cross Country Nationals, the F-M girls won their fifth straight national title with a record low score of 27 points, while the F-M boys finished second. (You can watch a replay of the webcast here).
If you're curious about the F-M team and its philosophy, I highly recommend listening to an in-depth interview that Letsrun.com did in April with Bill Aris, the team's coach. You can read the transcript of the interview, but listening is better.
Letsrun Track Talk with Bill Aris - April 10, 2010
If, however, you're wondering about "the secret," you're going to be disappointed. As hard as it is to believe, the evidence suggests that with F-M you have to begin with the philosophy and if you can accept that, then admit that the training probably isn't the reason the team is so successful.
Here's a representative quote from Aris from the beginning of the Letsrun interview:
"We start with the athlete's mind and their heart. And people think, 'Well, he's sandbagging again, he doesn't want to talk about workouts.' [but] that's not true... We try to find out what makes a kid tick. We talk to them, we spend time with them, we ask them - this is in advance of any serious running - and find out what motivates them and what they aspire to do and achieve, even if [...] they're not runners yet. OK. And our emphasis is on getting them to see what we may perceive as their potential. And when they see it and they invest of themselves or, as they say, buy into it, then the rest of it's easy. You know, everybody talks about the training, and yeah, certainly training [is] essential. I mean, you can't just run fast on waking up in the morning and having a good attitude. But the fact is, you've got to believe in what you're doing. You've got to believe and trust your coaches. You've got to believe in the aim and the purpose of your program philosophy, and that's really what it's all about."
I don't know how the following anecdote relates to F-M's overall philosophy, but there was a moment at the end of yesterday's race that struck me powerfully and made me reach for a piece of paper to write down what I had just heard.
It is at about 20 minutes into the girls race, and half the runners have crossed the finish line. Most are absolutely spent and some have collapsed on the gold wet grass. It is already clear that F-M has won in a rout. Their top three runners have finished 2nd, 4th, and 6th overall (1st, 2nd, and 4th in team scoring). Their fourth and fifth runners have finished in the top thirty. It is an absolutely dominating performance, and these five girls, who have just given everything to this cold, wet, windy, muddy five kilometers, are beginning to celebrate.
That's when we hear the voice of Bill Aris, cutting through all the cheering and excitement in the finishing chute. He sounds a little angry as he tells his girls "You've got two more coming. We're not a FIVE-man team. Let's go!" And five-sevenths of the best HS team in the country walk back towards the finish line to wait for and cheer in their sixth and seventh runners.
December 04, 2010
Must Watch XC: Nike Cross Nationals Today
If last year was any indication, this year's streaming of the 2010 Nike Cross Nationals meet will provide the best live coverage of a cross country meet you've ever seen. I recommend getting your run in early, clearing out your schedule, and sitting down at your computer to watch the boys and girls races, beginning at 1 p.m. EST. and available from the following link
Live coverage of NXN on Runnerspace
In 2009, NXN restored my faith that cross country was a viable spectator sport for TV or Internet viewing. Two weeks before NXN, the Versus network had butchered the 2009 NCAA Div I XC championships with incompetent coverage and inane post-race commentary, so I wasn't expecting much. Instead, the NXN webcast was superb, serving up vital background information on the teams and individuals and riveting commentary and live team score updates as the race developed.
(NXN Shows How To Cover a XC Meet - 12/6/09)
Several teams have represented Massachusetts at the national meet over the last few years, including Brookline (boys), Lincoln-Sudbury (girls), Newton South (girls) and Bishop Feehen (girls). This year, Mass is represented by Pembroke H.S., who earned their berth in the national championships by finishing second in the Northeast Regional, and by Weymouth's Steve Sollowin, who qualified as an individual.
November 27, 2010
Footlocker, NXN Northeast Regionals Today
It's a big day for Massachusetts cross-country individuals and teams with national aspirations as they'll toe the line(s) today at one of two big end-of-season regional meets: the Footlocker Northeast Regionals (Sunken Meadow State Park) and the Nike XC Nationals, aka, NXN (Bowdoin Park, Wappingers Falls NY).
Before NXN, Footlocker used to attract all the best runners in the region, pitting them in competition for one of the top spots and a ticket to the Footlocker finals in San Diego. Now many of the better runners skip Footlocker and instead compete at the NXN regional meet with their teams.
But whatever happens in the future, for now Footlocker is still a high quality race that brings together runners from 12 Northeast States. Significantly, because it is not subject to State association rules (technically, runners do not represent their schools), it is one of the only meets where public school, private school, and home-schooled runners compete together.
At Footlocker Northeast last year, Shrewsbury's John Murray surprised a lot of people by finishing 10th and earning a trip to the finals. Murray is no longer an unknown and will return to the Footlocker meet fresh off his state championship and record-setting run at Gardner last Saturday. Other familiar names on the boys side include Old Rochester's Dana Dourdeville (2nd in the MA DII State meet), Deerfield Academy's Sam Belcher (NEPSTA DI champion), Mansfield's Shayne Collins (12th at MA D1), and many others.
On the girls' side, Nashoba's Abby Hurd (3rd at MA D1), Wellesley's Priyanka Fouda (8th at MA D1), and many other Mass. natives will be competing.
The Elite Racing Systems website has a complete list of entries and will (eventually) have results.
As for the NXN Northeast Regionals, it is an exciting year for Massachusetts with several teams representing the Bay State, including these girls teams...
Bishop Feehen (aka "Rocks TC"), 15th at NXN last year
Hamilton-Wenham (aka "H-W XC Club")
Lincoln-Sudbury (aka "Mercury TC")
Weymouth (aka "Weymouth Youth TC")
...and these boys teams...
Brookline (aka "Brookline TC")
Hamilton-Wenham (aka "H-W XC Club")
Lowell (aka "Lowell XC Club")
Pembroke (aka "Titans TC")
Walpole (aka "Walpole TC")
Weymouth (aka "Weymouth Youth TC")
Sorry if I missed anyone! I should note there are also several MA runners competing without a full team, such as Newton's Kathy O'Keefe. The full list of competitors can be found on the NXN Regional web site.
Good luck to all!
November 26, 2010
NNHS Alumni Results - 11/26/10
Thanksgiving isn't all about Football and Feasting... in New England at least, it's also about joining friends and neighbors, little kids and college students home for break, grandparents and recent grads... for that happy tradition, running in the local Turkey Trot.
Every year I scan results from dozens of races to see all the familiar names, including Newton North alumni, runners from my running club (CSU), and folks who are fixtures on the Boston running scene. After the excitement of fall marathons and the intensity of cross-country championship meets, it's just a fun day of racing for the entire running family.
Turning first to the Boston Volvo 5K Road Race, it looks like Team Chebot had a good day, with Dan Chebot taking third place overall (16:11), followed by Scott Cole (14th, 17:58), and Jesse Chebot (44th, 20:00). Scott and Jesse are cyclists these days, not pedestrians, but everyone runs on Thanksgiving!
(I should also note that Dan might have had a little fatigue in his legs from competing in the USATF Pacific Association XC championships last Sunday, where he finished 57th overall with a time of 33:43 for 10K.)
Over in Watertown, NN assistant coach Shawn Wallace finished second overall at the Donohue's 5K Turkey Trot, running 16:52.
My CSU teammate (and NSRP regular) Terry McNatt usually has a talent for finding the race with the deepest, most competitive field -- seemingly determined to deprive him of his Thanksgiving portion of glory -- but yesterday he helped himself to first place at the AMPT Earn Your Turkey 5K race in Wakefield, winning by a full minute with a time of 16:34.
In Somerville, another friend of NSRP (and CSU and Concord Academy and Tufts XC), Tyler Andrews ran into a buzzsaw of competition but emerged with a fourth-place finish (first in his age group) at the 14th annual Gobble, Gobble, Gobble 4M race in Somerville. Tyler blitzed the course in 20:39 (5:10 pace!) and was well ahead of several luminaries, such as BU's Eric Ashe, who finished 10th. In the same race, NNHS alumnus John Blouin finished 27th in 22:56.
...
