Jump to content


Photo

Crawfish Crawl


  • Please log in to reply
161 replies to this topic

#16 Daniel

Daniel

    Reptile Runner

  • Red Lizards
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 775 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Woodstock

Posted 16 August 2005 - 08:47 AM

I don't know why it is so hard to believe that people ran as fast as they did. It always has to be some factor based off of weather, topography, short, long and etc.

Personally I am not a straight line runner that is when I run well I do it in chunks and I believe many individuals are the same way. Comparing two races of different distances, significant time in between and togography doens't seem to be a good predictor to current racing ability. If the races were on a track then you can compare and there would be no arguments.

There were a few factors that were not considered in this highly scientific approach.

Number One: The field was overall fast and it was a low key event. You know my best time for the 5k was ran at Stanford well over 20 seconds faster than anything I had run before and since. That was mainly because of the field and the time held go figure Friday evening around 7 P.M.

Number Two: The weather was absolutely perfect for running a fast 5k not too cold and not too hot.

Number Three: Human emotion(atmosphere overall highly positive) and the fact people might actually be peaking from all of their workouts completed to this point throughout the summer.

Number Four: Why would the course have a dileberate turnaround point if it wasn't accurate.

Number Five: In general flat courses are faster but this course to state it bluntly was fast!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Personally I know I could run a 5k at or below the time I ran on the track given a few stipulations, a field to run with and it not being too hot. Unfortunately I don't see how this would fit into my training schedule.

Other things I noticed that were different from races I have ran so far this year was the fact I was able to keep the turnover going. Also right when I was tiring there was a convenient long gradual downhill that aided to the finish. I know if it were flat or uphill my time would have been over 16:00 easily.

Also nobody discounts the distance of Pints to Pasta but they all acknowledge it is fast because of the downhill.

My recommendation is to measure the course for yourself and to not discount people's accomplishments. Sure you can say it is fast for this reason or that reason but I wouldn't be going around saying the distance is short. You are attacking the integrity of the individuals who held the event when you do that and they don't have that type of a reputation.

The Danimal has spoken.

Danimal angry.gif angry.gif

#17 Rick Lovett

Rick Lovett

    Coach

  • Red Lizards
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5890 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland
  • Interests:Science fiction, hiking, geophysics, cross-country skiing, toxicology, bicycle touring (especially carrying all my gear with me).

Posted 16 August 2005 - 10:01 AM

I was going to say some of what Danimal has said. I know that Paula's folks are fanatical about course distance measurement. That said, they didn't certify this one (which was probably why Keston didn't do it, chasing his 5K world record) but my own instincts say it was accurate.

Three factors to support Danimal:

1. It's an evening race. They're faster. Alberto set a world record in one of those, and he firmly believes it. He's not the only one to believe it, as well. You're better warmed up.

2. Can't compare to RHW. Some folks did great times at RHW, but others found it a slow course. It was sure as heck hotter, whatever the air temp said, out there in the sun at RHW than in the shade at Crawfish.

3. There was serious competition. Forget the times, look at how tightly people were bunched in the pack behind Chuck. I was stationed at mile 3 and they all came through in about 10 seconds.

4. Yes, hills theoretically slow you down. But there's not a lot of hill on that course--way less per mile than on RHW. Run it right, and at max it's 10 seconds slwer than a pancake. And rolling a bit can change the muscles you use and juice you up emotionally. Combine that with a tough field and you can get very fast times. As many of you probalby know, world records were set at the old Cascade Runoff, and that's the Shamrock Course. Mega-hills. The same field on the flat probalby would have been faster (or with easier roller) but getting all those folks together for a big prize was always better.

I think that was 4. And yeah, my masters PR is on that course from 2002, so I might be a bit biased. But I think it's an honest course.

Rick

#18 Big Red

Big Red

    Salamander

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 33 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 August 2005 - 10:14 AM

Banana Man doesn't take himself too seriously. He's all about even pacing.

Banana Man thinks the course was 100% accurate.

Crawfish went out fast...but was eaten up by the Jamba Juice--Banana Man after the first mile :-)

Great job everyone! Perfect evening for fast racing.

