View Full Version : Ntn
Saucy
11-11-2006, 10:23 PM
Just another question for all of us to get pissed over...
What teams still have a shot to capture the fourth spot in the NE rankings and possibly earn a wildcard to NTN?
spacemountain
11-11-2006, 10:53 PM
right now i see Shen and Coatesville are an obvious # 1 and # 2 but after this weekend i would see smithtown moving into the # 3 spot and then maybe danbury moving back to 4th and glastonbury moving up to 5th. But for any NYS team its going to come down to feds. I can also see Colliegate coming back into the mix but theyre guy that was injured probably wont be race sharp so im not sure how much that will help them. So as of now i see
1.Coatesville
2.Shen
3.Smithtown
4.Danbury
thats if i had to pick 4
NYrunner
11-13-2006, 08:13 AM
Two Ohio teams are in NTN....No offense to them but I think they will be near the 19-20 range at NTN.....They both have #5s way back. I think they will be duking it out with SW #3 for 18-20th at NTN way behind the rest of the field....
Ohio state champs:
Winner at 15:22
Woodridge-
1. Scott Hilditch - 15:46
2. Brian Himelright - 15:47
6. David Petrak - 16:05
9. Joey McCoy - 16:26
25. Tony Marette - 16:58(96 seconds behind winner 32 speed rating points)
Lasalle-
5. Jake Nusekabel - 15:48
7. Kyle Lang - 15:57
12. Ricky Lupp - 16:19
21. Corey Spriggs - 16:31
33. Michael Inderhees - 16:46(84 seconds behind winner 28 speed rating points)
Also the SW team that got an at-large ran the following at Rocky Mountain:
winner at 15:45
7) Scooter Foley 16:26(41 behind winner)
23) Josh Franke 16:58(73 back)
30) Laine Parish 17:03(78 back)
36) Sean Wilde 17:05
42) Devin Rathburn 17:10(85 back)
Notice that their #2 guy was almost 25 speed rating points (73 seconds) behind winner.
Let's wait and see how the NYS teams do at Feds. I think Warwick with 5 guys who have run 177 or higher have a shot at pulling off some thing big at Feds if they run well. Also if Collegiate runs to form they will be tough to keep out. I see a lot of NYS teams that can run with these 3 (especially SW #3) NTN teams.
NYrunner
11-13-2006, 09:19 AM
That at-large team looks pathetic (unless the winner is a favorite for a FLNAT runaway). Please tell me that wasn't their best performance of the season...
Collegiate has 5 guys who have hit 180 or higher which means if they run well they will have probably 5 guys with in 60 seconds of the Feds winner who will be a top 10 potential FLN guy....Warwick is in the same boat...
NYrunner
11-13-2006, 10:11 AM
Who won (individual) that Rocky Mountain race?
Luke Puskedra
Sully 800
11-13-2006, 10:13 AM
Also the SW team that got an at-large ran the following at Rocky Mountain:
winner at 15:45
7) Scooter Foley 16:26(41 behind winner)
23) Josh Franke 16:58(73 back)
30) Laine Parish 17:03(78 back)
36) Sean Wilde 17:05
42) Devin Rathburn 17:10(85 back)
Notice that their #2 guy was almost 25 speed rating points (73 seconds) behind winner.
Geez, I hadn't seen this info before at all, but was the race rated?
Quickly, even if the winner ran a 200 speed rating that team would be...
186
176
174
174
172
They'll be buried!
NYrunner
11-13-2006, 10:21 AM
Geez, I hadn't seen this info before at all, but was the race rated?
Quickly, even if the winner ran a 200 speed rating that team would be...
186
176
174
174
172
They'll be buried!
Meylan prob. rated it and he'll post his projections after FLNE/Cali State in about 12 days.....expect these teams at the bottom.
This is the problem we are facing for getting at-large bids. People just don't understand how good the NE is....This team would get their butts kicked by many NE teams that won't be at NTN. Yeah there are a lot of great teams but these 3 don't seem all that great. Very good but not better then some of the NE teams that won't even be considered for at-large.....How did these teams get the bids over the #2 MO team?
breng77
11-13-2006, 10:36 AM
I would probably still have Danbury 3, Smithtown 4. Danbury was better at Manhattan, Beat Glastonbury by more than Smithtown (at LL), and has yet to lose since losing to Shen at Manhattan. Yes they were close on saturday, with a bad race by their #2 but they still won it with their depth.
KenA55
11-13-2006, 11:09 AM
This is the problem we are facing for getting at-large bids......How did these teams get the bids over the #2 MO team?
...or the best IN team, or the best behind York in IL, or TX#3, or the AK champ, or WA#3....
Most everybody in the middle of the country is again scratching their heads over the way certain central regions were stacked at the end and the strange direction some of the at-large selection turned in. I really hope they get regionals set up out here where there's plenty of time for them and let the best sort it out for themselves who should be in at-large consideration and in what order at the end. There'll still be interesting cross-region choices to be made, but at least there'll be no more fuss about which teams within each region ought to be in consideration.
