Well, my fears expressed in yesterday's post appear to have been confirmed, with mounting evidence growing that the Noosa 5k course was short. Fellow participants have discussed the situation the on CoolRunning website and its pretty unamious from them and others that the course is short. I spent some time making calculations with my Timex, pen and paper and calculated that assuming the course is 150-200m short, I ran somewhere between 17:15 to 17:25. Ironically, I would have been absolutely thrilled with this time prior to Sunday, but after thinking that I had ventured into sub 17 territory, it has come as a bit of a let down. So, I won't be posting a 16:36 on my PB's listed to the right of this page, but I will be claiming the 7th place - no one can take it away from me!!
I'm really looking forward to going sub 17 for real and boy, its gonna be a sweet moment when I do!!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Oops...bugger! Don't you hate that! I have to admit, when reading your report, "short course" was the first thing to enter my head. BUT...still an awesome run that should have still been a big PB. The problem is, and I have experienced the same thing, can you claim the 5k PB on the estimated adjusted time? This is the sort of reason why race organisers have to be ultra-careful in making sure they have an accurately measured course. I'd rather them announce the course as an accurately measured 4.9km. A month or two back I ran a "half marathon" that turned out to be about 300 m long--all in the last stretch from 20k to the finish. Everyone wondered why their pace slipped from 4:30 to 5:00 or whatever when they were absolutely busting a gut. At least we didn't have PBs riding on it.
Post a Comment