Love,
Banana Man
5K World Record Holder (as a Banana)

#19 Daniel

Daniel

    Reptile Runner

  • Red Lizards
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 775 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Woodstock

Posted 16 August 2005 - 10:36 AM

Banana Man.

Great job on your world record.

Danimal angry.gif

#20 NextLizard_Tiger Paul_*

NextLizard_Tiger Paul_*
  • Guests

Posted 16 August 2005 - 10:52 AM

As someone who wasn't even there, I've found all the post races very entertaining! But I wouldn't sweat all the "it was short" comments... Lizards should have thick enough skin to know that all comments are made in good humor and intent. Makes for a lively debate... that's all..

Now.. forget the running.. did anyone eat any crawfish? I want a culinary report!

2 years ago I went to the festival and ate 3 COLD crawfish seasoned with ROCK SALT! Apparently, in 55 years, nobody in Tualatin has figured out that crawfish are meant to be served BOILING HOT and seasoned with CRAB BOIL! What gives! I sent a terse email to the festival yesterday telling them they need to get with the program... I expect that plea to end up in File 13.

One of these day, I'll be organizing my own crawfish boil.. maybe we'll make a TRL race around it or combine it with the Tour de Goose since Cajuns are French...

#21 Jeff Huber

Jeff Huber

    Komodo Dragon

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2467 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Beaverton OR
  • Interests:Running, timing people who are running, skiing.

Posted 16 August 2005 - 11:03 AM

First let me say, I have no idea if the course was accurate or not but I did have a fun time running it (I was an unmarked reptile), and I'd run it again whether the course is found to be accurate or not.

QUOTE (Daniel @ Aug 16 2005, 09:47 AM)
Also nobody discounts the distance of Pints to Pasta but they all acknowledge it is fast because of the downhill.
The Pints to Pasta start line is at a higher elevation then the finish. I believe the difference is roughly 150 vertical ft. Because of this the course is not USATF records eligible, though the distance is USATF certified per the USATF's website: USATF certification for the course.

#22 Daniel

Daniel

    Reptile Runner

  • Red Lizards
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 775 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Woodstock

Posted 16 August 2005 - 11:15 AM

QUOTE (Tigre Pablo @ Aug 16 2005, 10:52 AM)
As someone who wasn't even there, I've found all the post races very entertaining!  But I wouldn't sweat all the "it was short" comments... Lizards should have thick enough skin to know that all comments are made in good humor and intent.  Makes for a lively debate... that's all.. 

Now.. forget the running.. did anyone eat any crawfish?  I want a culinary report! 

2 years ago I went to the festival and ate 3 COLD crawfish seasoned with ROCK SALT!  Apparently, in 55 years, nobody in Tualatin has figured out that crawfish are meant to be served BOILING HOT and seasoned with CRAB BOIL!  What gives!  I sent a terse email to the festival yesterday telling them they need to get with the program... I expect that plea to end up in File 13.

One of these day, I'll be organizing my own crawfish boil.. maybe we'll make a TRL race around it or combine it with the Tour de Goose since Cajuns are French...


Just as a disclaimer. The reason for my post is exactly as Tigre Pablo states to generate a debate with no hard feelings. It is fun to debate such matters.

Danimal angry.gif

#23 Torrey

Torrey

    Communications Director

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10790 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland
  • Interests:I always love flyfishing. Occasionally I like running...

Posted 16 August 2005 - 11:27 AM

Comparing my Crawfish time to Iris Festival isn't a fair comparison, since that was within a week of the 50K ultra I did (and I was a wee bit tired still). But there are a few final things I would like to add to this debate.

1. The course was laid out, measured, re-measured, and re-measured again by Rob Finnigan. If anyone knows Rob, they know he may be more "detail-oriented" than David. Since this is the 3rd time I've run the course, I know it was identical to last year's course. Brandon Workman won the race last year as well, and was only a couple second faster this year, so the course would have had to been short last year as well (I know he has run at least 14:46).