At most only one of the OH teams should have even been in consideration, there's simply no way you can support either of those OH teams being superior to the MI D1 Champ Pinckney. Not even close. Very difficult to place them ahead of the IN champ and IL runner-up as well. We need the regionals here.
xcrunna
11-13-2006, 01:11 PM
The SE is pretty weak as well. Midlothian Boys are probably better than the OH teams, but maybe not the SE #2. The way it will go is Shen, Coatesville & Danbury are probably locks. If Collegiate runs well at Feds they can get an at-large. Smithtown could use a big race to get in also. Glastonbury probably has an outside shot at best.
NYrunner
11-13-2006, 04:07 PM
"Selection of teams for the 2006 Nike Team Nationals will take place over four Sundays in November. The teams ranked 1 and 2 in each region are automatically invited. Teams ranked 3 and 4 are eligible for the four national at large slots in the 20-team field. If a regional top 2 team declines, the invitation goes to the 3rd ranked team in that region. If the 3rd ranked team declines, the slot is added to the at large pool".
The teams ranked 3-4 in the NE and Cali are only eligible for the last two at-large bids so it should say:
"Selection of teams for the 2006 Nike Team Nationals will take place over four Sundays in November. The teams ranked 1 and 2 in each region are automatically invited. Teams ranked 3 and 4 in all regions except the NE and Cali are eligible for the four national at large slots in the 20-team field. If a regional top 2 team declines, the invitation goes to the 3rd ranked team in that region. If the 3rd ranked team declines, the slot is added to the at large pool".
Why are the NE/Cali people not freaking out over this? The thing is run by Cali and NE people(Rich/Bloom) so why do they include such an un-fair practice where 6 regions have a better shot at an at-large bid? NTN built this into the selection process and I would love for someone to explain it.
Don't say they need to give out those first 4 at-large early so teams can plan their trip b/c the fact is the Cali teams and the other 4 at-large have to work everything out for themselves with short notice (only a week). Going from 8 teams to 12 that last weekend would not hurt anything and would be fair.
Sully 800
11-13-2006, 04:43 PM
Well the reason why is simple- Cali and NY finish their seasons later than the rest of the country. Many other teams will have been finished for 3+ weeks by the time Feds is run, so they really shouldn't be expected to keep training while having no idea whether they are even close to being considered for an at large bid.
However that is still of course not fair to the Cali or NE teams. Especially Pennsylvania, where the runners finish on a normal schedule but are screwed over by NY (the rest of New England at least only has to wait 1 week after their biggest meet). To solve the problem I guess they need to just standardize the schedules of different states but I don't see that happening.
Sully 800
11-13-2006, 04:50 PM
...or the best IN team, or the best behind York in IL, or TX#3, or the AK champ, or WA#3....
Most everybody in the middle of the country is again scratching their heads over the way certain central regions were stacked at the end and the strange direction some of the at-large selection turned in. I really hope they get regionals set up out here where there's plenty of time for them and let the best sort it out for themselves who should be in at-large consideration and in what order at the end. There'll still be interesting cross-region choices to be made, but at least there'll be no more fuss about which teams within each region ought to be in consideration.
At most only one of the OH teams should have even been in consideration, there's simply no way you can support either of those OH teams being superior to the MI D1 Champ Pinckney. Not even close. Very difficult to place them ahead of the IN champ and IL runner-up as well. We need the regionals here.
What do you think the chances are of some entrepreneurial minded people setting up their own unofficial regional meet? Many teams from the Midwest and Heartland are outraged each year once the NTN bids are placed. If you organized an interstate meet for each region I'm sure you would have plenty of bubble teams eager to go and have a chance to prove themselves. It could be hosted the week after most state meets are completed, and I don't think attendance would be a problem (heck you could probably get 10+ illinois teams to take their shot!)
It would take organization and money, and teams would have to pay their own way which might limit some prospects (but if they want it badly enough, any team could fundraise to go to a regional meet). Within a year or so it could easily be the best meet of the season for comparing teams across state lines, and therefore it might become a defacto regional qualifier.
Maybe its a pipe dream but it seems like some individuals and teams could start this process themselves instead of waiting for the NTN committee to come up with a regional meet for the whole country (which would take quite more time and effort because of the wacky scheduling conflicts).
KenA55
11-13-2006, 05:12 PM
I'd love to see it happen any way it can, but the NTN, if they were going to consider the results of such a meet, would have to agree to hold off another week with selections until after the fact.
juicynacho
11-13-2006, 05:14 PM
The SE is pretty weak as well. Midlothian Boys are probably better than the OH teams, but maybe not the SE #2. The way it will go is Shen, Coatesville & Danbury are probably locks. If Collegiate runs well at Feds they can get an at-large. Smithtown could use a big race to get in also. Glastonbury probably has an outside shot at best.
I would have only Shen right now is a lock. With Coatesville being the next closest thing to a lock. They are clearing deserving but I could see something funky happen and all of sudden they are left home. I would hardly however call Danbury a lock at all.
FAKE EDIT: The only way Shen doesn't get a bid is if they lose at Feds which shouldn't happen. And even if they just barely lose they will still get a bid.
Sully 800
11-13-2006, 05:22 PM
I'd love to see it happen any way it can, but the NTN, if they were going to consider the results of such a meet, would have to agree to hold off another week with selections until after the fact.
