Monday, November 25, 2013
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Popular Posts
-
You can now view all the entrants plus their performance mark from the section qualifier for this weekend's CA State Track and Field ... -
One more bump. Please list below athletes that you feel belong on the lists below. One more trivia question. Who is the runner ... -
Below is the schedule for the 2013 Cross Country season. If you see any errors, additions or can confirm any dates, please email me at alb...
-
Central Coast Section Results: http://www.rtspt.com/events/cif/2017Meets/ccsxc17/ Sac-Joaquin Section Section Finals: http://timerhub....
-
Just added: Info for Ghebray Invitational on September 22nd. With one extra Saturday in September next year, I started to hunt down the d...
-
Bold meets are confirmed for 2014 season. Non bolded dates are from 2013 season. August 2014 8/22 Ryan Bousquet Memorial Run at Yorba Reg...
-
I will start with one: “Somewhere in the world someone is training when you are not. When you race him, he will win.” — Tom Fleming What...
-
If you are an athlete and you have a question about race strategy, training or anything else that is pertinent to Track & Field and/o...
-
I will continue to update this list throughout the year. Please feel free to add others in the comment section below. I know I do not hav... -
I am very sad to report that Bob Shor passed away this morning after battling illness for the past few year...
35 comments:
solid NCS representation in D5
No props for Aptos Girls eh? Did you see the "virtual" meet on lynbrooksports? They finish 3rd based off section performances!
http://www.prepcaltrack.com/ATHLETICS/XC/2013/sec_comb.htm
Not from Aptos, but they are too low. Beat Bishop Amat at Stanford by > 1 minute, and Bishop O'Dowd by > 2 min. You must be a Catholic (like me) and over in love with the "Bishops" 😀
Be warned that the "virtual" meet data is skewed a bit since each race includes ~100 teams and ~700 runners. The better model would be to include only the runners from the 23 teams that qualified (and indv qualifiers for fun if you like). Of course that requires a few extra hours of work. As it stands now, the teams with a relatively weaker 4th or 5th runner have disproportionately higher scores. Still fun to look at, and clearly, it took some serious effort to compile.
Also note the virtual meet predicts Fiona O'Keeffe will run 16:31 and break Baxter's course record.
You can respond to this line in the virtual meet " Coaches - If you see conversion times that are incorrect, please email me the correct conversion." If you think it is inaccurate then I suggest representing your section and offer an alternative. I did so for the SJS girls times. I felt it was off by about 15 seconds. I believe you may be seeing an update with times that make more sense. By the way, I am a parent, so don't let the appeal to coaches stop you.
The virtual meet also predicts SJND to win the D5 race
by more than 100 points over 2nd place Flintridge:
1) SJND 51
2) Flintridge 157
3) Marin Academy 214
4) Thatcher 217
5) La Jolla Country 227
6) Lick Wilmerding 280
I only did Division IV and V. In Division V boys, SJND is the overwhelming favorite to repeat as state champions. Flintridge Prep is the 2nd best team followed by Marin Academy right now. La Jolla Country Day has been ranked in the top 3 all season but showed a weakness with their 5th runner at their section meet so they got dropped down.
SLV is the favorite in the Division IV girls with Yreka the favorite in the boys.
Division V girls will be an interesting race in that Flintridge Prep ran without their #1 runner at their section meet while Branson ran without their #2 runner. If they both run, it should be a tight battle for 1st place.
I think DLS is under-ranked. Schuman had a bad race at NCS but their #4 and 5 had great races. Plus, Hurlock is going to be challenging Haney up at the front.
Props to Chris Boranian from Head Royce - strong race! Good luck at state.
In the "virtual meet" linked to here: http://www.prepcaltrack.com/ATHLETICS/XC/2013/sec_comb.htm
It looks like the course at Willow Hills is weighted wrong, as the fastest runners of the day are all from SJS.
Unlikely to say the least that Baxter's course record will be broken by 9 seconds by OKeefe, or that the kid from Nevada Union will run some 50+ seconds faster than last year.
Stranger things have happened, but I think re-running the simulation with a different adjustment for Willow Hills course would be more accurate. and therefore more interesting. Looks like it is a solid 20-30 seconds too fast for the top runners.
Although I'd love to believe SJND will beat Flintridge by 100 point, it is probably a bit optimistic. Not that it might not come to pass...
where is the list of state meet records and top times (historical)? Would someone mind posting the link? Thanks.
