CCS
http://soqueltrack.com/results/ccsindex.html
NCS
Class A-https://redwoodempirerunning.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/ncsclassa2019results.pdf
Redwood Empire
https://redwoodempirerunning.com/2019-boys-ncs-redwood-meet/
https://redwoodempirerunning.com/2019-girls-ncs-redwood-meet/
Tri-Valley-http://diablotiming.com/results/2019-05-11/
Bay Shore-http://atwresults.com/atwupload/20190511/ (NEW)
SJS
http://cifsjs.org/sports/track/playoffs
Northern Section
San Francisco Section
http://lynbrooksports.prepcaltrack.com/ATHLETICS/TRACK/2019/sf_tr.htm
Oakland Section
Live results we be available here: http://www.adkinstrakwest.com/
Wednesday -
There are trials today for the laned events and boys 1600.
Trials and Finals for boys disc, boys long, girls triple, girls shot, girls high, and boys vault
Thursday:
All running finals. (1 heat of each)
Trial and Finals for: girls long, boys high, girls disc, boys shot, boys triple, girls vault
All this info as well as a section preview (and more) can be found on our team page here: https://www.irunskyline.com/track-and-field/season-blog
http://soqueltrack.com/results/ccsindex.html
NCS
Class A-https://redwoodempirerunning.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/ncsclassa2019results.pdf
Redwood Empire
https://redwoodempirerunning.com/2019-boys-ncs-redwood-meet/
https://redwoodempirerunning.com/2019-girls-ncs-redwood-meet/
Tri-Valley-http://diablotiming.com/results/2019-05-11/
Bay Shore-http://atwresults.com/atwupload/20190511/ (NEW)
SJS
http://cifsjs.org/sports/track/playoffs
Northern Section
San Francisco Section
http://lynbrooksports.prepcaltrack.com/ATHLETICS/TRACK/2019/sf_tr.htm
Oakland Section
Live results we be available here: http://www.adkinstrakwest.com/
Wednesday -
There are trials today for the laned events and boys 1600.
Trials and Finals for boys disc, boys long, girls triple, girls shot, girls high, and boys vault
Thursday:
All running finals. (1 heat of each)
Trial and Finals for: girls long, boys high, girls disc, boys shot, boys triple, girls vault
All this info as well as a section preview (and more) can be found on our team page here: https://www.irunskyline.com/track-and-field/season-blog
Scrolling through results I am amazed at the strong performance of the schools, private and public, on the peninsula. It also really stands out that the majority of schools that made the finals are from wealthy communities. Pali Alyo, Menlo, Los Gatos, Saint Francis, Los Altos. Rarely do you find a school with high minority’s or lower economic status. Is this the case! Why is this? Can anything be done? Is their a class system developing in our schools? All this talk about equality and divisions when perhaps a bigger advantage than population is how much money you have.
ReplyDeleteComing from a lower income, minority school I know that the kids cannot dedicate the time required to come to practice regularly. They are busy working to help support their families and taking care of younger siblings. Most of my kids don't have the resources for good running shoes for workouts and even fewer have spikes. Finally, most do not have parental support for much in their lives. I try and teach them about proper diet and nutrition, but they eat what they can and usually that is not healthy food. They don't have parents that come to meets and support their endeavors or even make sure they get enough sleep. It is an uphill battle, but one worth continuing to work on.
ReplyDeleteInteresting observation. Running, like most other sports where you don’t need a lot of equipment or expensive facilities (e.g. soccer, boxing) should not be as affected by wealth as other sports that do (e.g. golf, lacrosse). So, if your assertion is correct, what are the likely differentiators. Some would say self selection - this the popular private vs public school debate. But that doesn’t explain Paly or Los Altos. What about coaching, access, priorities? Is this a problem or is it just a blip, like the panic over the lack of black baseball players a few years ago?
ReplyDeleteGlad to see that all 4 athletes who got a re-run out of WCAL made it to finals.
ReplyDelete@11:45 I think that was the entire point. They were good enough to make it to the finals but would have been denied the chance to participate because of faulty equipment.
ReplyDeleteGlad to see Riley Chamberlain back in action. I predict she will be the top Norcal girl in the 3200.
ReplyDeleteRiley Chamberlain ran 10:27 by herself. It will be interesting to see if she can go low 10s when running in competitive field.
ReplyDeleteGlad to see 4 athletes who actually qualified get displaced from finals because the WCAL & CCS broke bylaws to get them into the meet.
ReplyDeleteProtest will be filed. Those athletes should never have been allowed to compete. They did NOT qualify.
ReplyDeleteBAYSHORE results?
ReplyDeleteWondering if the unified races affected any of the team results?
