用大数据分析发现：赛程安排影响名次，但个人进步难预测。
Faster Results from a Smarter Schedule: Reframing Collegiate Cross Country through Analysis of the National Running Club Database
- 基于全国跑步数据库，量化赛程频率与全国排名的关系。
- 个人成绩提升难以预测（男性R²仅0.043），但团队参赛机会更重要。
- 原始时间高估进步幅度15-21秒，建议使用标准化数据决策。
大学越野跑队伍常凭经验制定赛季赛程，因缺乏公开的大规模表现数据。本文分析国家跑步俱乐部数据库（NRCD）中2023–2025年完整时代越野跑子集，涵盖7,083名运动员的23,355条成绩（课程/天气覆盖超97%）。在控制数据泄露与时间验证的前提下，比赛结果特征无法有效预测跨年个人进步（男性最佳R²=0.043；女性为-0.029），仅捕捉到结果可靠性上限的约23%-28%。相比之下，团队参赛频率与全国排名显著相关（合并相对风险RR=2.09；GEE优势比OR=2.56/标准差）。全队参赛机会（队伍深度；有效参赛机会）在横向比较中优于单个主力选手的最高参赛次数，但整体团队深度对参赛次数有制约。未经气象与海拔调整的‘仅转换’时间，相比‘标准化’时间高估首尾差距15–21秒。研究挑战了将赛程设计视为纯经验主义的做法，展示了NRCD如何支持大学越野跑中的实证决策。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Collegiate cross country teams often build their season schedules on intuition rather than evidence, partly because large-scale performance datasets were not publicly accessible prior to the National Running Club Database (NRCD). We analyze the comprehensive-era Cross Country subset of NRCD, 23,355 results from 7,083 athletes (2023-2025; >97% course/weather coverage). Under leakage control and temporal validation, race-result features do not support out-of-year forecasting of individual improvement (best men's R^2=0.043; women's -0.029), capturing only a small fraction of the outcome's reliability ceiling (~0.23-0.28). Against this null, team race frequency associates with nationals placement (pooled RR =2.09; GEE OR =2.56/SD). Program-wide opportunity (roster depth; Effective Racing Opportunity) outranks a single workhorse's max race count cross-sectionally, but overall team depth for race count is controlled. `Converted Only' times (not adjusted for weather and elevation) overstate mean first-to-last gains by 15-21 seconds relative to `Standardized'. These results challenge coaching practices that treat schedule design as purely anecdotal and show how NRCD enables evidence-based decision-making in collegiate cross country.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品；中文卡片由大模型生成，请以原文为准。