If you didn't run a Thanksgiving race and are feeling left out, here's a reminder that Brookline H.S. is hosting their 2nd Annual Warrior 5K XC Run at Larz Anderson Park on Sunday at 9:30 a.m. on the same course that the team uses for high school meets. You can re-experience all those thrilling Brookline-NN meets on the very same hills run by the McArdle brothers, Barnicle, Gibson, Polgar, Burnstein, and the rest.
Every year I scan results from dozens of races to see all the familiar names, including Newton North alumni, runners from my running club (CSU), and folks who are fixtures on the Boston running scene. After the excitement of fall marathons and the intensity of cross-country championship meets, it's just a fun day of racing for the entire running family.
Turning first to the Boston Volvo 5K Road Race, it looks like Team Chebot had a good day, with Dan Chebot taking third place overall (16:11), followed by Scott Cole (14th, 17:58), and Jesse Chebot (44th, 20:00). Scott and Jesse are cyclists these days, not pedestrians, but everyone runs on Thanksgiving!
(I should also note that Dan might have had a little fatigue in his legs from competing in the USATF Pacific Association XC championships last Sunday, where he finished 57th overall with a time of 33:43 for 10K.)
Over in Watertown, NN assistant coach Shawn Wallace finished second overall at the Donohue's 5K Turkey Trot, running 16:52.
My CSU teammate (and NSRP regular) Terry McNatt usually has a talent for finding the race with the deepest, most competitive field -- seemingly determined to deprive him of his Thanksgiving portion of glory -- but yesterday he helped himself to first place at the AMPT Earn Your Turkey 5K race in Wakefield, winning by a full minute with a time of 16:34.
In Somerville, another friend of NSRP (and CSU and Concord Academy and Tufts XC), Tyler Andrews ran into a buzzsaw of competition but emerged with a fourth-place finish (first in his age group) at the 14th annual Gobble, Gobble, Gobble 4M race in Somerville. Tyler blitzed the course in 20:39 (5:10 pace!) and was well ahead of several luminaries, such as BU's Eric Ashe, who finished 10th. In the same race, NNHS alumnus John Blouin finished 27th in 22:56.
...
If you didn't run a Thanksgiving race and are feeling left out, here's a reminder that Brookline H.S. is hosting their 2nd Annual Warrior 5K XC Run at Larz Anderson Park on Sunday at 9:30 a.m. on the same course that the team uses for high school meets. You can re-experience all those thrilling Brookline-NN meets on the very same hills run by the McArdle brothers, Barnicle, Gibson, Polgar, Burnstein, and the rest.
November 21, 2010
Weymouth, Brookline Are State Champions
Hearty congratulations to the Weymouth girls (and coach Mike Miller) and the Brookline boys (and coach Mike Glennon) on their championship performances in the State Meet at Gardner yesterday!
Weymouth, which earned the school's first-ever state cross-country championship, had to fend off a strong challenge from "home team" Wachusett Regional, which had dominated the Central Mass meet on this same course a week ago, and Bay State rival Wellesley, which had won the EMass Div 3 race at Franklin Park and was competing at the State Div 1 level for the first time.
It seemed that the new alignment (and expanded field from the six EMass divisions) helped create a terrifically well-balanced race at the front. The top fifteen runners in the girls Div 1 race were from 15 different schools. In the end, Weymouth had the most depth, and was the only school to place five runners in the top forty. As it so often turns out, their fifth runner was the difference, as Bridget Jaklitsch crossed the line well ahead of any other team's final scorer.
Taking individual honors, Lincoln-Sudbury's Andrea Keklak repeated as state D1 champion, running 16:37 to best Peabody sophomore Catarina Rocha by five seconds. This was Keklak's second time running at Garder. As a freshman in 2007, she finished 7th and led her team to the championship. Let us take a moment to appreciate how good Keklak has been over the past four years. In that time she has won three EMass D1 titles and two individual state championships, also finishing second as a sophomore.
(An interesting side note: one of Keklak's teammates from her sophomore season -- then senior Jennifer Gossels who now runs for Williams College --won the individual title was second at the NCAA Div III championships yesterday.)
Speaking of appreciating runners, in her final XC race for Newton North, Margo Gillis finished 15th overall in a time of 17:33.
MIAA Girls D1 State Cross Country Results
And now to Brookline.
The last time time the state meet was held at Gardner, Brookline dominated, placing four runners in the top ten and scoring a mere 25 points. On that day, the Warriors' top FIVE scored fewer points than any other team's top THREE, and fewer points than 13 of the 15 other teams' top TWO, which is about as dominant as any team has been at the state level.
This year's D1 race was a lot more competitive. Brookline had finished second to Lowell at EMass, and was also facing defending champ Mansfield and Central Mass champ St. John's of Shrewsbury. In the Emass race, Brookline had not run Evan Sternstein, but it was Sternstein who stepped up big to finish 5th for the Warriors -- a step behind teammate Mark Perry -- and seal the victory.
Shrewsbury's John Murray won the individual honors, running 14:06, which happens to be about three seconds faster than Chris Barnicle ran when he won in 2004. Chris, it will be remembered, went on to win the Footlocker Northeast Regional and finish 6th at Footlockers. I'm just saying. Murray was 12 second ahead of Weymouth's Steve Sollowin, who finishes his Mass. XC career with an EMass D1 win and a state runner-up finish.
Newton North's Dan Ranti, who qualified as an individual, finished 50th overall in a fine time of 15:14.
MIAA Boys D1 State Cross Country Results
In Boys D2, Pembroke Brookline-ized the competition, finishing 1-3-5-11-15 and beating runner-up Hamilton-Wenham 35-114. Pembroke junior Wesley Gallagher won a sprint finish over Old Rochester's Dana Dourdeville, 14:20.5 to 14:20.8
In Girls D2, Bishop Feehen was clearly the best team on the course, going 1-4-14-17-25 to defeating Hamilton-Wenham 61 to 85. Feehen's Viviana Hanley was the individual champion and had the fastest time of the day, running 16:28.
Weymouth, which earned the school's first-ever state cross-country championship, had to fend off a strong challenge from "home team" Wachusett Regional, which had dominated the Central Mass meet on this same course a week ago, and Bay State rival Wellesley, which had won the EMass Div 3 race at Franklin Park and was competing at the State Div 1 level for the first time.
It seemed that the new alignment (and expanded field from the six EMass divisions) helped create a terrifically well-balanced race at the front. The top fifteen runners in the girls Div 1 race were from 15 different schools. In the end, Weymouth had the most depth, and was the only school to place five runners in the top forty. As it so often turns out, their fifth runner was the difference, as Bridget Jaklitsch crossed the line well ahead of any other team's final scorer.
Taking individual honors, Lincoln-Sudbury's Andrea Keklak repeated as state D1 champion, running 16:37 to best Peabody sophomore Catarina Rocha by five seconds. This was Keklak's second time running at Garder. As a freshman in 2007, she finished 7th and led her team to the championship. Let us take a moment to appreciate how good Keklak has been over the past four years. In that time she has won three EMass D1 titles and two individual state championships, also finishing second as a sophomore.
(An interesting side note: one of Keklak's teammates from her sophomore season -- then senior Jennifer Gossels who now runs for Williams College --
Speaking of appreciating runners, in her final XC race for Newton North, Margo Gillis finished 15th overall in a time of 17:33.
MIAA Girls D1 State Cross Country Results
And now to Brookline.
The last time time the state meet was held at Gardner, Brookline dominated, placing four runners in the top ten and scoring a mere 25 points. On that day, the Warriors' top FIVE scored fewer points than any other team's top THREE, and fewer points than 13 of the 15 other teams' top TWO, which is about as dominant as any team has been at the state level.
This year's D1 race was a lot more competitive. Brookline had finished second to Lowell at EMass, and was also facing defending champ Mansfield and Central Mass champ St. John's of Shrewsbury. In the Emass race, Brookline had not run Evan Sternstein, but it was Sternstein who stepped up big to finish 5th for the Warriors -- a step behind teammate Mark Perry -- and seal the victory.