ReplyDeleteThey did qualify. And those who didn’t should’ve run faster. The finals is about the best racing the best. Their league got to rerun the race. CCS approved. End of story. Other leagues do plenty of other interesting things. Look at BVAL Mt. Hamilton results and tell me who is missing. Let’s not throw stones in glass houses.
ReplyDelete"Other leagues do plenty of other interesting things. Look at BVAL Mt. Hamilton results and tell me who is missing."
ReplyDeleteNot sure what you're talking about. Rather than being cryptic, why don't you tell us what happened?
Where are the results for NCS bayshore league that was at James Logan? Why is bayshore always slow with their results?
ReplyDelete@ 10:08. He’s talking about hardships that were applied for, voted on, and likely approve apron by all coaches in MHAL prior to SUB leagu finals which WCAL doesn’t even have to run. How unfair is that? WE are talking about concocting a new reason no one has ever used for as evidence for a re-run 3 days later, under controlled conditions for athletes who didn’t qualify in the allotted league slots, or by hitting the CCS auto time. But only the ones who deserve the chance. It’s like if Kurtis Lee ran 27.5 in the 200 at BVAL finals, but because somebody farted and startled him at the 100 M mark, we had him run it again, but remember, just him, because he’s the only one who’d deserves the rerun.
ReplyDeleteApparently both Lee and Shearer both did not compete in their league trials or finals but advanced to the BVAL meet. They both apparently did not run Top 8 either just a few days before that hints they were injured. Odd that the top ranked athletes both were out ill or injured and unable to run. Glad to see they are feeling better!
ReplyDeletewhen will the seeds for the MOC comeout? Will they be posted on CIFNCS.org?
ReplyDeletehttp://diablotiming.com/results/2019-05-17/performance_list.htm
ReplyDeleteIt looks like rain will be a factor in most if not all Masters/MOC meets this weekend. Should add a little intrigue to some races.
ReplyDeleteBayshore was incredibly slow this year. Either the at large times should be adjusted or Bayshore should have fewer qualifying spots to MOC, it's a huge bummer for people in Redwood Empire or Tri Valley who don't get to move on but run 15 seconds faster in the boys 1600 or almost 40 seconds quicker in the 3200 than the last qualifiers in Bayshore
ReplyDeleteI know it is mostly distance runners here but did you all hear about the error on the display board in the boys shot put? I am not kidding! Apparently no athletes threw over 46 feet in the earlier flights but when the results came out someone was scored as a 48 foot throw. Apparently this bumped out another athlete from the top 12. The issue came up that the score board was not official and and error on that did not mean that was an accurate mark. So did you get that? A wrong scoreboard in WCAL means they all get to try again to make the final. A wrong scoreboard at CCS for a non WCAL school means too bad so sad. Hmmmmm.
ReplyDeleteThis is not unusual at this point in the season but there were multiple issues at last week's semifinals. Aside from the shot put issue you mentioned, a runner missed his heat in the 800m and was placed in the 4th heat by the crew at the finish line. He should have been DQ'ed. There was also a DQ in the 1600m relay which resulted in a protest and some drama leading to the final.
ReplyDeleteAny others that I did not hear about?
Coach Bell was yelling at parents and coaches out at Discus. Not sure what happened there though.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the decision to rerun the WCAL athletes was made by those who honestly think these athletes should have previously qualified from their times run at earlier races. Perhaps these athletes were going to find a way into CCS no matter how they finished at WCAL finals? That could be a reason for the convenient excuse of the video board, and an answer to why it was still affecting races likely hours apart. Remember, no other athletes in the same races or races in between were so adversely affected that it warranted their rerun. Only those who had previously hit the auto mark within the season. My personal assertion is that this was a way to circumvent the current system and a decision made by people who answer to no one, with conflicts of interest, and on their way out the door. The 1600 runner being added just makes the whole thing completely implausible. He qualified in the 3200 later in the meet. This was all about the in-season auto time. I also believe that we were never even meant to know about this matter if not for someone probably within the league and unhappy too, casually mentioning it on this site.
ReplyDeleteOK. I am pretty tired of all the misinformation that is being spread about the WCAL run off--@8:55 am was the proverbial straw. Do any of the people posting on this site know who ruled on the run off for the four athletes in the WCAL? Reading through this strand, it appears people think it was some inside job that occurred because the WCAL has special pull and power over CCS, perhaps because Steve Filios is a grad of Serra and worked at St. Francis for many years. To read Steve Filios' integrity being impugned is very very disappointing to me, especially when he had nothing to do with the ruling. The ruling was made by Hal Harkness, the CIF referee for all rules issues in both Cross Country and Track in California. The decision was made--by Hal, using precedent--because at the trials on Tuesday and Wednesday, the scoreboard clock had been activated by the starter's pistol, but, unbeknownst to the competitors and coaches, it was not activated by the pistol on Friday. Whether we agree with the CIF decision or not, it WAS NOT the result of any secret cabalistic subterfuge, and neither Filios not any WCAL coach, AD, or the commissioner of the League did anything but follow the protocol--which I imagine and hope any coach at any school would try to use if they felt that their athlete did not have a fair chance to compete..