Well, if during planning stages there was enough interest in the meet I think you might be able to show the committee that a final large meet of the season was still to take place and maybe they would agree to that. It would basically be like New Englands- everyone has their state meet and then gets together for a REAL championship :p
daman
11-13-2006, 06:34 PM
Well the reason why is simple- Cali and NY finish their seasons later than the rest of the country. Many other teams will have been finished for 3+ weeks by the time Feds is run, so they really shouldn't be expected to keep training while having no idea whether they are even close to being considered for an at large bid.
However that is still of course not fair to the Cali or NE teams. Especially Pennsylvania, where the runners finish on a normal schedule but are screwed over by NY (the rest of New England at least only has to wait 1 week after their biggest meet). To solve the problem I guess they need to just standardize the schedules of different states but I don't see that happening.
It's not unfair if the majority of the states finish earlier than Cali and NY. That's only 2 states, why should every state adjust to their schedule just to make it "fair"?
And is it maybe more unfair to the states who finish in early November? Some states don't allow coach contact after state meet so the team has to train without coaches and can't use school facilities either.
And, as there is a month or more break from state to NTN, the focus is to peak at state and not NTN. So teams will have to peak for state, then try and hold that peak without coaching or use of facilities for a month. And if you live in a less than temperate region, weather can really limit how much you can run from November to December. At least Cali and NY have a 2 week break from their big meets which would seem ideal....a week off from racing, but 2 weeks to re-focus for NTN.
Of course, regionals would be perfect for the MW. All the states run their state meets within a week of each other, and the Parkside venue is always available. In fact, they just held a WI-IL border clash there this past weekend. They should invite the other states to that and there would be an unofficial regional meet.
xcrunna
11-13-2006, 09:09 PM
I would have only Shen right now is a lock. With Coatesville being the next closest thing to a lock. They are clearing deserving but I could see something funky happen and all of sudden they are left home. I would hardly however call Danbury a lock at all.
FAKE EDIT: The only way Shen doesn't get a bid is if they lose at Feds which shouldn't happen. And even if they just barely lose they will still get a bid.
Coatesville is ranked top 6 in the country with a team above them declining the bid. They've been #1 in the NE the entire time there is absolutely no way they don't earn a bid. Shen could theoretically bomb at Feds, but I really doubt that. Danbury I think did well enough at Manhattan and didn't lose the rest of the way , even with an off day for their #2 against the #5 team in the region(the fact that G'bury was ranked that high shows that the committee really respects these two teams).
juicynacho
11-13-2006, 09:18 PM
Coatesville is ranked top 6 in the country with a team above them declining the bid. They've been #1 in the NE the entire time there is absolutely no way they don't earn a bid. Shen could theoretically bomb at Feds, but I really doubt that. Danbury I think did well enough at Manhattan and didn't lose the rest of the way , even with an off day for their #2 against the #5 team in the region(the fact that G'bury was ranked that high shows that the committee really respects these two teams).
Well I didn't want to say that because everyone on here knows my PA bias. So that is why I just said the next closest thing to a lock. but yes I think they will definitely be there with Shen and Collegiate and maybe not Danbury. I am just not sold on Danbury yet, but I hope that they do get a bid, but it is out of their hands, because if Collegiate runs well then they are going to bypass them for the number 3 spot, assuming Shen still beats them at feds. Then it is up to the comitee to decide on whether 3 or 4 teams from the NE get to go.
BROWN POTATO
11-13-2006, 10:03 PM
Well I didn't want to say that because everyone on here knows my PA bias. So that is why I just said the next closest thing to a lock. but yes I think they will definitely be there with Shen and Collegiate and maybe not Danbury. I am just not sold on Danbury yet, but I hope that they do get a bid, but it is out of their hands, because if Collegiate runs well then they are going to bypass them for the number 3 spot, assuming Shen still beats them at feds. Then it is up to the comitee to decide on whether 3 or 4 teams from the NE get to go.
I'm not sure about collegiate just yet, even though i feel they should go, but you cannot count out smithtown either.
Between collegiate, coatesville, shen, danbury (who should get a bid next year), smithtown, and even glastonbury, there will be some good teams being left out of NTN this year
MBoggs
11-14-2006, 01:46 PM
I'm not sure about collegiate just yet, even though i feel they should go, but you cannot count out smithtown either.
agreed. i think they should go, but i don't see them going unless they beat shen at feds
Burned_in_Style
11-14-2006, 06:44 PM
agreed. i think they should go, but i don't see them going unless they beat shen at feds
collegiate is ready for feds...dont worry.
spacemountain
11-14-2006, 09:42 PM
nobodys is worrying. dont expect to go in there and win or take 2nd without a fight from shen smithtown liverpool fm queensbury and warwick
PineSol
11-14-2006, 10:38 PM
nobodys is worrying. dont expect to go in there and win or take 2nd without a fight from shen smithtown liverpool fm queensbury and warwick
It's going to be a dogfight, and a hell of a day. Good luck to everyone competing; hopefully, this Saturday may be deepest and best Federation race in the races history.
