|
||
|
|
FEATURE
STORY
Entering the homestretch of the 1,500-meter final at last month's NCAA Track and Field Championships, Megan Metcalfe of West Virginia was flying. As she crossed the line her time flashed onto the scoreboard: Metcalfe, WVU, 4:12.00. In the 21-year history of the meet, only two 1,500 winners had ever run faster. Yet Metcalfe didn't raise her arms in triumph or wave to the roaring crowd or take a victory lap. Why? She finished ninth. No All-American honors, no team points, no trip to the award stand. Ninth -- and a well-beaten ninth at that. Ahead of Metcalfe, Mississippi State sophomore Tiffany McWilliams broke the electronic beam in 4:06.75, taking two seconds off Suzy Favor-Hamilton's 13-year-old championship record. "After the final I was kind of stunned because I had run faster than expected, but more so that there were so many other girls running so fast," said Metcalfe, a sophomore competing in her second NCAA meet. "That was a phenomenal race by pretty much everyone." Metcalfe wasn't the only one whose NCAA meet performance would have put her high on the award stand, if not on the rostrum's top step, most years. Colorado sophomore Sara Gorton finished third in the 5,000 with a time of 15:40.13. Only three NCAA champions had ever run faster. Jamie Kryzminski of Michigan State placed fifth in the 10,000 with a quicker time (32:52.76) than all but four of the 18 nationals winners. It was that kind of season for women's distance running at the collegiate level and it took more than a few coaches, athletes and fans by surprise. "We're used to a certain trajectory of improvement," said Colorado coach Mark Wetmore. "But there was a great leap this year. More people ran faster than we had reason to expect from the 800 up." *** How good was the 2003 outdoor season? Three women cracked 2:02 in the NCAA 800, with North Carolina's Alice Schmidt (2:01.15) posting the third-fastest winning time ever. Alicia Craig, a Stanford freshman, won the NCAA 10,000 in 32:40.03, the quickest time since 1988. BYU sophomore Kassi Andersen set a championships record in the 3,000m steeplechase (9:44.95) and both Stanford's Lauren Fleshman (15:24.06) and North Carolina's Shalane Flanagan (15:30.60) dipped under the meet record in the 5,000. And then there was the 1,500. Entering the spring, only 12 collegians had ever run faster than 4:12.00. At the NCAA meet, nine did, and that group didn't include Flanagan who has a best of 4:11.60, Northern Arizona's Johanna Nilsson who had run 4:10.32 but managed only 4:16 in the final, or Providence's Roisin McGettigan who ran 4:10.34 at a July 5th meet in Cork, Ireland. The year with the next most sub-4:12 times? That would be 1990, when four women bettered the mark. It wasn't just the NCAA meet either. At April's Mt. San Antonio College Relays, Fleshman came within less than a second of Kathy Hayes' 18-year-old American collegiate record in the 5,000 with a time of 15:23.94. Gorton (15:24.97) and Craig (15:25.75) were right behind, becoming the third and fourth fastest Americans in NCAA history. Hayes' NCAA best didn't last much longer, though, as Flanagan lowered the record to 15:20.24 in finishing second at the U.S. Championships. Later in that meet, Schmidt took fifth in the 800, Toledo junior Brianna Shook (who redshirted the NCAA outdoor season) won the steeplechase, and McWilliams took third in the 1,500 behind Suzy Favor Hamilton and Regina Jacobs, two of the world's top milers. McWilliams' run in particular seemed to signal that a changing of the guard might soon be at hand as she pushed the pace early in the race, stringing out a field of top post-collegiate athletes. "She totally impresses me," Favor Hamilton told Runner's World Daily. "She's only a sophomore in college and has enormous guts to go out and take the lead in a championship race and with all these big guns... This is the kind of runner we need to see in the future. I just applaud her and respect her 100 percent." *** So what made for such fast times in 2003? Was it the result of healthy athletes racing in favorable conditions? Was it the new regional qualifying setup? An influx of foreign talent raising the competitive bar? The emergence of a new generation of Olympic-caliber American athletes? Yes. *** Like most coaches, Mark Wetmore is hesitant to comment on performances of athletes he doesn't work with. However, he can offer a simple explanation for the improvement of his star athlete, Sara Gorton. "She's been able to train soundly, with no interruptions, and then get in good races with other good women in good conditions," said the Colorado coach. For Gorton, who had lost seasons to mononucleosis and a stress fracture in the past, staying healthy was an accomplishment in itself, and one that took her running to another level. After a 10th-place finish at last fall's NCAA Cross Country Championships, Gorton won the 5,000 at the NCAA indoor meet and set personal bests in the 800, 1,500 and 5,000 outdoors. The importance of staying healthy cannot be overemphasized, according to Mike Whittlesey, the women's distance coach at North Carolina. "How healthy is the runner?" said Whittlesey. "That's always the big question and probably the most important factor in the improvements this year. A lot of these girls have been running consistently and haven't been hurt." Athletes were just as fortunate