2. If the course were only 3 miles, versus 3.1, that wouldn't explain why my average mile pace for 5K agreed perfectly with the splits I took at each mile marker. I imagine everyone would have thought they ran one heckuva fast last mile if the course were only 3 miles, but the average pace was computed for 3.1. It would have taken a lot more work to purposely adjust the mile markers to make it seem accurate.

3. And of course that leads us back to the point which has been brought up already - what if the course were measured with a bad wheel? I suppose it's possible. But if that's the case, then we would have to call into question every course that Dave and Paula set up - which includes Helvetia, as well as Pints to Pasta which was mentioned already. I can tell you right now, my time at Helvetia did not reflect a shortened course. Especially since if we extend David's hypothesis of the wheel being off 0.1 miles per 5K, then Helvetia should have been almost a half mile short (now that would have been nice wink.gif

I think there may be a lot of validity to Rick's thoughts on it being an evening race. Since most other races are in the morning, perhaps there is a lot to be said for being fully awake, hydrated, nourished, warmed up, etc. I would almost be willing to take David up on his challenge, other than the fact I refuse to run circles around a track and I wouldn't have the same competition present to help push me to that next level. But if you can come up with a decent 5K road race coming up in the next month or so that would have some competition at it, I would love to not only prove I can match my Crawfish time but go sub-16:00.

#24 Tim

Tim

    Komodo Dragon

  • Red Lizards
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8121 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:right here, right now
  • Interests:Yes

Posted 16 August 2005 - 11:40 AM

C'mon folks, you're missing the even bigger picture here. You all have a chance to score some decent cash off of Hatfield. Rest up, wait for the perfect weather day and all of you get together to run a 5k on the Lincoln H.S. track. With all of you working together, David could be out at least $500!!!

Let me know when this event goes off. I want in.

THE OLDER I GET, THE BETTER I WAS.

PROUD TO BE A PAFAR!


#25 David Hatfield

David Hatfield

    Power Lizard

  • Red Lizards
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1336 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 August 2005 - 11:48 AM

Banana Man, what were your splits? Ah ha ha....

I'm not trying to attack Paula & Dave's integrity. I like them. And now that I've used a wheel I know that it can be quite consistent (though also needs calibration.) But all of us are fallible. So I don't automatically assume their courses are accurate, especially when the results are hard to believe. (My hypothesis is not that their wheel is off. It's just one possible factor.)

Most of my times over the past few years have been tightly clustered (e.g. my three road 5Ks this year have been 17:17, 17:18, and 17:20, and I don't run with a watch), though I have gotten slightly faster over time, and I have appeared to experience occassional punctuated improvements (as well as punctuated dropoffs via injury.) Then there have been outliers, times significantly faster or slower than expected. It has seemed more reasonable to me to attribute these cases to course distance. So I have come to not automatically assume that courses are accurate.

The time I ran in Pints to Pasta seemed reasonable. The course has a net downhill of about 150 feet, had a tail wind the year I ran it, and I had competition (though I didn't draft for much of it.) I PR'ed by 20 seconds.

I don't have a good sense of the benefit of drafting, but it doesn't seem to help that much (e.g. not 10 seconds a mile.) I ran 16:57 at Hayward this year after drafting behind one person for over half the race, and was chasing another runner the rest of the way, and was hurting more than usual at the finish. Going in I was expecting to run 17:05 to 17:10, based on my track workouts, so I don't think the drafting and competition helped me that much. I have run races with and without people, and haven't noticed much difference in my times. Maybe my performances, based on my style etc., are significantly more consistent than most people's.

The times I'm going off of a little more than you guys (Danimal, Torrey, and Jeff) are John & Tom, since I've done more track workouts with them, and seem to be closer to their speed (though John seems to have improved of late, and I haven't run as much with Tom, since he hasn't been running as much.) Two years ago I was significantly better than I am now, and my best 5K was a 16:35. (I throw out a 16:16 as unreliable, because it was an outlier - all my other races were 16:40's & 16:50's at the time.) Therefore I have a hard time believing John & Tom ran 16:16 & 16:23, respectively, 'cause I feel that would put them much faster than my current level. Also there's Jim Ney who ran a 16:55, and I've been consistently faster than him.