Shrewsbury's John Murray won the individual honors, running 14:06, which happens to be about three seconds faster than Chris Barnicle ran when he won in 2004. Chris, it will be remembered, went on to win the Footlocker Northeast Regional and finish 6th at Footlockers. I'm just saying. Murray was 12 second ahead of Weymouth's Steve Sollowin, who finishes his Mass. XC career with an EMass D1 win and a state runner-up finish.
Newton North's Dan Ranti, who qualified as an individual, finished 50th overall in a fine time of 15:14.
MIAA Boys D1 State Cross Country Results
In Boys D2, Pembroke Brookline-ized the competition, finishing 1-3-5-11-15 and beating runner-up Hamilton-Wenham 35-114. Pembroke junior Wesley Gallagher won a sprint finish over Old Rochester's Dana Dourdeville, 14:20.5 to 14:20.8
In Girls D2, Bishop Feehen was clearly the best team on the course, going 1-4-14-17-25 to defeating Hamilton-Wenham 61 to 85. Feehen's Viviana Hanley was the individual champion and had the fastest time of the day, running 16:28.
November 15, 2010
CA on the Podium
I stood alone at the back of the Governor's Academy gym, where rows and rows of folding seats had been set up for the awards ceremony following the New England Prep School Div III Championships. All of the boys and girls from Concord Academy were sitting in their assigned section, close to the podium. Some of the boys had changed into jackets and ties, something I had never seen them do before. The reason for their unusual choice of attire was the possibility -- only a possibility, since no results had been released from the race run several hours before -- that CA had been one of the top three teams, an outcome that would mean a trip to the podium, a plaque, and a chance to bear back news to the school that the team had earned its highest-ever finish at a New England championship race.
It had been a really good season -- a historically good season for the Chameleons. Unfortunately, although we had peaked well and run our best times at the league championship meet the previous week, we had been beaten by a better team from Beaver Country Day School. I fretted that the kids themselves wouldn't realize what they had accomplished, so I was glad we had one more chance to do something special.
It was maddening to have to wait for results, without even quick scoring to give us a clue about how we had finished. I had seen enough to know that Groton, with four in the top ten, had won the team title, and I was fairly sure that St. Mark's had finished second, well ahead of us, but it seemed to me that several teams, including CA, had a bunch of runners finishing between 15th and 40th. It had been impossible to count how many from each team. And it didn't help that the team I was most worried about how uniforms the same color as the team that had dominated.
As the meet director began reading the names of teams in reverse finishing order, one part of me was busy preparing myself for the bad news that we had missed out by some agonizingly slim margin. I knew if that happen I would spend the next year thinking about whether I had prepared each runner to race for every available place. But another part of me knew that the kids had run well. They had run really well, and smart, too.
The course at Governor's Academy is mostly flat for the first 1.5 miles, with several short, steep "speed bumps" that wreck a runner's momentum and sap energy from the legs. After another short hill to 3K, the course crosses a covered bridge and begins a long, twisting climb through woods South of the campus. After the climb, the course descends through the woods for a bit, passing the 4K mark, then run back down a service road back to the covered bridge. The final 700 meters crosses the center of campus, rolls down to the fields, and ends with about 350 meters around the fields and to the finish.
I believed my team was one of the top three teams in the race, but I kept saying there was no reason to prove it in the first 1K. Having had the recent experience of going out hard at Franklin Park, they decided they didn't want to make the same mistake on a tougher course. For my part, I said that whether they went out fast or went out slow, they had to have complete confidence to see their strategy through. If they went out slow, they would need to believe that they could move up through the field and not be discouraged at an early deficit. If they went out fast, they couldn't use that as an excuse to give up when the hills came.
Fifteen seconds after the gun went off, it was obvious which strategy they had chosen. They were all near the back of the field as they ran across the first long field, and as I watched, I hoped they knew what they were doing.
At 1K, they were still a little buried in the pack, but not too bad, and I could see that they were taking the opportunities given to them by the course to pass a runner here or there. I saw them next at 1.4M. Arthur, my top runner, was in 19th, and the next four were in a large pack with runners in places 30-40. What I didn't know then, but was able to figure out later from some video shot by one of our runners who was not competing, was that we were in 6th at this point, and if the race had ended there, we would have had about 165 points.
In the final 2K, they had fought hard to gain back places. Most spectacularly, Arthur moved from 19th to 5th with 300m to go, and came within a couple of seconds of running down the 4th-place finisher. Our next finisher moved up from 34th to 18th. The others had all finished in the top 35. Would that be enough?
As the meet director announced the 6th-place team, my heart began pounding. When he announced the 5th place team with 160 points, I think I stopped breathing. He seemed to be speaking in slow motion now, as he said, "...and finishing fourth, with 149 points..." and then the name of another school.
And then we were next. He called for the captains of the third-place school, and our guys went up in their rarely-seen but suddenly appropriate blazers and ties to accept their plaque, and really, from the cheers of the other CA runners in their seats, you couldn't tell the difference between us and the winning team.
After the ceremony, when I finally got my hands on the results, I saw that it hadn't even been close. We had scored 107 points. We had been down 20 points at the halfway mark and had beaten the fourth place team by 40. On a difficult course, almost every runner on the team had been at or near a season's best. I was very proud.
So now it's time to wrap up the season. Arthur and Adam (our fifth) will be back next year, but the others are seniors and have run their last high school cross-country race. It's always hard to realize that it's done, and that there are no "next weeks" to set that PR or beat that rival team.
But one thing that makes the NEPSTA meet better than the MIAA championship meets is that there are JV races, and those races always give us glimpses into the future. In the JV race yesterday, one of CA's runners put on spikes for the first time and ran a minute faster than he had ever run before. I had mentioned to him in the days leading up to the race that the top 15 finishers in the JV race were called up and awarded ribbons. I figured he had an outside chance to sneak into the top 15, so why not? His response to the challenge was to run 19:11 and finish 6th, an astonishing time for a runner who completed his first race this fall in just over 24 minutes.
The desire to stand on the podium has that effect on people.
It had been a really good season -- a historically good season for the Chameleons. Unfortunately, although we had peaked well and run our best times at the league championship meet the previous week, we had been beaten by a better team from Beaver Country Day School. I fretted that the kids themselves wouldn't realize what they had accomplished, so I was glad we had one more chance to do something special.
It was maddening to have to wait for results, without even quick scoring to give us a clue about how we had finished. I had seen enough to know that Groton, with four in the top ten, had won the team title, and I was fairly sure that St. Mark's had finished second, well ahead of us, but it seemed to me that several teams, including CA, had a bunch of runners finishing between 15th and 40th. It had been impossible to count how many from each team. And it didn't help that the team I was most worried about how uniforms the same color as the team that had dominated.
As the meet director began reading the names of teams in reverse finishing order, one part of me was busy preparing myself for the bad news that we had missed out by some agonizingly slim margin. I knew if that happen I would spend the next year thinking about whether I had prepared each runner to race for every available place. But another part of me knew that the kids had run well. They had run really well, and smart, too.
The course at Governor's Academy is mostly flat for the first 1.5 miles, with several short, steep "speed bumps" that wreck a runner's momentum and sap energy from the legs. After another short hill to 3K, the course crosses a covered bridge and begins a long, twisting climb through woods South of the campus. After the climb, the course descends through the woods for a bit, passing the 4K mark, then run back down a service road back to the covered bridge. The final 700 meters crosses the center of campus, rolls down to the fields, and ends with about 350 meters around the fields and to the finish.
I believed my team was one of the top three teams in the race, but I kept saying there was no reason to prove it in the first 1K. Having had the recent experience of going out hard at Franklin Park, they decided they didn't want to make the same mistake on a tougher course. For my part, I said that whether they went out fast or went out slow, they had to have complete confidence to see their strategy through. If they went out slow, they would need to believe that they could move up through the field and not be discouraged at an early deficit. If they went out fast, they couldn't use that as an excuse to give up when the hills came.
Fifteen seconds after the gun went off, it was obvious which strategy they had chosen. They were all near the back of the field as they ran across the first long field, and as I watched, I hoped they knew what they were doing.
