+1.

I did not enjoy the run course. Too many cars, trucks, and trucks pulling boats- combined with too little traffic control.

One other thing about that new loop is that the road is very canted so that parts of it were like running on a velodrome.

---

Proud Representative of Slowtwitch Anti-Atheists Society.

+2 I liked the old run course better. The bike also added a new hill from the last one I did, I liked that!

I think I liked this course better. Not really sure why. Maybe it was more people on the course was motivating to me. The other way was cool, I just dug this one. It would be much much better if they limited traffic to the lake until the race was over.

---

1*

I've done the "old" run seven times. I liked yesterday's run better. The "energy lab II" portion of the old run was dead boring, and lots of years you had wind and/or blazing sun to deal with there too.

I agree about the vehicle traffic on the "church hill" road.

My vote would be for the new run, with the caveat that something is done to limit the vehicle traffic (especially the mega RV's and any vehicle pulling a boat or trailer) during the time frame when there are going to be a lot of runners on the course.

---

"Human existence is based upon two pillars: Compassion and knowledge. Compassion without knowledge is ineffective; Knowledge without compassion is inhuman." Victor Weisskopf.

I thought it was a great addition! This was my 6th time to race Buffalo Springs and I loved it. From a spectator perspective my crew was able to see multiple times as opposed to the old out and back. It is impossible to close the roads in the park, it's just not going to happen. It also allowed for condensing of the aid stations. I hope Mike and Marti will keep. You could race it for the next decade and you'll never get a better weather day than yesterday. Who would have thought BSLT would be 20 degrees cooler than CdA.

I like the new course better because:

1. Its spectator friendly. There was encouragement throughout both loops. My family were able to watch more than transition.

2. A bit more shade (always a plus)

3. Much more scenic.

4. The old hills were epic but ridiculous at the same time.

5. I liked getting to pass people more than once....especially the pros. Seeing some of those pro guys/gals several times was impressive and motivational.

6. The big trucks pulling rv's were on the old course also...only saw that same hill that they climb to exit the park one extra time this year.

7. 2 laps really helped with my pacing.

---

"WHEW...I really regret that workout!"..............Noone

This. Much much more spectator friendly. The traffic was worse, but I was never pushed off the road. I was too busy just trying to hold onto my pace to worry about traffic that in reality was a minor annoyance at best. I say they address the traffic on the hill (the only area it was potentially even a problem) and it's an all around win.

And compared to last year, the weather was a huge blessing.

+1. I liked the new course a bit better. It's still not an easy run, but it's more scenic and more spectator friendly, which that course really needs. If you're down around the bridge, a spectator can see a racer 5x. The traffic was the only negative.

I checked my Garmin map. Going up "church hill" from the intersection to the turnaround and then going back down to the intersection is one mile. What if Mike and Marti simply eliminated this section and made it a three loop run? The "new" out and back to the "dead end" would be a shorter leg (~ 0.4 mile each way) on each of the three loops. While we'd no longer have the challenge of "running" up "church hill" (quite a few people simply walk up that hill), it would eliminate a couple of problems. Runners wouldn't have to dodge the vehicles and the vehicles wouldn't have to deal with the runners on that hill. The hand cycle athletes seem to really struggle with that hill, and I don't know if they consider that a fair test or not.

Mike and Marti wouldn't need to man an aid station and they wouldn't need to place a timing mat at the top of the hill. They would only need one aid station on the "new" out and back leg. The run would be even more spectator friendly, and it would still be tough enough with all of the rollers on the road around the lake.

That's my suggestion for next year.

---

"Human existence is based upon two pillars: Compassion and knowledge. Compassion without knowledge is ineffective; Knowledge without compassion is inhuman." Victor Weisskopf.

Personally, I'd hate to see all 3 run hills eliminated. That hill is a beast (it's not even easy to run down), but I like that they kept it.

I didn't race on Sunday, so I don't have experience with the new course, but I have mixed feelings about the old route. The hills and the lonely out & back section were a painful experience for me, but they are also part of the allure of that race. Suffering through the 110 degree heat, wind and dust make BSLT a lasting memory. It's not a course you get a PR on.

In general I dislike loops and congestion. Was the primary reason to change it just to keep it all in the park? They did a superb job of supporting the old course with water and ice, so it doesn't seem like the logistics were much of a problem.

---

-Andrew

As a veteran of the old course (did not race this year though) this thread and the course change makes me sad. For me the allure of the old course was hot much it absolutely sucked. Yes, it was hot, sometimes windy, always challenging and very lonely. I couldn't give a rats ass about spectators on the course. Hopefully Mike and Marti will revert back to the old course. Btw, it's likely in my best interest to have an easier course as I've never done well out after 5 tries. 4 of those 5 times I've crumbled out in the Energy Lab section. Love (and hate) it.

I loved the old course. It destroyed me every time I've done it but if the energy lab section is gone as well as 2 of the climbs I'll never go back. The allure of the race was the difficulty.

---

Twitter
Instagram

Here's what Mike Greer (RD) said on an ST thread back in April:

It is true that the run course will stay within the park area, which will offer shade, a more spectator friendly feature, and the elimination of the Energy Lab II road. It will be a two loop course and will have one hill on it that is done twice. While I am the guy who came up with the Energy Lab II challenge of the course many years ago, I can say that the decision to change it was a little bit emotional for me! BUT I promise that when our athlete advisors and run course volunteers met with Marti and I, everyone embraced the idea as good for all concerned. We know it will be more spectator friendly and the shade trees will be appreciated.

I agree about congested looped courses, but BSLT is a smaller event, and I didn't feel the congestion was bad with 2 loops (other than the congestion caused by the cars).

I don't think the run was easier. Just different.

---

1*

I found the rolling hills on the out-and-back to be pretty tough on that second lap. I have always looked forward to Energy Lab II as an opportunity to move through the field assuming that I've been patient early. It was part of Mike and Marti's "legendary race." Personally, I did not find the additional crowd support adequate to justify the change. Mike and Marti have given much to the sport, and I hope that they are given the freedom to determine the BSLT course in the future.