From personal experience (15+ years ago), old Chocolate City at the St. Francis Retreat Center ran around 20-30 seconds faster than what we would run a couple weeks later at Grant Park. Believe it or not though there was one year at Chocolate City where it was rainy and muddy and only the winner broke 17 minutes.
17:32 puts Scott top 50 nationally. If she can run close to that at state, she will be faster than Roberts last year who went on to finish 7th at the FL regional. I hope she competes at FL and NXN.
That is not what I was implying…I realize that Chocolate City is an fast course. I would put it in a similar category as Arrowhead.
Doubtful but possible. Scott ram 18:45 at Chocolate City last year and 18:41 at state. From the sounds of it, though, the conditions in Burlington were better this year. It would not surprise me if 4-5 girls go under 18:00 and 4-5 guys foes under 15:20.
And using 15 years worth of data, some real studs ran this course. It might be faster but no one had ever broken 15:30 there. There are courses where it’s easy to go faster for the 16:20 guys - JV guys but performances seem to halt at 15:30 - 15:40 barrier for the top guys
right on and as I said when it’s to good to be true it’s to good to be true. Remember you are comparing those to other very fast courses that are 5K 5K’s. Arrowhead, Midwest, Lake Breeze. In the long run it doesn’t matter as Ridges will be the final equalizer. Another note just because the course follows the same general path and area does not mean it is exactly the same distance. I can absolutely guarantee that the 1991 Midwest was not close to 5K but it was in the same general area as the present course. One year you go behind a green another year in front to avoid damaging a certain area. The times at midwest that year were so fast that we never used them on our all time lists and yet we went another year over 20 years ago where the 5K mark was right at the last green you would pass almost 180M short of the finish. I think back in those days the janitors would mark and line the course. Today the coaches measurer or at least supervise the measurement .-
did’t see any sub 18’s at state and Scott ran 45s slower than her Choc City time. You still think that course is legit? May have been soft and state but so was CC.
Does it really matter? Scott won, didnt she? I don’t recall ever saying Chocolate was as tough as the Ridges. Not all courses can be Verona.
Ask the D1 State Champ what he thought of the Ridges yesterday. That alternative path up the steep grade before the uphill stretch leading to the 2 mile was border line cruel and unusual punishment!
Wow. You’ve been holding onto this for weeks now. Everyone pretty much agreed that Choc City was around 3 miles. We were also saying that Scott was a legit contender based on the fact that she beat the competition by a minute at Choc. City. She ran 17:55 at Grant. She won convincingly and put 14 seconds on Davre in the final 600 meters. She ran 18:10 on a tough course. Do you feel vindicated now that she didn’t run 17:30? Exactly what are you suggesting here? Maybe you just ought to give the girl some much deserved credit.
I think @westharrier is just after seeking out the truth about courses and course ratings like many of us are.
Put it as a 1 then. Its short and all down hill.
I am not much of a stickler with Chocolate City as I am with other courses. At least Chocolate City is consistent and had a number of studs run on it before. Marshall’s Dana Wadell course and Deerfield, however, the more scrutiny the better in my opinion.
Maybe I’m missing something but has Marshall or Deerfield/Cambridge not been consistently super short? I agree that they are bad because they claim to be a 5k and come far short, but how is this different than Chocolate City. I’ll admit that I’ve never been there so I could be missing something. Fill me in if I’m missing something please!
I think Chocolate City is definitely FAST. But I’m not so sure it is short. Maybe next year I’ll start driving to courses with a jones counter, a measuring wheel and all sorts of other gizmos like altimeters and anemometers to entertain the fodder. It’ll especially be entertaining watching the winged circus it’ll look like I am performing with all of them (westharrier can get pictures too).
Then we can say whether courses are TrackTalk certified or not.
This was about the course not the runner. There was no mention of this being a 3 mile course in the original discussion. I can not say that because I have never measured the school course but I did measure the old seminary course they used to use. I was just saying that 17:30 didn’t reflect the time for a true 5K flat or not. If you take Nate Farrell’s time at CC 15:18 and compare it to his time two weeks later at Verona( course is 60M short) 15:53 in the Big 8 meet that is 35 seconds slower in a race where in finished third so he was pushed something isn’t quite right at CC. Scott’s time at Ridges was still outstanding especially given the conditions that day. It appears she is fully capable of breaking under 18. Someone else had predicted 3 or 4 times under 18 at Ridges and that obviously did not happen. Now if you measure a course at a meet you can say nothing to the meet director about your measured distance and if you google course measuring you will find u tube video somewhere on line and shows how to use a Jones Counter and such. I can really not say that surveying is the best way because that always measures in a straight line and the ground is curved and I believe that some student engineers surveys the Ridges course but which one is the question? I will update the course difficulty scale and add new courses soon.
You are right about the altered course. I remember that has been used before. I am not sure how you have course records at Ridges when one course is definitely tougher than the other but that is another story.