At 1K, they were still a little buried in the pack, but not too bad, and I could see that they were taking the opportunities given to them by the course to pass a runner here or there. I saw them next at 1.4M. Arthur, my top runner, was in 19th, and the next four were in a large pack with runners in places 30-40. What I didn't know then, but was able to figure out later from some video shot by one of our runners who was not competing, was that we were in 6th at this point, and if the race had ended there, we would have had about 165 points.
In the final 2K, they had fought hard to gain back places. Most spectacularly, Arthur moved from 19th to 5th with 300m to go, and came within a couple of seconds of running down the 4th-place finisher. Our next finisher moved up from 34th to 18th. The others had all finished in the top 35. Would that be enough?
As the meet director announced the 6th-place team, my heart began pounding. When he announced the 5th place team with 160 points, I think I stopped breathing. He seemed to be speaking in slow motion now, as he said, "...and finishing fourth, with 149 points..." and then the name of another school.
And then we were next. He called for the captains of the third-place school, and our guys went up in their rarely-seen but suddenly appropriate blazers and ties to accept their plaque, and really, from the cheers of the other CA runners in their seats, you couldn't tell the difference between us and the winning team.
After the ceremony, when I finally got my hands on the results, I saw that it hadn't even been close. We had scored 107 points. We had been down 20 points at the halfway mark and had beaten the fourth place team by 40. On a difficult course, almost every runner on the team had been at or near a season's best. I was very proud.
So now it's time to wrap up the season. Arthur and Adam (our fifth) will be back next year, but the others are seniors and have run their last high school cross-country race. It's always hard to realize that it's done, and that there are no "next weeks" to set that PR or beat that rival team.
But one thing that makes the NEPSTA meet better than the MIAA championship meets is that there are JV races, and those races always give us glimpses into the future. In the JV race yesterday, one of CA's runners put on spikes for the first time and ran a minute faster than he had ever run before. I had mentioned to him in the days leading up to the race that the top 15 finishers in the JV race were called up and awarded ribbons. I figured he had an outside chance to sneak into the top 15, so why not? His response to the challenge was to run 19:11 and finish 6th, an astonishing time for a runner who completed his first race this fall in just over 24 minutes.
The desire to stand on the podium has that effect on people.
November 14, 2010
NNHS EMass Results - 11/13/10
It can be hard this time of year because sometimes you don't know that you've run your last race until the results are posted and the points have been tallied and you see whether you're moving on or not.
It wasn't realistic to think that either Newton North XC team was going to make it to the State Meet this year, even with the slightly more generous six-division alignment of the EMass championships. Yet, I'm pretty sure North hoped to have one or two more individuals qualify.
On the girls side, Margo Gillis placed 7th in the D1 race and will compete as an individual at States. The NN team ran well to finish 10th out of 18 D1 teams in a blessedly smaller race (last year under the old alignment the D1 girls race had 189 runners, compared with 129 this year). Here are the results:
7 MARGO GILLIS 19:36
39 DEVIKA BANERJEE 21:18
53 JULIA SCHIANTARELLI 21:53
56 REBECCA TRAYNER 22:05
71 MEGHAN BELLEROSE 22:40
77 JULIA SCHLOSSMAN 22:53
84 MELISSA WEIKART 23:17
(http://www.coolrunning.com/results/10/ma/Nov13_MIAAEa_set7.shtml)
For the boys, it appears to have been a tough race for the team's "big three" of Dan Ranti, Ezra Lichtman, and Justin Keefe, who ran so well at the State Coaches meet last week. I'm guessing there was a reason (A fall? An injury?), although sometimes it's just the way the race develops and whether you're having a good day. Here are the results:
19 DAN RANTI 16:50
31 EZRA LICHTMAN 17:04
62 JUSTIN KEEFE 17:36
87 JON LONG 18:07
100 STEVEN MICHAEL 18:25
113 DAVID BUZBY 18:33
131 DAVID DEMAREST 18:51
http://www.coolrunning.com/results/10/ma/Nov13_MIAAEa_set1.shtml
Overall, it was a good day for Bay State teams. For the girls, Weymouth won D1 (a first in the program's history, I believe), Wellesley won D3, and Needham qualified for the State meet out of D2 with their 4th-place finish. For the boys, Brookline was 2nd in D1 and Walpole was 3rd in D3 to move on to the State meet in Gardner next week.
Also deserving special mention, Weymouth's Steve Sollowin won the D1 race with the fastest time of the day in any division, running 15:47.
It wasn't realistic to think that either Newton North XC team was going to make it to the State Meet this year, even with the slightly more generous six-division alignment of the EMass championships. Yet, I'm pretty sure North hoped to have one or two more individuals qualify.
On the girls side, Margo Gillis placed 7th in the D1 race and will compete as an individual at States. The NN team ran well to finish 10th out of 18 D1 teams in a blessedly smaller race (last year under the old alignment the D1 girls race had 189 runners, compared with 129 this year). Here are the results:
7 MARGO GILLIS 19:36
39 DEVIKA BANERJEE 21:18
53 JULIA SCHIANTARELLI 21:53
56 REBECCA TRAYNER 22:05
71 MEGHAN BELLEROSE 22:40
77 JULIA SCHLOSSMAN 22:53
84 MELISSA WEIKART 23:17
(http://www.coolrunning.com/results/10/ma/Nov13_MIAAEa_set7.shtml)
For the boys, it appears to have been a tough race for the team's "big three" of Dan Ranti, Ezra Lichtman, and Justin Keefe, who ran so well at the State Coaches meet last week. I'm guessing there was a reason (A fall? An injury?), although sometimes it's just the way the race develops and whether you're having a good day. Here are the results:
19 DAN RANTI 16:50
31 EZRA LICHTMAN 17:04
62 JUSTIN KEEFE 17:36
87 JON LONG 18:07
100 STEVEN MICHAEL 18:25
113 DAVID BUZBY 18:33
131 DAVID DEMAREST 18:51
http://www.coolrunning.com/results/10/ma/Nov13_MIAAEa_set1.shtml
Overall, it was a good day for Bay State teams. For the girls, Weymouth won D1 (a first in the program's history, I believe), Wellesley won D3, and Needham qualified for the State meet out of D2 with their 4th-place finish. For the boys, Brookline was 2nd in D1 and Walpole was 3rd in D3 to move on to the State meet in Gardner next week.
Also deserving special mention, Weymouth's Steve Sollowin won the D1 race with the fastest time of the day in any division, running 15:47.
November 09, 2010
"Planned Disaster" at the NYC Marathon
Most runners in a major marathon begin their races well-rested and bubbling with enthusiasm and hope. Hours later, that overflowing energy has been drained and runners finish transformed, often not in a good way. Some merely cross the finish line very tired. But others, predictably though unfortunately, encounter trouble along the way -- maladies from blisters to bruises, heat stroke to hypothermia to heart attacks.
An immense amount of planning and logistics are required to prepare to treat the runners who end up needing medical attention. For the several hours following a race like the New York City Marathon, the effort resembles the mobilization of medical resources after a natural disaster.
In fact, in many ways, marathons turn out to be apt testing grounds for responding to disasters. In some sense, a marathon is a "planned disaster" -- that's one of the observations in an interesting article in today's New York Times (Doctor Prepared for the Worst at Marathon).
The article describes how the NYC Marathon expanded its medical services for the 2010 race under the new philosophy of Dr. Stuart Weiss, the race's second-year medical director. The article quotes Dr. Weiss to the effect that it's a unique situation to be working in an emergency room and have all your patients running to you.
For anyone who has gratefully accepted treatment at a race, or only wondered about what preparation is needed to stage such an event, it's a fascinating article.
An immense amount of planning and logistics are required to prepare to treat the runners who end up needing medical attention. For the several hours following a race like the New York City Marathon, the effort resembles the mobilization of medical resources after a natural disaster.
In fact, in many ways, marathons turn out to be apt testing grounds for responding to disasters. In some sense, a marathon is a "planned disaster" -- that's one of the observations in an interesting article in today's New York Times (Doctor Prepared for the Worst at Marathon).
The article describes how the NYC Marathon expanded its medical services for the 2010 race under the new philosophy of Dr. Stuart Weiss, the race's second-year medical director. The article quotes Dr. Weiss to the effect that it's a unique situation to be working in an emergency room and have all your patients running to you.