Please note that I do believe that the adjustment given to the Willow Hills course is based on the past 7 years performances from the Willow Hills Section meet performances to the 2-week later State meet performances. Obviously this is based on an average and the extremes to either side are hard to gauge. Not saying that the kids that have run the Section Meet will or will not meet the predictions at State meet but, this year's performances, at all meets not just the Section meet, do support, in theory, some outstanding performances continuing to come from the much maligned SJS. Jesuit Boys team, Davis and St. Francis Girls teams, NU "Kid" that ran the 3rd fastest Willow Hills Course (2 seconds off of 2nd and 30 seconds behind German Fernandes course record) and Fiona breaking the Girls course record bespeaks of the potential for some outstanding running. With all of the early season meets behind, the true talent shows up at the championship meets. The question is who will be there this year, and who will people say were misplaced due to a "less-than-par" performance when it counts...at the State Meet. I'm not saying that other section teams and individuals will not rise to the occasion, as many, many will...I'm just saying do not discount a runner because they are not your favorite, in your section, has not raced at the races you wanted to see them at, or are unknown to you. Give the youth athlete a chance to show their true grit when the stress is on the line. There are a lot of talented runners out there that deserve the benefit of their performance prior to being put down by nay-saying blog posters. Jus-sayin
Agree that Willow performances weighted way too favorably. Wonderful mathematical excercise but this analysis does not pass the "smell test"
"Hurlock is going to be challenging Haney up at the front."
Lol.
I have gotten input on both the Willow Hills course and the Hayward course and will make the recommended changes and will re-post later today for everyone to have "more fun" with :)
Won't be up right away for I'm still busy "Makin' the shoes".
hank
Hank, thanks for doing this! It's very interesting and entertaining, and much appreciated.
Top all-time performances at Woodward Park can be found here: http://www.prepcaltrack.com/all-time-california-cross-country-lists/
Kind of funny reading about all the "virtual meet" results. I've been guilty of doing this, too, running virtual meets to see projected outcomes.
"Actual meet" results are ALWAYS different. You can get the same virtual results by pulling names/teams out of a hat.
Salesian sure fell quite a bit in the D-IV boys rankings. But everyone gets to prove their mettle on Saturday!
We need Fantasy XC teams with a point system for big pr's and chokes.
Salesian (SS) ran without their #2 last week (club soccer tournament on the East Coast); expect them to be better at State.
More fodder to play with... I've loaded up the new "Virtual" State Meet with the updated conversions for NCS & SJS - have at it.
hank
To OffCourse -- I hope your comment is to be taken tongue-in-cheek. Let's all remember that these are high school athletes, not professional athletes. It hardly seems appropriate to label any performance as a "choke" even if it falls short of predictions.
Can someone who didn't even compete in the state meet qualifier then compete in the actual state meet?
@ 8:49
W/o researching this, and others will correct me if wrong, as a member of a team, I believe they can. In other words, the team qualifies, and if they missed the "qualifier" but the team made it, then they could run as a member of that team, but I do not think there is any way they could run as an individual.
That is correct. An athlete can run at the state meet if they didn't compete at their section meet. Sarah Yoho of Flintridge Prep and Anna Harleen of Branson both didn't compete at their respective section meets and I am sure will be racing this coming Saturday. Perfectly legal.
Not so to compete at CCS. You have to have participated in at least half your league meets leading up to the league final and at the league final race as well.
Albert - the League Finals meet also counts as a League meet. So in the SCVAL we have 3 cluster League Meets and the League Finals (so that's 4 total). So an athlete need only compete at one cluster meet and the League Finals to fulfill the CCS requirement.
hank
^ or two of the cluster meets and you can skip the League Finals (and hope the team still qualifies on to CCS so you can still run CCS).
hank
I would like to point out that according to XCNATION the SJND boys did not win the DII nationals because it was "statistically impossible". The team that won ran an average time of 16:26. SJND beat De Le Salle with an average time of 15:31. hahahahahahhahahahahahhaha
I was thinking the same thing. I have no idea the difficulty of the course that the other team used but I just can't see another small school running faster than SJND.
there are no hills in minnesota. can't be that tough unless it was sleeting or something.
Well that's why we have a thing called NXN, just a shame there is not a small school division.
There are hills in Minnesota by the way. Maybe not monsters like Mt. Sac but plenty of hills. Ask anyone who has run the Twin Cities marathon.
Post a Comment