ReplyDeleteTo finally put all of this to rest, a protest was filed following the WCAL Finals in a timely manner. The protest was decided upon by Hal Harkness, CIF Rules interpreter, through the CCS. The runoff was held at Serra since it was a neutral site. This was not given special consideration because it came from the WCAL. No need to go into any more specifics that those. Anyone who has worked with Steve Filios knows how hard he tries to do the best by all athletes in the CCS. Our track and field and cross country championships are superior quality meets because of his leadership. However, the meets are ultimately run by coaches and officials and so human fallibility will always play a role.
ReplyDeleteGood luck to all this Friday. As athletes, coaches, and spectators let us all do our best to pursue victory with honor.
Jim Marheineke
Junipero Serra High School
Sorry but the above two posts only harms your argument. “No need to go into specifics?” Love how the WCAL acts. Please explain how a scoreboard no linked to the starting pistol effects your results? The Mitty boys got beat really bad. Ran over 2 min. That’s not a clock problem. I also heard everyone in the race was supposed to be invited. Was this not the case?
ReplyDeleteCoaches McCrystke and Marheinek: The big reason the community is upset with the decision is that only a select few were chosen to compete in this second runoff. You can't possibly look at who was chosen amongst the group and not scratch your head. Why those athletes? Why not every competitor who was in the race? That would have been the EQUITABLE decision. The ruling was not fair to all those competing. That much is clear
ReplyDeleteThe WCAL, CCS and Hal Harkness certainly did not "pursue victory with honor" because only a select few were chosen presumably because they had the "best chance" to make the state meet. That is why the majority of coaches were displeased. If you can't understand that or even acknowledge the unfairness that is the current situation, then you clearly aren't looking through an objective lens.
I believe everybody who competed in the final outside of the two automatic finishers was given an opportunity to take part in the race the following Tuesday. I assume a couple chose not to take part.
ReplyDeleteThe original races and results seemed to work out just fine for those who qualified in the top two or hit the auto time at WCAL finals. How come those guys didn't want to protest and run again?
ReplyDeleteIf this was a rerun of all effected races I would be fine with it. But the fact athletes who already met the standard or finished top 2 did not have to compete tells me this was not a rerun but a second chance time trial. That is the problem I have with this all.
ReplyDeleteMy son has been running track for 5 years and this is his first year in HS (800m and 1600m).He has been taught since Day 1 to never look at the scoreboard. His coaches or I have always given him his splits so there's never any confusion. At this point, he can also feel the difference between the pacing so that he definitely knows if he's running a 57 or 61 on a 400m split. He could of easily made the at large times in the 800 and 1600 and leagues and divisionals and took it easy but we didn't want to chance it. He went out and ran hard and took a first and second at both. I guess what's surprising to me is that people are justifying the fact that because technology failed, these kids should get a second chance. We didn't even have a scoreboard at our league finals! If my son had been in this exact same position, I would not have allowed him to participate in a run off nor would he have wanted to because he would accepted that it was his fault. Running the 80O and 1600 or 1600 and 3200 is not an excuse for not going hard. If you can't do the double turnaround, then don't run both! On a side note, how can we get the SJS to hold Master's prelims and finals a week apart. That must be nice!
ReplyDeleteDan,
ReplyDeleteSJS and most other sections have a divisional component which CCS does not. With only a semifinal and final, those meets are indeed spaced one week apart. I wish they could divide the first round into two divisional meets but then I believe we would have to go back to back for the semis and finals. I was in NCS and they also have semis and finals on back to back days. I don't know if there is a good solution that would work for everybody so that teams can compete against like-sized schools in the opening round and still be able to space the semis and finals so it's not back to back. I believe NCS teams have considered changing the format before but nothing has changed so far.
Dan, from a performance perspective, the SJS Masters (and many other sections) hold Friday/Saturday Trials/Finals that mirror the CIF State Championships the following week. I am incredibly impressed by any athletes that qualify for CIF in such a competitive state, even more so those that qualify in multiple events. Someone trying to double would be looking at 4 tough heats over the course of about 24 hours. The school calendar also has to be taken in to account, in years past, there were always athletes that had to decide between their high school graduations and competing at the state meet, hopefully the move up has reduced or eliminated that. I think the format makes it hard for the middle distance/long distance athletes to produce their fastest times, but with such a large geographical state there are no easy solutions. I'll be looking forward to seeing your son (and all of the other incredible athletes) compete this weekend at Davis. There is something truly special about seeing a young athlete's dreams come true by even making it to state, best of luck to all competing this weekend.