For anyone who has gratefully accepted treatment at a race, or only wondered about what preparation is needed to stage such an event, it's a fascinating article.
November 08, 2010
NNHS Results From State Coaches Meet
On Saturday, Newton North competed at the State Coaches meet in Wrentham. For all but the top seven varsity runners, this is the last meet of the season. The varsity goes on, of course, to compete at the EMass Championships at Franklin Park, November 13.
Below are the Newton North results, culled from the complete results available on the MSTCA web site.
A very impressive performance from Ranti, Lichtman, and Keefe in the Boys Jr-Sr race. Also good to see the depth at the freshman level for the boys.
Below are the Newton North results, culled from the complete results available on the MSTCA web site.
A very impressive performance from Ranti, Lichtman, and Keefe in the Boys Jr-Sr race. Also good to see the depth at the freshman level for the boys.
Girls 3k Run CC Freshman Div I
14 2391 Rudie, Elizabeth FR Newton North 12:48.20
85 2380 Horn, Anastasia FR Newton North 15:05.23
Girls 5k Run CC Soph. Div I
20 2393 Schiantarelli, Jul SO Newton North 21:16.10
29 2373 Bellerose, Meghan SO Newton North 21:44.60
59 2386 Moore, Charlotte SO Newton North 23:06.47
130 2389 Raymond, Christine SO Newton North 26:12.98
154 2384 Loftus, Caroline SO Newton North 27:51.58
160 2399 Sylvia, Sarah SO Newton North 29:06.54
169 2378 Handler, Daneille SO Newton North 31:46.33
Girls 5k Run CC Jr. - Sr. Div I
35 2400 Trayner, Rebecca JR Newton North 21:15.03
84 2402 Weikert, Melissa JR Newton North 22:38.64
96 2382 Kugener, Tiphaine JR Newton North 22:56.66
115 2375 Cooke, Laura JR Newton North 23:28.73
117 2377 Hamilton, Jenny JR Newton North 23:30.74
118 2396 Sokolov, Rosie JR Newton North 23:31.71
136 2388 Phillips, Allie JR Newton North 23:52.60
Boys 3k Run CC Freshman Div I
25 2435 Schlichting, Mike FR Newton North 10:59.68
57 2405 Brandl, Max FR Newton North 11:23.27
61 2416 Fabry, Alex FR Newton North 11:29.40
75 2406 Buttereton, Adrian FR Newton North 11:42.16
91 2420 Freedman, Jared FR Newton North 11:48.35
122 2421 Galgano, Ben FR Newton North 12:06.55
127 2422 Goffstein, Adam FR Newton North 12:10.19
158 2413 DeGroot, Henry FR Newton North 12:28.35
208 2425 Huang, Sam SO Newton North 13:12.91
220 2412 D'Urso, Joseph FR Newton North 13:32.14
Boys 5k Run CC Soph. Div I
28 2428 Long, Jon SO Newton North 17:53.25
38 2414 Demerest, David SO Newton North 18:03.77
105 2404 Bishop, Thomas SO Newton North 19:25.78
174 2436 Smith, Gmalek SO Newton North 20:45.10
Boys 5k Run CC Jr. - Sr. Div I
3 2433 Ranti, Dan SR Newton North 16:17.47
4 2427 Lichtman, Ezra SR Newton North 16:17.87
5 2426 Keefe, Justin JR Newton North 16:19.31
104 2407 Buzby, David JR Newton North 18:10.15
109 2431 Michael, Steven JR Newton North 18:12.38
187 2417 Feinhaus, Isaac JR Newton North 19:06.21
234 2438 Tripathi, Jesse JR Newton North 19:41.20
240 2424 Harris, Evan JR Newton North 19:44.40
259 2430 McSally, Bernard SR Newton North 19:56.79
307 2434 Schamm, Sam JR Newton North 20:37.72
November 06, 2010
Tanya Jones (NNHS '92) to be Inducted into NNHS Hall of Fame
Tanya Jones, Newton North's all-time top scoring athlete in state track and field competition, will join eleven other alumni as inductees into the Newton North Hall of Fame Class of 2010. The Hall of Fame dinner will be held Friday, November 26, 2010, from 6:00 p.m. at the Sheraton Needham Hotel -- 100 Cabot Street, Needham, Mass (more info here).
Most of the information below was provided by pre-eminent NNHS track historian Josh Seeherman.
A 1992 graduate of Newton North, Tanya Jones won an amazing ELEVEN individual Class A/Division I championships in four events: the 300 (indoor), 400 (outdoor), high jump, and long jump. In addition, she won at least four All-State championships (results from the 1989 All-State meet have been hard to find).
In the 1992 indoor season, Jones became the first and only NNHS girl to win a triple crown (running, field, relay) at the Division 1 level, when she won the 300y dash and high jump, and was part of the winning 4x440 relay. Her win in the 300y was her fourth Division I title in four years in the same event, making her the only Newton athlete to ever accomplish that feat.
While she was on the team, Newton North won the Outdoor Division 1 team title in 1989, 1991, and 1992, and the Indoor Division I and All-State titles in 1992.
Jones' 300 and 400 times (300 converted from yards to meters) have not been
seriously challenged by any other NN athlete. Her fastest 400 time in Mass. competition appears to have been 56.90, although she might have run faster at a New England or National level meet. Her winning time from the 1992 indoor 300y was her best result, a staggering 35.98, which converts to approximately 39.5 for 300m.
Finally, at the Division 1 level Jones scored 127 points, a number so high that
it is 40 points in front of the next highest-scoring girl (Senta Burton) and over 50 points in front of the boys' record (Gordon Thomas' 75.5).
After graduating from Newton North, Ms. Jones attended Brown University, where she was a five-time Ivy League champion in the 400m with a PR of 55.19.
Her academic career has been even more impressive than her athletic achievements. While at Brown, she was a two-time Academic All-Ivy award winner. After earning her B.A., she went on to obtain a masters degree in International Health and Development from Princeton in 2001 and a PhD in Sociology from the University of California at Berkeley in 2010. She was a Ford Pre-Doctoral Fellow from 2006-2009, focusing on Development and Modernization, Medical Anthopology, and Social Theory.
Jones is currently a Foundation Relations Associate at Pathfinder International, where she focuses on the scaling-up of health programs in Africa, particularly related to HIV/AIDS care and treatment.
Tanya Jones H.S. record in Div I and All-State Meets:
Division 1 Championships
1989: Indoors, 300y, Outdoors 200m & Long Jump
1990: Indoors, 300y, Outdoors 400m
1991: Indoors, 300y, Outdoors 400m & Long Jump
1992: Indoors, 300y & High Jump, Outdoors just Long Jump (injured ?)
All-State Championships
1989: Could not locate results
1990: Outdoor 400m
1991: Indoor 300y, Outdoor 400m
1992: Indoor 300y
Most of the information below was provided by pre-eminent NNHS track historian Josh Seeherman.
A 1992 graduate of Newton North, Tanya Jones won an amazing ELEVEN individual Class A/Division I championships in four events: the 300 (indoor), 400 (outdoor), high jump, and long jump. In addition, she won at least four All-State championships (results from the 1989 All-State meet have been hard to find).
In the 1992 indoor season, Jones became the first and only NNHS girl to win a triple crown (running, field, relay) at the Division 1 level, when she won the 300y dash and high jump, and was part of the winning 4x440 relay. Her win in the 300y was her fourth Division I title in four years in the same event, making her the only Newton athlete to ever accomplish that feat.
While she was on the team, Newton North won the Outdoor Division 1 team title in 1989, 1991, and 1992, and the Indoor Division I and All-State titles in 1992.
Jones' 300 and 400 times (300 converted from yards to meters) have not been
seriously challenged by any other NN athlete. Her fastest 400 time in Mass. competition appears to have been 56.90, although she might have run faster at a New England or National level meet. Her winning time from the 1992 indoor 300y was her best result, a staggering 35.98, which converts to approximately 39.5 for 300m.