Burned_in_Style
11-15-2006, 12:05 AM
nobodys is worrying. dont expect to go in there and win or take 2nd without a fight from shen smithtown liverpool fm queensbury and warwick
of course not. the team that goes in cocky is most likely to lose.
but obviously people are worrying if they keep asking about dylan
Numbers Runner
11-15-2006, 12:11 AM
So, Chris, what are you expecting to do at Feds.? (teamwise)
Shen Rules
11-15-2006, 01:23 AM
I am sure they are expecting to do their best... wherever that will take them.
NYrunner
11-15-2006, 05:55 AM
Collegiate has a solid chance at 2nd if they run to potential. Warwick could knock off Shen if their 3-5 run to pre-state level. Combine their sectional and state speed ratings and taking best for each runner to get idea of potential (without Fox who didn't run sectionals or state)
192
190
186
174
171
Burned_in_Style
11-15-2006, 08:28 AM
So, Chris, what are you expecting to do at Feds.? (teamwise)
we just want everyone to leave it all out on the course. everyone on our team has gotten back into the swing of things again so i think its going to be a very fun race. Shen will win if Suriano and Danaher both run good races but if they slip up a bit like Suriano did at states...things could turn out to be a bit more interesting. I'm sure everyone has worked hard all year. let the best team win.
My sleeper pick is Liverpool for the win at feds
intheknow
11-15-2006, 08:38 AM
NY Runner Wrote:
"Why are the NE/Cali people not freaking out over this? The thing is run by Cali and NE people (Rich/Bloom)..."
Someone whould let Josh Rowe and John Truax know this, as I'm sure they'd love to get some sleep right about now. Just having fun with you NY Runner. Josh and John are the Nike guys who created the meet and spend more time on it than they do with their families from Oct-Dec. They are the kings of this sport. As much as some people want to politicize some of the event by saying that Nike has corporate interests and bias, etc, etc....John and Josh are the two biggest fans of the sport I know. They are ALL about the best interests of the runners, the teams, and giving the kids an experience that is second to none. I've been fortunate enought to be part of the first 2 NTN as a worker and will be there again this year, and it is the best running event i've ever seen....i've attended the Olympics, olympic trials, NCAA's for everything....and this meet is the best of them all in creating a championship atmosphere.
NY Runner, I agree that Cali and NE are stacked, but the NTN committee from around the country does their best to be fair and create a diverse meet. What makes the meet great is that there are teams from all over the USA. IMO, the meet wouldn't be as cool is there were 7 Cal teams, 5 NY teams, and 7 or 8 others sprinkled in from around the country.....and I'm a northeast guy.
IF the goal of this meet is to create interest, energy, and excitement in the sport AND determine a national champion.....then it has far exceeded it's mission. While I understand that there are lots of teams who will have legitimate claims to at-large bids, the teams that will be competing for the win will be there already. Now my own memory is gonna make me think about retracting part of that....as I believe Mead received an at-large in '04 and finished 3rd overall.
ANyhow, the meet is awesome....the energy and interest it has created has never been seen before in HS XC, and I can't wait to be in Portland to see it myself!
intheknow
11-15-2006, 09:36 AM
wow, you are correct.
watchout
11-15-2006, 09:53 AM
Two Ohio teams are in NTN....No offense to them but I think they will be near the 19-20 range at NTN.....They both have #5s way back. I think they will be duking it out with SW #3 for 18-20th at NTN way behind the rest of the field....
Ohio state champs:
Winner at 15:22
Woodridge-
1. Scott Hilditch - 15:46
2. Brian Himelright - 15:47
6. David Petrak - 16:05
9. Joey McCoy - 16:26
25. Tony Marette - 16:58(96 seconds behind winner 32 speed rating points)
Lasalle-
5. Jake Nusekabel - 15:48
7. Kyle Lang - 15:57
12. Ricky Lupp - 16:19
21. Corey Spriggs - 16:31
33. Michael Inderhees - 16:46(84 seconds behind winner 28 speed rating points)
Also the SW team that got an at-large ran the following at Rocky Mountain:
winner at 15:45
7) Scooter Foley 16:26(41 behind winner)
23) Josh Franke 16:58(73 back)
30) Laine Parish 17:03(78 back)
36) Sean Wilde 17:05
42) Devin Rathburn 17:10(85 back)
Notice that their #2 guy was almost 25 speed rating points (73 seconds) behind winner.
Let's wait and see how the NYS teams do at Feds. I think Warwick with 5 guys who have run 177 or higher have a shot at pulling off some thing big at Feds if they run well. Also if Collegiate runs to form they will be tough to keep out. I see a lot of NYS teams that can run with these 3 (especially SW #3) NTN teams.
Yeah, but since Parrish was usually their #5 guy, and their spread was usually less than 35 ... you can assume that this wasn't their best race (and that Foley and Parish ran about their normal). If you assume that, then having their #5 "only" 78 seconds behind the winner of a race doesn't sound TOO bad... although I'll agree that they won't do that great at NTN (I'll agree with a #15-20 range).
Say that Puskedra's performance was a 196, for example... that puts them between 182 and 170. That, as you said, isn't going to score that great at NTN at all. But it probably looks better than suggesting sub-170's for half their team.
