Thursday, April 19, 2018

Central Coast Section Top 8 Meet Preview

You can find the meet preview at this LINK.

Feel free to comment on the meet and what races/events you are most looking forward to watching this coming Saturday. What events do you feel are the strongest in CCS? Weakest? Who has been the athletes that have really shined this season to date? Who are the most improved athletes?What athletes do you feel will have an opportunity to get on the podium at the state track and field meet?

25 comments:

Anonymous said...

Frosh Soph 1600
Benny Garver from St Francis

Varsity 1600
Colton Colonna of St Francis

Frosh Soph 3200
Nolan Topper of Bellarmine

Varsity 3200
Shyam Kumar of St Francis

Anonymous said...

How come Garcia is seeded at 4:22.9 if his 1600m time is listed as 4:19.3?

Anonymous said...

It looks like the Top 8 is suffering a little of the Stanford Invite problem with times being made up, or times from previous years being used when the rules specifically say they have to be from this year. A brief review of the boys 1600 and 3200 (using Athletic .net only) shows at least 6 times in the 1600 (first heat only), and 3 times in the 3200 that are from the 2017 season or that were never made at all. Since all previous listed alternates for the 1600 got in the race it is not clear how the erroneous marks impacted the entries. In the 3200, three deserving athletes have been relegated to the alternate list when, under the strict rules of the meet, they should be in that race.

Anonymous said...

@12:03 I believe the 4:19.3 is from Arcadia, which is a mile race with spits at 1500 and 1600. It is not clear if his coach thought that the 1600 split time would not be an official time, so it appears that he used the his actual 1600 PR from this year.

My bigger concern is what was posted by 12:10. If true, the three alternates that should be in the 3200 are Padilla, D'Orfani and Eng. They should at least be added to the heat even if the others are not disqualified for submitting bad marks.

Anonymous said...

Even with some of the heavy hitters (Scales, Miranda, MBR) missing the meet, it will still have a lot of great action and be a preview of some of the guys who will factor at CCS. Depending on who runs what at CCS, the battle between Estrella and Colonna in the 1600, and Kumar and MacKenzie in the 3200, could decide who goes to state when they hook up in May. I wouldn't sleep on Walker and Ma in the 1600, or a few of the St. Francis boys in the 3200. Can't wait!

Anonymous said...

Giving some of the entries the benefit of the doubt, not all dual meets are posted on Athletic.net. Some of the season bests could have come from those.

Ron Ernst said...

I read this thread and realized one of the athletes in question was due to an error on my part. I converted a mile PR from 2017 instead of using a 1600 from 2018. I made an honest mistake as I thought the entries were like Arcadia. This was not an attempt to cheat the system. Please know that if I had entered my athletes 2018 time he would be Heat 1 anyway. I have explained the error to one of the meet directors and provided evidence of the 2018 time. Again, my apologies to the greater track community for the error. See you Saturday.

Anonymous said...

No biggie Ron. You should see the fins on the FS boys entries. In the years past entries were verified. To much work? Any why not use athletic.net? While not everyone is on there it eliminates a lot of leg work. Also dual meet results really should not be allowed for 100 & 200 and Marks should be wind legal.

Anonymous said...

Miranda 4:12.64 (1600) & 4:14.02 (mile)

Anonymous said...

Can somebody let Hank know that the Top 8 live results link at Lynbrook is directed to some random SCVAL meet.

Anonymous said...

the label is wrong, but the results look correct.

Anonymous said...

live results:
http://lynbrooksports.prepcaltrack.com/ATHLETICS/TRACK/2018/18_dual/SCVAL_Dual.htm

Anonymous said...

Does anyone get punished for violating the “honest competition” rule anymore? What happened last night was blatant in its violation of the rule and for its total lack of ethics. Not only was an erroneous time used to get in the race where the infraction occurred, evidently that race was used as a warmup for a later race. If the coaches don’t police that kind of behavior, the meet administrators have to step up to protect the integrity of the sport.

Albert Caruana said...

There is no honest effort rule at the CCS Top 8 meet.