Finally, at the Division 1 level Jones scored 127 points, a number so high that
it is 40 points in front of the next highest-scoring girl (Senta Burton) and over 50 points in front of the boys' record (Gordon Thomas' 75.5).
After graduating from Newton North, Ms. Jones attended Brown University, where she was a five-time Ivy League champion in the 400m with a PR of 55.19.
Her academic career has been even more impressive than her athletic achievements. While at Brown, she was a two-time Academic All-Ivy award winner. After earning her B.A., she went on to obtain a masters degree in International Health and Development from Princeton in 2001 and a PhD in Sociology from the University of California at Berkeley in 2010. She was a Ford Pre-Doctoral Fellow from 2006-2009, focusing on Development and Modernization, Medical Anthopology, and Social Theory.
Jones is currently a Foundation Relations Associate at Pathfinder International, where she focuses on the scaling-up of health programs in Africa, particularly related to HIV/AIDS care and treatment.
Tanya Jones H.S. record in Div I and All-State Meets:
Division 1 Championships
1989: Indoors, 300y, Outdoors 200m & Long Jump
1990: Indoors, 300y, Outdoors 400m
1991: Indoors, 300y, Outdoors 400m & Long Jump
1992: Indoors, 300y & High Jump, Outdoors just Long Jump (injured ?)
All-State Championships
1989: Could not locate results
1990: Outdoor 400m
1991: Indoor 300y, Outdoor 400m
1992: Indoor 300y
November 04, 2010
Salazar/Ritz Profile in New Yorker
Jennifer Kahn has written a well-informed and provocative profile of Alberto Salazar and Dathan Ritzenheim in the latest issue of the New Yorker, as Ritz prepares for the New York Marathon, Sunday (The Perfect Stride).
The article does a great job of capturing the obsessive lengths to which Salazar will go, to which he has always gone, to maximize performance. It describes his spectacular career but brief career as a marathoner, and his transition to working for the Oregon Project and coaching some of the best American distance runners in the country. The main focus of the article is Salazar's attempt to re-engineer Ritzenheim's stride to make him a more efficient, less injury-prone runner -- and a champion on the world stage.
One of the things that sets Salazar apart is that he is willing to take gigantic risks to maximize the success of his athletes. It's frightening when he makes mistakes, as he does. But it's exhilarating when he succeeds. Who wasn't thrilled to see Alan Webb return to something like his racing form this summer and early fall under Salazar's patient guidance?
But as the article points out, it's hugely risky to tinker with an athlete's stride. Few coaches would have the confidence and single-minded focus to commit to the project.
Because he is willing to take such risks, Salazar will always be in the spotlight, always be evaluated based on the performance of the latest top-level athlete in his care. When Ritz gets underway in the NYC Marathon on Sunday, it might well be his coach feeling all the pressure.
The article does a great job of capturing the obsessive lengths to which Salazar will go, to which he has always gone, to maximize performance. It describes his spectacular career but brief career as a marathoner, and his transition to working for the Oregon Project and coaching some of the best American distance runners in the country. The main focus of the article is Salazar's attempt to re-engineer Ritzenheim's stride to make him a more efficient, less injury-prone runner -- and a champion on the world stage.
One of the things that sets Salazar apart is that he is willing to take gigantic risks to maximize the success of his athletes. It's frightening when he makes mistakes, as he does. But it's exhilarating when he succeeds. Who wasn't thrilled to see Alan Webb return to something like his racing form this summer and early fall under Salazar's patient guidance?
But as the article points out, it's hugely risky to tinker with an athlete's stride. Few coaches would have the confidence and single-minded focus to commit to the project.
Because he is willing to take such risks, Salazar will always be in the spotlight, always be evaluated based on the performance of the latest top-level athlete in his care. When Ritz gets underway in the NYC Marathon on Sunday, it might well be his coach feeling all the pressure.
November 01, 2010
NNHS and NSRP Alumni Results - 10/31/10
Tom Davis ran an impressive race to finish 2nd in the Cape Cod Marathon on Sunday, running 2:31:05 (5:45 pace). I'm fairly certain Tom, himself, would say it wasn't a particularly fast time, but the CCM course is brutal on a windy day. After the first ten miles, which are quite flat and sheltered, the course becomes much more hilly and exposed to the wind off the water. Very few people run under 2:30 there. So congratulations to Tom on a great effort.
Several old friends of NSRP competed at the UAA Championships in Van Cortland Park on Saturday. Mike Burnstein (Washington U., Brookline) and Paul Norton (Brandeis, Amherst H.S.) had great performances. Burnstein won the 8K race in 25:40, leading Wash U. to the team title; Norton was a few steps behind in 3rd in 25:42. Other local runners included: Yuji Wakimoto (35th, 26:41), Sam Donovan (72nd (28:19), and Billy Littlefield (74th (28:52).
The NESCAC championships were held at Hamilton College on Saturday, and Tyler Andrews reports that there was mud, mud, mud, and hills on the 8K men's course. NSRP'er Andrews finished a very respectable 26th in 27:03, as Tufts placed 3rd in the team race. Other veterans of Cold Springs Park included two Newton south alumni, Andrew Wortham (33rd in 27:10) and Will Cha (107th, 29:25). Needham's Sam Miller finished 85th (28:26), but he's never been to NSRP, so I'm not even sure why I'm mentioning him...
And while I'm not mentioning people, congratulations to Needham H.S. XC Coach Chris Van Cott, who won the Bill's 5K road race in Newton on Sunday, running 16:49.
Several old friends of NSRP competed at the UAA Championships in Van Cortland Park on Saturday. Mike Burnstein (Washington U., Brookline) and Paul Norton (Brandeis, Amherst H.S.) had great performances. Burnstein won the 8K race in 25:40, leading Wash U. to the team title; Norton was a few steps behind in 3rd in 25:42. Other local runners included: Yuji Wakimoto (35th, 26:41), Sam Donovan (72nd (28:19), and Billy Littlefield (74th (28:52).
The NESCAC championships were held at Hamilton College on Saturday, and Tyler Andrews reports that there was mud, mud, mud, and hills on the 8K men's course. NSRP'er Andrews finished a very respectable 26th in 27:03, as Tufts placed 3rd in the team race. Other veterans of Cold Springs Park included two Newton south alumni, Andrew Wortham (33rd in 27:10) and Will Cha (107th, 29:25). Needham's Sam Miller finished 85th (28:26), but he's never been to NSRP, so I'm not even sure why I'm mentioning him...
And while I'm not mentioning people, congratulations to Needham H.S. XC Coach Chris Van Cott, who won the Bill's 5K road race in Newton on Sunday, running 16:49.
October 31, 2010
BSC Meet Results
October 30 was the big day for high school and college conference championships all across the land. No exception to that rule, The BSC held its league meet at Norwood again this year, and both Newton North teams ran very well.
In the boys varsity race, Weymouth's Steve Sollowin (16:05) defended his title with a dominating win over Wellesley's Peter Krieg (16:26) and the rest of the field. Newton North junior Justin Keefe had a total break-out race, finishing third in the deep field in a personal best time of 16:30. It should be noted that Keefe finished ahead of five Brookline runners who had beat him only four days earlier at Larz Anderson (beating everyone on Brookline's varsity except Chernet Sisay, who did not run).
Seniors Ezra Lichtman (16:47) and Dan Ranti (16:62) also had all-star caliber races, finishing 9th and 11th, respectively.
Brookline won the team title convincingly, even without Sisay, as they placed five runners in the top twenty to score 50 points, well ahead of second-place Weymouth. After those two teams, the next three teams were separated by only three points, showing the new parity of the league. Walpole and Newton North both scored 101 points, with the Rebels taking 3rd on the strength of the finish of their sixth man, Dave Connors. I believe it was the highest place for the Walpole boys since the glory days of the mid-90s.
Results of BSC boys varsity race
In the girls varsity race, Margo Gillis also defended her title, but had her hands full with Wellesley's Priyanka Fouda, outkicking her by a mere 2.5 seconds for the victory. Overall, times were much faster this year than in 2009, where Gillis won by half a minute and was the only girl under 20:00. This year eight girls broke 20:00, and twenty broke 21:00 compared with nine last year.