when it came to Mother Nature's race-day disposition. As always, conditions were ideal for racing at the Mt. SAC distance carnival, but it was at the NCAA championships in Sacramento where surprisingly good weather made for an abundance of fast times in the middle and long distances. While hot and windy during the day, the northern-California locale cooled off considerably each evening, leaving spectators grabbing for jackets and athletes primed for fast racing. The brisk after-sunset conditions contrasted starkly with the oppressive heat and humidity that plagued recent championships in Baton Rogue, LA and Durham, NC. *** The 2003 season also marked the first year in which athletes qualified for NCAA championships via a regional qualifying system. Until this year, all athletes who met an automatic qualifying standard moved on to the national meet. Fields, usually 19-23 athletes in size, were then filled using a descending order list of athletes who had met a provisional mark. While straightforward, the system drew criticism from many coaches who believed it forced them to peak their athletes too early in the season to assure that they obtained qualifying marks. Regional qualifying sought to eliminate that concern. Under the new system, the top five finishers in each event at the four regional meets advance to an expanded national championships. Six to eight athletes are then added to each event field based on seasonal best list. Although regional qualifying allows coaches more latitude in preparing their athletes, opponents of the setup worried that inserting another high-stakes meet into an already stressful end-of-the season schedule would be too much to ask of athletes. The end-of-the-year results speak for themselves. NCAA meet records fell in seven women's events and the men's competition featured some of the top hurdle, 400 and 10,000 marks in championship history. "A lot of people talked about the regionals being a system that would beat up the athletes and make the national championships not as good. I think it made it better," said Whittlesey, a 2003 Mondo Assistant Coach of the Year honoree. "Everyone was peaking for the regionals and nationals -- they were just sharp. You had girls setting personal bests by three, four, five seconds in the 1,500 and coming back in the final and getting another [personal best] in the final two days after the fact. The 800s were fast, the 5,000s were fast, and the collegiate athletes were still rocking a week later at the USA [championships]. With the way qualifying is set up, coaches did a much better job of getting people ready for the end of the year when it counts the most." The addition of extra preliminary rounds at the NCAA meet may also have contributed to the fast times as it discouraged coaches from doubling athletes. As a result, there were fewer overextended athletes competing in event finals and a more even dispersal of talent among the distances. Put it all together and there's nowhere for an athlete to hide, said Arkansas head coach Lance Harter. "It used to be that, if you had a good one or a great one, you could find an event to avoid the clash of superstars," said Harter, a six-time SEC coach of the year. "But this year there was no weak event." Still, the depth of performance came as a surprise to Harter, who had three athletes in the 1,500, including Christin Wurth (4:10.49) who finished third in the final and Londa Bevins, the fastest non-qualifier at 4:15.32. "We told Londa before the prelim., 'Just run 4:19 and you'll be in the final as always,'" Harter said. "Londa's time would have won nine times and been no worse than third. Not in 2003 though. This year she ends up 13th and just misses the final." Of the 12 who did advance, seven were foreign athletes. Included in that group were two high-powered Swedish athletes, the defending champion, Lena Nilsson of UCLA, and Northern Arizona's Johanna Nilsson (no relation) who won the mile at the 2003 NCAA indoor meet. International athletes were also among the favorites in the 800, in which five of eight finalists were foreign, as well as the steeplechase and 10,000. *** In the past, foreign standouts competing at US schools typically had their way with their American collegians. On occasion, US athletes rose to the challenge and were dragged along to faster times, but as often as not, they conceded to their foreign opponents. "There is a mentality that American kids dismiss the international students," said UCLA distance coach Eric Peterson. "Even our system doesn't reward international athletes as being All-America unless they finish in the top eight, but we'll reward American students on a lesser standard." While there was certainly a deep cast of talented foreigners, there was no backing down by US athletes. If anything, Americans were excited by the challenge presented by their international counterparts -- and it showed. US athletes took the top spot in every event from 800 to 10,000. Foreigners became the chased or as Wetmore of Colorado explained, "Participants in the competitive synergy that made the events so fast." Peter Tegen, in his 29th year as head coach at Wisconsin, believes the change in the American competitive outlook occurred well before this season, and perhaps not coincidentally, at about the same time Fleshman, Flanagan, et al, entered the collegiate ranks. "In