I assume in Alberto's race he didn't PR by 10 secs a mile. wink.gif

If I knew the exact course of the Crawl (and still had the wheel), I would wheel it, because now I am really curious.

I'm not saying that the course was inaccurate. I'm saying I think the course was probably short. And I hope you won't be pissed at me for thinking and stating this (based on the reasoning I've given.)

I do think that if you really want a time that you can hang your hat on, run a race on the track. (Though even that is problematic, since the track is measured 20 centimeters out from the line...)

As a fun, but also intended to be educational exercise, the Lincoln Challenge still stands if anyone wants to take it. Though I know it might not fit into your schedules...

p.s. I'm posting with good intent, but not to be funny (except in obvious places.) To do so would be cruel. I like thick skin. But I don't like discounting others just because they disagree with you.

p.p.s. Torrey, your Stayton time predicts an even slower 5K, over 17:15. But that was a hilly course...
I could dig deeper..., but then I'd be further in a hole.

#26 Daniel

Daniel

    Reptile Runner

  • Red Lizards
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 775 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Woodstock

Posted 16 August 2005 - 12:12 PM

"My recommendation is to measure the course for yourself and to not discount people's accomplishments. Sure you can say it is fast for this reason or that reason but I wouldn't be going around saying the distance is short. You are attacking the integrity of the individuals who held the event when you do that and they don't have that type of a reputation."


Ok that statement above might have been a little too direct but that was the point it gets great results. grin.png

A kinder way of saying it would have been. The people who organized the event are known for putting on well organized events with accurate distances. Also many people ran well and phychologically it is a lift. To mention the fact the course is short takes away from that good feeling.

Danimal angry.gif

If I keep at this pace I will move past my gecko status. rolleyes.gif

#27 David Hatfield

David Hatfield

    Power Lizard

  • Red Lizards
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1336 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 August 2005 - 12:21 PM

I also question whether the line between Gecko and Lizard is accurate. grin.png
I could dig deeper..., but then I'd be further in a hole.

#28 Diep

Diep

    Binge Runner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3728 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SW
  • Interests:Once in a while I like to go running.<br /><br />Usually I'm just in it for the beer!

Posted 16 August 2005 - 12:29 PM

QUOTE (David Hatfield @ Aug 16 2005, 02:21 AM)
Call it the Lincoln Challenge.  If I win, you give me a Lincoln.  If you win, I give you a Franklin. grin.png


A 1000:1 Payout? You can't be serious. Even if I thought the course was 30 seconds slow I'd still try this just becuase you can't beat the odds...

#29 Diep

Diep

    Binge Runner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3728 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:SW
  • Interests:Once in a while I like to go running.<br /><br />Usually I'm just in it for the beer!

Posted 16 August 2005 - 12:33 PM

QUOTE (David Hatfield @ Aug 16 2005, 12:48 PM)
I don't have a good sense of the benefit of drafting, but it doesn't seem to help that much (e.g. not 10 seconds a mile.)  I ran 16:57 at Hayward this year after drafting behind one person for over half the race, and was chasing another runner the rest of the way, and was hurting more than usual at the finish.  Going in I was expecting to run 17:05 to 17:10, based on my track workouts, so I don't think the drafting and competition helped me that much.  I have run races with and without people, and haven't noticed much difference in my times.  Maybe my performances, based on my style etc., are significantly more consistent than most people's.

I don't think the fast field is good for drafting purposes, rather for phycological purposes. I know being with torrey for much of the race kept my pace from slipping at several points. I think I helped him stay in it in mile 2 at the hill. Also seeing Danimal not too far in front after a mile kept me pushing through mile 2 trying to stay up with him. If I was running it alone I know I wouldn't have performed at the same level...

#30 Daniel

Daniel

    Reptile Runner

  • Red Lizards
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 775 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Woodstock

Posted 16 August 2005 - 12:39 PM

QUOTE (David Hatfield @ Aug 16 2005, 12:21 PM)
I also question whether the line between Gecko and Lizard is accurate. grin.png


Maybe I could have Chameleon status.

As sometimes I am red and other times I am green.

Danimal angry.gif




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users