The girls team race looked like it was all Wellesley, as the Raiders took 2-3-5-9, but the Carey champion Weymouth team placed all five of their scorers in the top 13, with Julie Tevenan and Molly Barker slipping in before Milton's Clara Heiden for the last two spots. Those places would be decisive, as Wellesley's fifth runner placed only 25th, and Weymouth won by a single point, 33 to 34.
In their best meet of the season, the Newton North girls earned an upset third-place finish over three teams that had beaten them earlier in the season. After Gillis, North's second finisher was Devika Banerjee in 26th. North's next four runners -- Emma Walter, Julia Schlossman, Julia Schiantarelli, and Meghan Bellerose -- blanketed the finish in 33rd-38th with a 13-second spread.
Results of BSC girls varsity race
In the boys varsity race, Weymouth's Steve Sollowin (16:05) defended his title with a dominating win over Wellesley's Peter Krieg (16:26) and the rest of the field. Newton North junior Justin Keefe had a total break-out race, finishing third in the deep field in a personal best time of 16:30. It should be noted that Keefe finished ahead of five Brookline runners who had beat him only four days earlier at Larz Anderson (beating everyone on Brookline's varsity except Chernet Sisay, who did not run).
Seniors Ezra Lichtman (16:47) and Dan Ranti (16:62) also had all-star caliber races, finishing 9th and 11th, respectively.
Brookline won the team title convincingly, even without Sisay, as they placed five runners in the top twenty to score 50 points, well ahead of second-place Weymouth. After those two teams, the next three teams were separated by only three points, showing the new parity of the league. Walpole and Newton North both scored 101 points, with the Rebels taking 3rd on the strength of the finish of their sixth man, Dave Connors. I believe it was the highest place for the Walpole boys since the glory days of the mid-90s.
Results of BSC boys varsity race
In the girls varsity race, Margo Gillis also defended her title, but had her hands full with Wellesley's Priyanka Fouda, outkicking her by a mere 2.5 seconds for the victory. Overall, times were much faster this year than in 2009, where Gillis won by half a minute and was the only girl under 20:00. This year eight girls broke 20:00, and twenty broke 21:00 compared with nine last year.
The girls team race looked like it was all Wellesley, as the Raiders took 2-3-5-9, but the Carey champion Weymouth team placed all five of their scorers in the top 13, with Julie Tevenan and Molly Barker slipping in before Milton's Clara Heiden for the last two spots. Those places would be decisive, as Wellesley's fifth runner placed only 25th, and Weymouth won by a single point, 33 to 34.
In their best meet of the season, the Newton North girls earned an upset third-place finish over three teams that had beaten them earlier in the season. After Gillis, North's second finisher was Devika Banerjee in 26th. North's next four runners -- Emma Walter, Julia Schlossman, Julia Schiantarelli, and Meghan Bellerose -- blanketed the finish in 33rd-38th with a 13-second spread.
Results of BSC girls varsity race
October 27, 2010
NNHS Loses to Brookline in Dual Meet Finale
Newton North wrapped up its dual meet season on Tuesday with a trip to the hills of Larz Anderson Park.
In the boys race, the Tigers were no match for the host Warriors. Brookline's Chernet Sisay, Mark Perry, and Romey Sklar took the top three places, clinching the win before NN's first runner crossed the line. Dan Ranti and Ezra Lichtman had strong races to finish fourth and fifth, but Brookine took 10 of the next 12 places. Final score: 19-40 for the home team.
The boys finish the season with only two losses to Weymouth and Brookline. The team now looks forward to the BSC Championship meet at Norwood on Saturday, followed by the coaches meet, and the state class meet.
Boys results (compiled from athletic.net)
In the girls race, the Tigers couldn't leverage another dominating performance by Margo Gillis, and ended up losing a close meet to the Warriors 26-31.
Gillis (18:39) finished nearly a minute in front of Brookline freshman Charlotte Cole (19:37). Devika Banerjee took second, and Rebecca Trayner sixth for the Tigers. Brookline had four of the next five finishers, though, showing superior depth.
Girls results (compiled from athletic.net)
In the boys race, the Tigers were no match for the host Warriors. Brookline's Chernet Sisay, Mark Perry, and Romey Sklar took the top three places, clinching the win before NN's first runner crossed the line. Dan Ranti and Ezra Lichtman had strong races to finish fourth and fifth, but Brookine took 10 of the next 12 places. Final score: 19-40 for the home team.
The boys finish the season with only two losses to Weymouth and Brookline. The team now looks forward to the BSC Championship meet at Norwood on Saturday, followed by the coaches meet, and the state class meet.
Boys results (compiled from athletic.net)
1 Chernet Sisay 15:25 Broo 11
2 Mark Perry 15:26 Broo 11
3 Romey Sklar 15:33 Broo 12
4 Dan Ranti 15:46 NNHS 12
5 Ezra Lichtman 15:49 NNHS 12
6 Matt Goroff 15:55 Broo 11
7 Evan Sternstein 16:01 Broo 11
8 Michael Katzeff 16:04 Broo 12
9 Justin Keefe 16:15 NNHS 11
10 Jon Long 16:39 NNHS 10
11 Aaron Klein 16:41 Broo 10
12 Andrew Triedman 16:49 Broo 12
13 William Jackson 16:53 Broo 12
14 Zane McInturf 16:57 Broo 12
15 Danny Waldroop 17:01 Broo 11
16 Max Shore 17:17 Broo 11
17 Grigoriy Gressel17:18 Broo 11
18 Steven Michael 17:34 NNHS 11
19 David Demerest 17:39 NNHS 10
20 Hikari Mamata 17:43 Broo 11
21 Sam Lauffer 17:46 Broo 12
22 Teddy Cullinane 18:07 Broo 11
23 Mike Schlichting18:37 NNHS 9
24 Ben Duvall 18:44 NNHS 11
25 Bernard McSally 19:12 NNHS 11
In the girls race, the Tigers couldn't leverage another dominating performance by Margo Gillis, and ended up losing a close meet to the Warriors 26-31.
Gillis (18:39) finished nearly a minute in front of Brookline freshman Charlotte Cole (19:37). Devika Banerjee took second, and Rebecca Trayner sixth for the Tigers. Brookline had four of the next five finishers, though, showing superior depth.
Girls results (compiled from athletic.net)
1 Margo Gillis 18:39 NNHS 12
2 Charlotte Cole 19:37 Broo 9
3 Devika Banerjee 19:58 NNHS 12
4 Jessica Lu 20:13 Broo 10
5 Lilly Gadhe 20:22 Broo 11
6 Rebecca Trayner 20:24 NNHS 11
7 Hannah Warren 20:26 Broo 12
8 Hannah Breck 20:43 Broo 11
9 J.Schiantarelli 21:02 NNHS 10
10 Anya Filina 21:08 Broo 12
11 Sabrina Lee 21:08 Broo 10
12 J. Schlossman 21:26 NNHS 10
13 Anna Russo 21:47 Broo 10
14 Emily Brown 22:00 Broo 11
15 Hannah Gottlieb 22:16 Broo 11
16 Allie Phillips 22:19 NNHS 11
17 Amanda Frankel 22:32 Broo 11
18 Meghan Bellerose22:39 NNHS 10
19 Melissa Weikart 22:51 NNHS 11
20 Katy Ames 23:14 Broo 12
21 Rose LaPlante 24:29 Broo 12
22 Michaela Corn 26:09 Broo 12
23 Iris Naimark 26:18 Broo 12
24 Kimberly Yu 29:46 Broo 12
25 Asuya Rozental 29:47 Broo 12
26 Hanna Pinsky 29:48 Broo 12
October 24, 2010
Checking in With the Chameleons
As a general rule, on Monday afternoons I don't like surprises.
As we head into each new week of cross country, I find myself hoping that last week's hard workouts have left no lingering soreness or impairment, and that the young minds and bodies in my care have been refreshed and recharged. I'm hoping that the faces I see will be ready and eager to plunge into another week of training and racing.
So I wasn't overjoyed when one my top runners showed up last Monday at practice in street clothes. Street clothes = trouble.