That at-large team looks pathetic (unless the winner is a favorite for a FLNAT runaway). Please tell me that wasn't their best performance of the season...
It wasn't their best.... but they don't get a ton better, either.
Geez, I hadn't seen this info before at all, but was the race rated?
Quickly, even if the winner ran a 200 speed rating that team would be...
186
176
174
174
172
They'll be buried!
I'd say drop it down 3-5 points to get a quick estimate of what it might score (I don't have a good read on the meet, but he is "only" a contender for a FLN qualifying spot... so probably less than 200, probably more than 194.
...or the best IN team, or the best behind York in IL, or TX#3, or the AK champ, or WA#3....
Most everybody in the middle of the country is again scratching their heads over the way certain central regions were stacked at the end and the strange direction some of the at-large selection turned in. I really hope they get regionals set up out here where there's plenty of time for them and let the best sort it out for themselves who should be in at-large consideration and in what order at the end. There'll still be interesting cross-region choices to be made, but at least there'll be no more fuss about which teams within each region ought to be in consideration.
At most only one of the OH teams should have even been in consideration, there's simply no way you can support either of those OH teams being superior to the MI D1 Champ Pinckney. Not even close. Very difficult to place them ahead of the IN champ and IL runner-up as well. We need the regionals here.
Thanks for including the rest of the nation's deserving teams/regions, I always get irritated when it's always "NE is getting hosed." without consideration to the other actual deserving teams as well.
The SE is pretty weak as well. Midlothian Boys are probably better than the OH teams, but maybe not the SE #2. The way it will go is Shen, Coatesville & Danbury are probably locks. If Collegiate runs well at Feds they can get an at-large. Smithtown could use a big race to get in also. Glastonbury probably has an outside shot at best.
Yes, the SE is still pretty weak ... but two things. First, I wanted to voice my concern over the thought that Danbury is a lock. How could they be a lock when Glastonbury is consistantly getting closer and closer every meet, and then tied them at the end? Assuming that Danbury is a lock implies that Glastonbury should be a lock as well, in which case so should Smithtown, and so should any team that beats Smithtown, or comes close to it, at Feds... and, well, that isn't the case.
In short, I'm thinking that Glastonbury might have ran Danbury's chances out the window. Or, if you want to think of it the other way, Danbury's sunk back out of the picture.
I'll share my "estimations" of speed ratings for some state meets.
Not knowing what Meylan decided it was, I used my own numbers... but this is what Meylan's NTN projections suggest he used:
(note: these projections of his were not based solely on the state meets, and that's why they aren't uniform)
Bolas 198.4 15:33.1 = 15:28 200.0
Workman 190.6 15:52.4 = 15:14 200.0
Hoge 181.1 16:14.8 = 15:18 200.0
Rampel 165.4 17:10.9 = 15:27 200.0
Muir 165.1 17:25.0 = 15:40 200.0
Marshall 162.1 17:50.7 = 15:57 200.0
Anderson 157.7 17:55.0 = 15:48 200.0
so I'm assuming that he found 200.0 was equal to around 15:15 or 15:20. (Bolas ran tactical, and the last 3 didn't really have that good of races). I myself used 15:14 as the standard.
note: I realize that he does not measure from 200.0 to find his ratings, but rather the numbers come from the # of seconds from "baseline" divided by 3 ... but explaining it this was makes it easier to see.
assuming that he came up with a similar difference between the years that I found (10 seconds), that would put the 200.0 mark at 15:04 or 15:10.
That put's Chapel Hill, SE#2, at:
15:39 = 188-190
16:34 = 170-172
16:36 = 169-171
16:40 = 168-170
16:51 = 164-166
note that that, as well, was not their best day, but nonetheless gives an idea of where they're at.
We can also compare other states, using the same process... for WA State.
Cosby 192.7 15:55 = 15:33
Nepon 191.6 15:56 = 15:31
Olsen 186.1 16:09 = 15:27
Hatcher 185.6 16:12 = 15:29
Gimpel 185 16:23 = 15:38
Hickerson 185 16:12 = 15:27
Quackenbush 181.5 16:24 = 15:28
Palmer 180.9 16:30 = 15:33
Lynch 180.7 16:31 = 15:33
Daratha 179.7 16:34 = 15:33
Maloney 179.7 16:28 = 15:27
Bishop 170.7 16:55 = 15:27
Hawkins 164.7 17:13 = 15:27
Roberts 163 17:48 = 15:37
I think it's safe to assume it was rated somewhere around 15:30, +/- 3 seconds or so. In comparison, I had it rated 15:22. So we will assume it was somewhere between 15:22 and 15:31 (so within a 3 speed rating estimation). I found this year to be 9 seconds slower than last year, so 200.0 becomes 15:31-15:40.
note: fastest time on the day was Seattle Prep's Max O'Donoghue-McDonald in 15:32, which would be a 200-203.
That puts WA's top 3 teams at...
