What is toughest CCS At-Large distance mark?

Saturday, February 27, 2016

Northern California Track and Field Invitational Results (2/27/16)

Clarke Massey Relays Results (POSTED)
HSU Relays Results (POSTED)
Super 7 Invitational Results (POSTED)
Viking Invitational Results (POSTED)
Capital Classic Relays Results at Cosumnes Oak (POSTED)
Skyline Invitational Results at Skyline HS (POSTED) some results may be incorrect
It appears the order in girls 1600 was Haskell 5:03, Woodward 5:09, Ross 5:16. Photo of start below.


San Joaquin County Relays (will be posted ASAP)

Until then, you can tweet updates from the meet to @CCExpress.

20 comments:

Anonymous said...

I believe you mean San Joaquin County relays.

Albert Caruana said...

I assumed that was a typo but it's fixed now. Thank you.

Andrew said...

Cassy Haskell runs 5:03 at skyline with Jaxin Woodward in 2nd at 5:09

Andrew said...

Jurnee Woodward 14.11 100 hurdles

Anonymous said...

Track is back! Pretty exciting. Wow, Cassidy Haskell.

Anonymous said...

Albert,

The Skyline results are different here, specifically for the Girls 1600 which looked a little suspect:

http://www.athletic.net/TrackAndField/MeetResults.aspx?Meet=257031#921

Andrew said...

I was there. I would say athletic.net is more wrong (Woodward for sure ran 5:09, Ross is missing and was definitely 3rd).

Anonymous said...

Andrew,

Here are the results from the official timer who I've worked with in the past:

http://atwresults.com/atwupload/20160227/160227F003.htm

In the Google Doc linked by Albert, were there really 9 girls from 5:05 - 5:12?

Andrew said...

Okay, I have heard some conflicting reports. I heard one girl in that range say she clocked herself at 5:30, so that seems off. Even the Adkins Trak West time seems off for her. But those do seem more reasonable. In my posts above, I had Woodward at 5:09. Pretty sure of that time. But yeah, maybe I was wrong.

I only really paid attention to Haskell, Woodward, and Ross in that heat, so I'm not really sure about the others.

I hope Skyline was taking videos like they did last year and we can find out what the times were.
Hope everyone had a good first weekend! Good to be back at it.

Murr said...

I think we can all agree that something is wrong with the girls 1600 times. While there is little to go on for the amazing frosh times, there is plenty of doubt raised by the 3-4 juniors who took :25 to over :30 off their prior PRs in the first race of the season. It is also doubtful that girls running 19:00 and 20:00 3M XC can run 5:06 in the same year. So, how does this get rectified? What if this had happened in the league finals and put some kids through to sections on auto qualifier based on a timing error? Or a kid missed out in a heated race when one heat was timed faster than the others? Is there a convention for review?

Anonymous said...

Results linked in the original post are definitely wrong. One of the two Oakland Tech parents was sitting near me and she had timed her daughter and said her time was 5.16 so it looks like the Adkins times may be correct. Haskell had opened the gap on Woodward going down the stretch but no idea how much of a gap when they crossed the line.

Anonymous said...

http://www.bvtrack.com/TFResults/2016ClarkeMasseyRelaysResults.htm Clarke Massey results

Anonymous said...

You are correct Andrew!

Haskell 5:03 for the win and meet record
Woodward 5:09 for second
Ross 5:16 for third

Anonymous said...

Jurnee Woodward 42.56 for 300mH

Anonymous said...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHZ1JnQtlA4 -- #1 and #3 are the only results that are close to the Adkins West times.

Anonymous said...

super seven results
http://www.athletic.net/TrackAndField/MeetResults.aspx?Meet=258587#1003

Andrew said...

#vindicated. Thanks for the video

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the Skyline video. It does highlight a problem in the sport. If you're going host a meet at a track with no curb, the least the organizers can do is place cones all along the curves. It's really not that hard....

Murr said...

I'm not sure why the rail or cones matter. Did someone step inside the curve at some point? Also, where are we on correcting the times for the girls 1600 and possibly the rest of the meet? MS still has the incorrect marks from #3 on. Or do we all agree that this is okay and they should stand in the records and standings for the section and state?

Anonymous said...

Murr,

Rails are expensive so cones are a must, especially when there are few if any officials monitoring the curve. The main reason is three consecutive steps on or inside the line of lane 1 while on the curve are grounds for a DQ. Plus the athlete ends up running less than the event distance.

It's hard to tell from the video (you only can see the beginning of the first curve) if anyone is stepping on or inside the line (it's more noticeable in the boys 1600 video), but I've watched numerous races in person where no cones were set up on the curves. There were always a number of kids running on the line or inside of it every race.

As for incorrect times in results databases, the only impact is seeding for major invitational and league championships. All rankings for sections and state are based on place/performance at league champs for section champs and then sections for state. The other impact is college coaches recruiting kids based on times they never ran...

Popular Posts