"You're going to be mad at me," he announced.
"I am?" I replied in a non-committal way, as I quickly ran through a mental checklist of the disasters that might befall a highly-trained H.S. distance runner: academic problems, illness (strep throat, flu, mono!), injury, new car, new job to pay for new car, use of drugs/alcohol, college stress, sleep deprivation, spiritual crisis, romance going badly, romance going too well...
He interrupted my train of thought. "I was playing hockey yesterday..." he said, and I nodded. I could see where this was going; no doubt, hockey is exactly the sport I want my runners playing on their day off. I sighed, and waited to see how bad this was going to be. Not so bad as the spiritual crisis, I thought...
---
In fact, the hockey injury turned out to be something of a blessing in disguise. Yes, it kept one of my top guys from running last week, and sure, we could have used him in our meet Wednesday (we were racing against last year's league champions). But having one of our leaders on the sidelines cheering had a curiously potent affect on the rest of the team.
Knowing that every place counted and that they were undermanned, the rest of the Chameleons approached the mid-week meet with uncommon resolve. There was an edge to the pre-race preparations and a sense of purpose. Although slightly behind in the early going, as the race wore on, our top two edged ahead of their top guy, pulling away by 20 seconds in the final mile. Our nominal fourth best runner had the race of his life and caught their top guy in the final 100 meters. In all, six of our top seven runners set personal bests. In almost every man-to-man battle, we came out ahead, and what was an even race with a mile to go turned into a lopsided 20-35 victory. It wasn't that the other team ran poorly; their coach was very happy with the number of his runners who also set lifetime bests. Everything just seemed to come together for us.
Three days later, at our annual competition against Pingree School, we had another good day, taking the top six places against a decent team, and recording another spate of personal bests, especially from the middle of our pack.
---
That hockey injury notwithstanding, it's been a fun season so far. This is my fourth year at Concord Academy, and this year's team is special in many ways. For one thing, the runners on my team seem to really LIKE to run. I confess, this surprises me, as I am used to having to be a cheerleader for running, selling its benefits to a skeptical audience that has other priorities. But this year feels different.
For example, there is this new enthusiasm for the long run. It started with a small group, as it usually does, and has spread through the 34-person team. When I asked them to write down their seasonal goals, many of my mid-packers listed running continuously for 10 miles (or 15 miles, or... ) rather than racing a particular time.
It remains to be seen how this will all translate to the championship season. We face tough competition in our league meet, and go into it as an underdog. We will have a tough challenge to try to reach the podium at the New England level.
But this year's team has already recorded the fastest five-man average time in CA history (at least so far as I can determine; some other CA team might have run faster in the dawn of time). And equally exciting, the success at the top has seemed to inspire success in the middle. For example, on Saturday, half a dozen runners ran faster than 7:00 pace over 5K for the first time in their lives. One of my freshmen cut 77 seconds off his best time, skipping the 21's entirely to run 20:54.
In retrospect, I think a turning point came in a team meeting four weeks ago. It was a chance to talk about individual goals and team goals, and how the two could be reconciled. There were a lot of things said about how we wanted to win the league championship, etc. But one kid, a sophomore who at that time had a best time of 23:26, spoke up and said, "I know that I'm not going to be in the top seven this year, but I also know that if I train hard this season and keep running after the season and next summer, I can be in the top seven next year." I'm probably not doing him justice, because he said it in direct words and very much from the heart. On Saturday, he ran 20:24, a new personal best by 53 seconds.
---
As we head into the final three weeks of the season, there are no guarantees. Like every other team out there, we're trying to find the balance of training and recovery, we're trying to stay healthy, and we're trying not to get too distracted by things we can't control, like how fast other teams are running.
But we're in a good place right now. I'd like to think we've developed some resilience, too, so that if we experience a little hardship -- as I'm sure we will -- we'll see it as a challenge that can motivate us to accomplish more.
Good luck to all teams as we approach November and championship season!
As we head into each new week of cross country, I find myself hoping that last week's hard workouts have left no lingering soreness or impairment, and that the young minds and bodies in my care have been refreshed and recharged. I'm hoping that the faces I see will be ready and eager to plunge into another week of training and racing.
So I wasn't overjoyed when one my top runners showed up last Monday at practice in street clothes. Street clothes = trouble.
"You're going to be mad at me," he announced.
"I am?" I replied in a non-committal way, as I quickly ran through a mental checklist of the disasters that might befall a highly-trained H.S. distance runner: academic problems, illness (strep throat, flu, mono!), injury, new car, new job to pay for new car, use of drugs/alcohol, college stress, sleep deprivation, spiritual crisis, romance going badly, romance going too well...
He interrupted my train of thought. "I was playing hockey yesterday..." he said, and I nodded. I could see where this was going; no doubt, hockey is exactly the sport I want my runners playing on their day off. I sighed, and waited to see how bad this was going to be. Not so bad as the spiritual crisis, I thought...
---
In fact, the hockey injury turned out to be something of a blessing in disguise. Yes, it kept one of my top guys from running last week, and sure, we could have used him in our meet Wednesday (we were racing against last year's league champions). But having one of our leaders on the sidelines cheering had a curiously potent affect on the rest of the team.
Knowing that every place counted and that they were undermanned, the rest of the Chameleons approached the mid-week meet with uncommon resolve. There was an edge to the pre-race preparations and a sense of purpose. Although slightly behind in the early going, as the race wore on, our top two edged ahead of their top guy, pulling away by 20 seconds in the final mile. Our nominal fourth best runner had the race of his life and caught their top guy in the final 100 meters. In all, six of our top seven runners set personal bests. In almost every man-to-man battle, we came out ahead, and what was an even race with a mile to go turned into a lopsided 20-35 victory. It wasn't that the other team ran poorly; their coach was very happy with the number of his runners who also set lifetime bests. Everything just seemed to come together for us.
Three days later, at our annual competition against Pingree School, we had another good day, taking the top six places against a decent team, and recording another spate of personal bests, especially from the middle of our pack.
---
That hockey injury notwithstanding, it's been a fun season so far. This is my fourth year at Concord Academy, and this year's team is special in many ways. For one thing, the runners on my team seem to really LIKE to run. I confess, this surprises me, as I am used to having to be a cheerleader for running, selling its benefits to a skeptical audience that has other priorities. But this year feels different.
For example, there is this new enthusiasm for the long run. It started with a small group, as it usually does, and has spread through the 34-person team. When I asked them to write down their seasonal goals, many of my mid-packers listed running continuously for 10 miles (or 15 miles, or... ) rather than racing a particular time.
It remains to be seen how this will all translate to the championship season. We face tough competition in our league meet, and go into it as an underdog. We will have a tough challenge to try to reach the podium at the New England level.
But this year's team has already recorded the fastest five-man average time in CA history (at least so far as I can determine; some other CA team might have run faster in the dawn of time). And equally exciting, the success at the top has seemed to inspire success in the middle. For example, on Saturday, half a dozen runners ran faster than 7:00 pace over 5K for the first time in their lives. One of my freshmen cut 77 seconds off his best time, skipping the 21's entirely to run 20:54.
In retrospect, I think a turning point came in a team meeting four weeks ago. It was a chance to talk about individual goals and team goals, and how the two could be reconciled. There were a lot of things said about how we wanted to win the league championship, etc. But one kid, a sophomore who at that time had a best time of 23:26, spoke up and said, "I know that I'm not going to be in the top seven this year, but I also know that if I train hard this season and keep running after the season and next summer, I can be in the top seven next year." I'm probably not doing him justice, because he said it in direct words and very much from the heart. On Saturday, he ran 20:24, a new personal best by 53 seconds.
---
As we head into the final three weeks of the season, there are no guarantees. Like every other team out there, we're trying to find the balance of training and recovery, we're trying to stay healthy, and we're trying not to get too distracted by things we can't control, like how fast other teams are running.
But we're in a good place right now. I'd like to think we've developed some resilience, too, so that if we experience a little hardship -- as I'm sure we will -- we'll see it as a challenge that can motivate us to accomplish more.
Good luck to all teams as we approach November and championship season!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