Joel Ferris:
15:44 = 196-199
15:58 = 191-194
15:58 = 191-194
16:31 = 180-183
16:47 = 175-178
Mead:
16:00 = 190-193
16:02 = 189-192
16:07 = 188-191
16:40 = 177-180
16:57 = 171-174
Central Valley:
15:57 = 191-194
16:03 = 189-192
16:34 = 179-182
16:47 = 175-178
17:08 = 168-171
We cannot apply this process to all states, since Meylan didn't go through all that painstaking detail, which most sane people wouldn't... but I estimated Virginia last year to be about a 15:04 for a 200.0 mark, which would put this year at around 15:34.
Midlothian:
15:59.31 = 192
16:26.11 = 183
16:36.33 = 179
16:47.22 = 176
17:06.81 = 169
If you want other states' estimates, just ask, I have most, or have some idea at least for most.. some still need reworking.
usatf44
11-15-2006, 10:02 AM
And I think this shows that the at large bids work. When a region is so stacked or lack of head to head means the top two in a region are too close to 3 and or 4 that is what the at large are for. at worse case maybe I would add 2 to 4 more at large and make sure the pool could be used anywhere. But lets remember these points:
1 NTN is for finding a National Champion, not ranking teams - Short of teams in states not allowing attendance which NTN can do nothing about. This is being accomplished.
2 Teams that have a legit chance to win seem to get bids. If a up and coming wants to get it's feet wet or experience the meet they have the open race.
3 NTN is pulling this of without pissing of the State HS Organizations for the most part. And this will continue as long as posters don't cry for regionals to much and keep the in season travel reasonable. Any Team Goals should be League, Section, and State First, NTN is a Goal for teams that can reach beyond that.
4 The impact on the sport has been dramatic, unprecedented, and overwhelmingly positive.
watchout
11-15-2006, 10:12 AM
And I think this shows that the at large bids work. When a region is so stacked or lack of head to head means the top two in a region are too close to 3 and or 4 that is what the at large are for. at worse case maybe I would add 2 to 4 more at large and make sure the pool could be used anywhere. But lets remember these points:
1 NTN is for finding a National Champion, not ranking teams - Short of teams in states not allowing attendance which NTN nothing aboutm this is being accomplished.
2 Teams that have a legit chance to win seem to get bids. If a up and coming wants to get it's feet wet or experience the meet they have the open race.
3 NTN is pulling this of without pissing of the State HS Organizations for the most part. And this will continue as long as posters don't cry for regionals to much and keep the in season travel reasonable. Any Team Goals should be League, Section, and State First, NTN is a Goal for teams that can reach beyond that.
4 The impact on the sport has been dramatic, unprecedented, and overwhelmingly positive.
I'm somewhat confused about your first paragraph, but that's because it's 7 am and I have not YET gone to sleep... although will do so soon :)
I'm assuming that you are referring to how Cheyenne Central WY and Los Alamos NM seemed very close in the SW, and so Cheyenne got an at-large bid?
and your 4 points, I agree with completely. although I do like to think that NTN is also for finding out who the top teams are nationally (and so teams that could finish in the top tier of NTN should be surely involved regardless of where they are from (limited regional participation) or whatever other reason)
xcrunna
11-15-2006, 10:49 AM
First, I wanted to voice my concern over the thought that Danbury is a lock. How could they be a lock when Glastonbury is consistantly getting closer and closer every meet, and then tied them at the end? Assuming that Danbury is a lock implies that Glastonbury should be a lock as well, in which case so should Smithtown, and so should any team that beats Smithtown, or comes close to it, at Feds... and, well, that isn't the case.
In short, I'm thinking that Glastonbury might have ran Danbury's chances out the window. Or, if you want to think of it the other way, Danbury's sunk back out of the picture.
Well, Danbury's #2 was way off his usual spot at New Englands. At State Opens, Glastonbury just had a monster race for them, spread-wise much better than they'd shown. I looked at how many points Glastonbury would've scored at Brown with their State Opens spread. It was about 50, or winning by 20 over Smithtown. I know the mud might have affected that a little bit, but still that shows significant improvement and a different team than the one that lost to Smithtown. Whether the committee thinks like me or you we will see.
watchout
11-15-2006, 10:52 AM
Well, Danbury's #2 was way off his usual spot at New Englands. At State Opens, Glastonbury just had a monster race for them, spread-wise much better than they'd shown. I looked at how many points Glastonbury would've scored at Brown with their State Opens spread. It was about 50, or winning by 20 over Smithtown. I know the mud might have affected that a little bit, but still that shows significant improvement and a different team than the one that lost to Smithtown. Whether the committee thinks like me or you we will see.
I don't think it's a simple case of "Is Danbury getting worse or is Glastonbury getting better?", I think it's a case of "Danbury and Glastonbury look extremely close. In fact, Danbury only won because of the 6th man tie breaker last time they faced off. But this team beat it's nearest competitor by x points, it wasn't that close. They showed more separation, and weren't so vulnerable lately, so we'll pick them"
usatf44
11-15-2006, 01:00 PM
1 NTN is for finding a National Champion, not ranking teams - Short of teams in states not allowing attendance which NTN can do nothing about. This is being accomplished.