Anonymous said...

Then there should be. Using the first 2 laps of a 1600 as a warmup for an 800 is not fair to the kids in the 1600. Playing rabbit is fine as long as they know you are pulling up before the finish but the kids didn’t know that and, as a result, the race strategy was altered. It’s unethical and that kid and his team should be reprimanded for that behavior, and for using a made up mark to get into the race in the first place.

Anonymous said...

Same kid did the same thing at CCS finals last year. Is there a honest effort rule there?

Albert Caruana said...

I don't believe there is an honest effort rule in CCS. Only at the state meet.

And please, nobody is using races as warm-up for other events.

Anonymous said...

If someone paces very hard for two laps and then burns out it's very possible they were making an honest effort. It's just not a very good strategy for winning races, but it could've been inexperience.

You have to have the sense to determine if a pace is sustainable for: the people setting the pace, your key competitors and yourself.

Regardless of whether or not runners set an artificially fast pace intentionally or, even worse, if they colluded with certain athletes in order to give them some kind of advantage. It did not have to be to the detriment of a strategic and self-aware runner.

Anonymous said...

@7:31, what exactly are you referring to. I did not see anyone jog a race to save themselves for a later race. Why would you when you can scratch at the coaches meeting?

Ron Ernst said...

I have already addressed the "erroneous time"/"made up mark" used to get into the race. To recap this concern: when I learned of the error I contacted a meet director and offered to give up the spot but Jason has run a 4:25.17 full mile at St Francis this year so he was able to keep the spot as his time was fast enough to deserve the placement.

As for the 1600m, Jason told us he has been dealing with a sore Achilles this week and he told me he felt it tightening up about 700m into the race. He continued to run for another 250m before he decided to pull off the track. We waited to take him to the trainer until I could finish up with some coaching responsibilities in the field. He then spent the next hour in the trainers station getting ice and treatment. Not ideal for a warm-up. We do not coach to have people drop out and the coaching staff was unaware of the injury until the moment he told us after he pulled out. Had we known we likely would have limited his racing effort.

I would strongly prefer our athletes always finish the race. I understand why people believe it is a pattern. We take this type of issue seriously and we address it with the athlete when it occurs. Sometimes kids use these big races to try different strategies and it was his goal to try a fast first lap to gain some separation on the field, he did not anticipate the sore tendon. We gave him some advice would maximize his ability to run the 800 with a limited strain on his Achilles.

For further discussion, please feel free to approach me at any meet to discuss. I believe strongly in the integrity of the sport and would welcome an adult discussion in person, I understand the concern.

My thanks to the team who put on a great event. St Francis once again proved to have an amazing distance team with great coaching, Walker and Jorge had great races. Lots of athletes had amazing races and efforts all around.

Anonymous said...

Ron, congratulations to you too. Taking first and second in the 800 is quite an achievement in that group. I think we can all agree that a mile mark is fine to use for the entry. I think the question about the honest effort is one of history. The 4:35 at Top 8 last year ahead of the 1:54; and 4:42 at CCS finals ahead of the 1:52 shows a practice and pattern that makes the explanation hard to buy. I don’t think anyone questions your integrity in this. If anyone has, I have not heard about it and that would be categorically wrong in my opinion.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the thoughts Ron. On a lighter note, the CCS better get ready for a full house in the 3200. 11 guys beat the relatively soft AL time time of 9:39.48, and that doesn’t include some of the big sticks who were down in LA. How many guys can they run in one heat? Should be fun to watch.

Albert Caruana said...

The 3200 field will be chopped down at the trials. Unless it's hot, look for the at-large mark to get a pretty big boost this year after going from 9:32 to 9:39 from last season's trials race.

Jason Gomez said...

Hello this is Jason Gomez

I understand why some of you may think that I am not racing honestly but I can assure you that is a misunderstanding. Id be willing to talk to anybody who has some concerns and questions about the matter, you can reach me at Jason.gomez5228@gmail.com. I hope that

Albert Caruana said...

Thank you Jason. There is no need to hash this any further.

Popular Posts