ReplyDeleteI think everyone should follow the CIF state championship format. Some kids have never had to run back to back races like they do at state at that level and just can't come back after making the finals.
ReplyDeleteDoes anyone know if the NCS MOC will be video live streamed at all?
ReplyDeleteAlbert- Thank you for the information.
ReplyDeleteDan T- You're correct and that's why Kellen is dropping the 800m in favor of the 1600m at Masters to increase his odds at making State. He's not a a point where it's realistic for him to try for both. We're hoping next year he will be ready for that double. Good luck this Saturday and bring your rain gear!
CCS has dropped the ball. Seriously no meet program with drops? This meet has gone down hill. And Gilroy. No real warm up area. SP & Discus facilitates are a joke. Less spectators.
ReplyDeleteTake a deep breath anonymous... program loaded online... even includes alternates...
ReplyDeletehttp://soqueltrack.com/results/
Coach Ibarra
NMC
Thanks Gus!
ReplyDeleteIt looks like we are learning 2 things tonight at the CCS: the WCAL is kicking butt in the distances and deserved a rerun, and the Westmont athlete learned from his teammate to jog the 1600 as a warmup and then come back and win the 800.
ReplyDeleteMacQuiddy did not run the 1600. Hopefully that error will be fixed.
ReplyDeleteAnyone know why Rayna Stanziano did not run in the girls 1600m at NCS trials after being the top seed at Tri Valley? She did run and advance in the 800m.
ReplyDeleteI scratched the 1600 to focus on the 800 and an alternate was put in well before race time. There was an error in the results that showed that I had raced. I laughed when I someone showed it to me.
ReplyDeleteHere is an historical list of the CCS Double Distance winners; first year of CCS was 1966, but girls don't come on to the scene until the early '70's and no 2 mile for the girls until the late '70's!! 7 girls have pulled off the 1600/3200 double, and 5 boys; 7 girls have also won the 8/16, and 6 boys...no one has done the 800/3200 double, though Anna Maxwell did win all 3!
ReplyDeleteCCS Double Distance Winners
Boys
2019: Colin Peattie Bellarmine CP 1600/3200
2017: Alex Scales Bellarmine CP 800/1600
2011: Chris Waschura Woodside HS 8/16
2010: Weston Strum Pioneer HS 8/16
2006: Ben Sitler St. Francis HS 16/32
2003: Jacob Evans Aptos HS 8/16
2001: Matt Bates Los Gatos HS 8/16
1997: Brendan Fitzgerald St. Ignatius CP 8/16
1985: J. Dominguez Leigh HS 16/32 (First Name?)
1984: Matt Giusto San Mateo HS 16/32
1979: Balderas San Jose HS 16/32 (First Name?)
Girls
2017: Alex Stout Pacific Collegiate HS 16/32
2014: Anna Maxwell San Lorenzo Valley HS 8/16
2013: Anna Maxwell San Lorenzo Valley HS 16/32
2012: Nikki Hiltz Aptos HS 8/16
2011: Nikki Hiltz Aptos HS 8/16
2002: Shannon Rowbury Sacred Heart Cathedral 8/16
2000: Alejandra Barrientos SLV 16/32
1995: Laneisha McPherson Silver Creek 8/16
*1992*: Lisa Couch 1600, Lisa Crough 800, both from Aptos…same person typo?
1990: Beth Bartholomew Fremont 8/16
1989: Beth Bartholomew Fremont 8/16
1988: Katie McCandless Castilleja HS 16/32
1987: Mary Mendoza Presentation HS 16/32
1986: Laurie Chapman Gunderson HS 16/32
1983: Corey Schubert Del Mar HS 16/32
Thanks Patrick. Looks like Colin joined a pretty elite group with his double victory and he is only a sophomore.
ReplyDelete1985 double winner was John Domingue (no "z") from Leigh. His junior year.
ReplyDeleteAnon 12:56: Thank you! I have also found Mr. Balderas' first name: Fernando.
ReplyDelete1992 Girls double-winner from Aptos was Lisa Crouch
ReplyDeletehttp://cifccs.org/sports/track/girls_history
Patrick, you spend more time on my site than I do.
ReplyDeleteHank
Hank: Probably...i keep a lot of records and lists for BCP running, and there is no place like your site for the history of the CCS. I've said it so many times before, but thanks!!!
ReplyDeleteAnd thanks to whoever cleared up the Lisa Crouch mystery...Hank, the 1992 CCS results have her listed with two different names.
I have visited Hank's site a time or two as well. It's an invaluable resource for not only CCS folks but to others around the state that might be searching for past results or more. We are all very thankful for all the time Hank has put in to build and maintain that site.
ReplyDeleteGoing back to the first comment, this is an interesting point. Even the SAT will now give an adversity score depending on where you live. Perhaps socio-economic status should be a factor in the equality of division placement as much as population?
ReplyDelete