my mind the turn around -- maybe three years ago -- seemed to be caused by a change in attitude," said the veteran coach. "Foreign athletes beating up on our sometimes-intimidated and athletically less-experienced young ladies may have been a blessing in disguise and eventually contributed to the change." Whittlesey, too, noted a shift in the way athletes approach training and racing. "A few athletes over the last few years have started to raise the bar and everybody else has gone after it," said the North Carolina coach. "They saw what they needed to do and really started getting aggressive." Although he doesn't discount the importance of international athletes in the across-the-board improvement, Whittlesey is quick to note that the steadily improving group of American athletes was just as responsible for elevating standards. "There were only three really high-profile foreign athletes and none of them won a national title," Whittlesey said. "The foreign athletes weren't the fastest of the year either. The American girls got it done and were still very hungry after that." Harter expressed similar sentiments. "The international athlete was very much a factor, but the major catalyst in the 1,500 was Tiffany McWilliams," said Harter. "Her aggressive front running raised the standards for all challengers. We saw her race almost weekly and knew that if you wanted to be up front you had to be ready for a very hot pace." The coaches weren't the only ones sensing a change. "I think that girls are taking running a lot more seriously," said Flanagan. "There are a bunch of motivated girls who want to change the sport and are ready to challenge one another to get better and raise the bar." That Americans were at the forefront of the NCAA middle- and long-distance resurgence is particularly encouraging for a discipline in need of a new generation of post-collegiate stars. During the 90s, women's distance running at the university level went through a stagnate period. Time slowed, expectations dropped and few athletes made the transition to the professional ranks. "It's my impression that during much of the 90s we began dealing with a relatively spoiled generation of female athletes, especially in the distances," said Tegen, who has worked with 43 NCAA champions while at Wisconsin. "A few major ingredients for success seemed to be missing somewhat and it's hard to pinpoint them. Maybe the commitment to go beyond any preconceived mental and physical boundaries was lacking for a while." The result? A small group of elite post-collegiate runners -- many closer to the end of their careers than the beginning -- and no one to whom they could pass the torch. Until now. "There is definitely a handful of girls out there who could be Olympic finalists someday," said Whittlesey. "There's certainly that type of talent, and not just talent but work ethic and competitiveness." Fleshman, Flanagan and McWilliams in particular have shown no aversion to setting high goals, as evidenced by their performances at the USA meet. "Obviously, the next step ahead of us is running competitively at the Olympic Trials," said Schmidt. "Some of that will take patience. I know that the more I race professionals, the more I learn about the 800, so that comes with practice and time. I know that I'm going to have to approach my races aggressively, putting myself in position early so that I can go with the leaders... More than anything it will probably take a lot of mental preparation" As critical as work ethic and competitiveness are to making progress, they can also be a detriment if not harnessed. "It's hard to be patient," said Flanagan, who announced recently that she will redshirt next spring to focus on preparation for the Trials. "However, by keeping a big picture like the Olympics, I find that it's easier to approach each workout, race or year. My goal has always been to stay consistent and healthy, which allows me to train to my full potential and reach the long term goals." Such maturity bodes well for the group, according to Wetmore. "The most important thing for a female runner to have is calm-mindedness," said the Colorado coach. "That means being able to be patient and be realistic about setting goals." To be sure myriad challenges lie ahead once a runner leaves the structure and support of the collegiate system. "They'll need patience as well as tenacity because our post-collegiate system is really lonely with very few alternatives, especially on the women's side," said Harter, who served as the head coach of the US team at the 1997 IAAF World Championships. "The support and racing opportunities that allow them to reach the next level are hard to come by." Tegen has also seen potential go unfulfilled from lack of support. "It seems that only the fortunate ones who can afford it economically and have the luxury of adequate coaching and health care available are able to stick it out," Tegen said. "Support almost always comes too late for our young athletes." Still, the Wisconsin coach is optimistic about the potential of the women who made 2003 such a memorable year, from established stars Flanagan and Fleshman to young up-and-comers like Metcalfe. "They're all athletes with tremendous amounts of talent whose potential is enormous," said Tegen. "If they're willing, they will do big things in the future." (Posted July 21, 2003.)
|