7am that's it
Yes I think they are make sure that teams that can win it are there, but 2 to 4 more at large might not hurt, and I would rather see that than regionals.
sisyphus
11-15-2006, 01:08 PM
You guys have to remember that at least one Danbury runner, their usual #3, got caught in the rugby scrum at 100 meters. This is different than a runner having a bad day. Once a race has a 25 person pile up that impedes an additional 25 or so runners, the race kind of loses it's ability to assess strengths and weaknesses of a team. I don't think half the teams at New England's, maybe more, had a 1-5 split that resembled their state meets.
cornwall
11-15-2006, 01:48 PM
Anyone that says Glastonbury should go is forgetting one thing- Danbury beat them in three meetings at the end of the season when it matters most. Was it close? You bet. Glastonbury is probably the best runner up team in the history of the state and they showed a lot of heart and class these past few weeks losing close meets. But all the same Danbury has proven themselves to be a little bit better and should get a shot at NTN off their great meets at Great American, Manhattan and all three championships meets.
Sully 800
11-15-2006, 02:01 PM
And I think this shows that the at large bids work. When a region is so stacked or lack of head to head means the top two in a region are too close to 3 and or 4 that is what the at large are for. at worse case maybe I would add 2 to 4 more at large and make sure the pool could be used anywhere. But lets remember these points:
1 NTN is for finding a National Champion, not ranking teams - Short of teams in states not allowing attendance which NTN can do nothing about. This is being accomplished.
2 Teams that have a legit chance to win seem to get bids. If a up and coming wants to get it's feet wet or experience the meet they have the open race.
3 NTN is pulling this of without pissing of the State HS Organizations for the most part. And this will continue as long as posters don't cry for regionals to much and keep the in season travel reasonable. Any Team Goals should be League, Section, and State First, NTN is a Goal for teams that can reach beyond that.
4 The impact on the sport has been dramatic, unprecedented, and overwhelmingly positive.
As showed a few posts up Mead 2004 and Toga 2005 both came to the meet as at large bids and finished 3rd and 1st respectively.
I wouldn't be so sure that a top 5 team doesn't get invited some time...
NYrunner
11-15-2006, 02:07 PM
As showed a few posts up Mead 2004 and Toga 2005 both came to the meet as at large bids and finished 3rd and 1st respectively.
I wouldn't be so sure that a top 5 team doesn't get invited some time...
Naperville girls only went last year b/c of a MI team declining. They ended up 4th and they were not even suppose to be there.
Sully 800
11-15-2006, 02:13 PM
Naperville girls only went last year b/c of a MI team declining. They ended up 4th and they were not even suppose to be there.
Thanks! I knew there was an even better example on the girls side but I couldn't think of it. If that's not reason enough to switch to regional meets I don't know what is.
sisyphus
11-15-2006, 02:14 PM
If Collegiate, Shen go Quinella at Feds:
Coatesville, Shen, Collegiate, Danbury (all should go) All have beaten teams going to NTN. except Coatesvile but that doesn't seem to matter)
If Collegiate misses top two at Feds:
Coatesville, Shen (assuming they win), Danbury (only three that have beaten teams that are going to NTN to my knowledge and Danbury has Manhattan over any other school)
Cali gets the other wildcard.
Only way Smithtown leaps ahead of Danbury is to win Feds.
Only way glastonbury goes. Smithtown and Collegiate blow up at Feds:
Coatesville, Shen, Danbury, Glastonbury
Although in this scenario Cali still gets the other wildcard most likely.
If other schools start figuring into the mix, especially Warwick, Danbury has to go with a 2-0 (one head to head, one merge) record against them.
breng77
11-15-2006, 03:08 PM
I doubt Glastonbury will go unless all the NY teams implode at Feds. AS good as they have run that would shut out CA from the the second at large in favor of 4 NE teams, and i just don't see that happening.
Numbers Runner
11-15-2006, 03:42 PM
I know Dylan has been out a while but they are the only team that took it to Shen htis year and they MAY just be healthy again. Still only a 5 man team though .......
Glastonbury is close but out.
Warwick has to win Feds. to get in as does Smithtown.
I can't see California getting shut out of at larges but it could happen.
I think it's Coatesville, Shen, Danbury and either Collegiate or a California team as the other at large. I'm putting money on it.
I know Dylan has been out a while but they are the only team that took it to Shen htis year and they MAY just be healthy again. Still only a 5 man team though .......
Glastonbury is close but out.
Warwick has to win Feds. to get in as does Smithtown.
I can't see California getting shut out of at larges but it could happen.
I think it's Coatesville, Shen, Danbury and either Collegiate or a California team as the other at large. I'm putting money on it.
It will be Coatsville, the NYS winner, and the NYS runner-up IF it is Collegiate in a very close score, or, if it is Shen in a very close score. The other at-large will be a CA team as they are very strong relative to the NE this year. I would not have made the last point for the last two years. Danbury's only way in would seem to be if Smithtown or Warwick, or some other team wins NYS convincingly.
spacemountain
11-15-2006, 05:16 PM
are you kidding me? i wouldnt believe that smithtown has to win feds to make it. I believe that if they come top 2 behind Shen they should get an at large.
wilson
11-15-2006, 05:22 PM
are you kidding me? i wouldnt believe that smithtown has to win feds to make it. I believe that if they come top 2 behind Shen they should get an at large.
But Danbury has beaten them.
backtoback
11-15-2006, 05:22 PM
are you kidding me? i wouldnt believe that smithtown has to win feds to make it. I believe that if they come top 2 behind Shen they should get an at large.
if shen wins feds you know its coatesville, shen, and probably danbury. i do not anticipate ne getting 2 at larges this year. danbury ran faster at manhattan and has won everything since then. smithtown if they get 2nd it would have to be a very, very close second to be considered. you did see shen girls beat bethlehem a few years ago at feds and they were not even considered for ntn and bethlehem still went. would it be a shame that the current #18 team be left home, yes of course but that is the way it is right now.
spacemountain
11-15-2006, 05:23 PM
not head to head only in a merge + smithtown has beaten glastonbury by a good amount and danbury is winning by less and less each week.
anyway good luck to to any teams/individuals competing this weekend.
Numbers Runner
11-15-2006, 06:03 PM
Your argument against Danbury is lousy. Glastonbury is so much better than they were at Brown now. Danbury has beaten them 3 times including by once by 27.
Yes, Danbury beat Smithtown only in a merge but it is not going to matter anyway - Smithtown is not beating Shenendehowa Saturday and they will not be going to NTN's.
It's Danbury, Collegiate, and probably Carmichael of CA for 2 spots (Shen and Coatesville are in). If Carmichael falters in CA States, then one more team goes from NE - probably whoever finishes in top 2 at Feds. with Shen.
BconXC
11-15-2006, 06:08 PM
You guys are all underestimating state feds, the top 2 teams will most likely go to NTN (2nd place with atlarge) Meets at the end of the season count more than at the beggining of the season. Its wat you are doing now and not what you were doing
Whether its glastonbury getting faster, or danbury getting slower, danbury was so close to losing their last meet, so i think a NY team will move ahead of them. However, Danbury has such a stacked team for next year and will definetly go to NTN next year (Unless injuries happen of course)
spacemountain
11-15-2006, 06:09 PM
Your argument against Danbury is lousy. Glastonbury is so much better than they were at Brown now. Danbury has beaten them 3 times including by once by 27.
Yes, Danbury beat Smithtown only in a merge but it is not going to matter anyway - Smithtown is not beating Shenendehowa Saturday and they will not be going to NTN's.
It's Danbury, Collegiate, and probably Carmichael of CA for 2 spots (Shen and Coatesville are in). If Carmichael falters in CA States, then one more team goes from NE - probably whoever finishes in top 2 at Feds. with Shen.
ok dude you cant say glastonbury is better than smithtown now because there is no way to prove that. also dont say that warwick or smithtown or any team is out of NTN contention.
Burned_in_Style
11-15-2006, 06:10 PM
ok dude you cant say glastonbury is better than smithtown now because there is no way to prove that. also dont say that warwick or smithtown or any team is out of NTN contention.
chill. smithtown can let their legs do the running
watchout
11-15-2006, 06:26 PM
If Collegiate, Shen go Quinella at Feds:
Coatesville, Shen, Collegiate, Danbury (all should go) All have beaten teams going to NTN. except Coatesvile but that doesn't seem to matter)
If Collegiate misses top two at Feds:
Coatesville, Shen (assuming they win), Danbury (only three that have beaten teams that are going to NTN to my knowledge and Danbury has Manhattan over any other school)
Cali gets the other wildcard.
Only way Smithtown leaps ahead of Danbury is to win Feds.
Only way glastonbury goes. Smithtown and Collegiate blow up at Feds:
Coatesville, Shen, Danbury, Glastonbury
Although in this scenario Cali still gets the other wildcard most likely.
If other schools start figuring into the mix, especially Warwick, Danbury has to go with a 2-0 (one head to head, one merge) record against them.
Interesting, I like how you're laying it out.
Let me try.
El Toro CA and Jesuit CA both beat teams headed to NTN (LaSalle at Stanford)
Davis Senior CA tied a team going to NTN (LaSalle at Stanford)
Madera CA beat a team that beat a team headed to NTN (El Toro)
Collegiate beat a team going to NTN (Shen at GAXC)
Smithtown and Glastonbury both beat a team that's beat a team going to NTN (Collegiate at Brown)
Glastonbury tied a team that beat a team that's going to NTN (Danbury at New England's)
Fort Collins CO beat a team that's going to NTN (Cheyenne Central)
Campbell County WY beat a team that's going to NTN twice (Cheyenne Central)
Grand Junction CO and Dakota Ridge CO beat teams that are going to NTN (Cheyenne Central)
Plano West TX beat a team that's going to NTN (Southlake Carroll)
etc.
and there were 7 teams not going to NTN that beat teams that beat teams via other meets as well (Griak, for example)
I don't think that puts Danbury as a near automatic at-large. They never BEAT anyone, just hung relatively close to Shenendehowa. And that's not better an argument than Central Valley's hanging close to Mead at state, when it counted. Plus dominating Sunfair (albeit over teams not ranked highly) and a runner-up at Danner despite their #3 being horribly sick.
I wouldn't count them out of having a chance at an at-large yet, and I wouldn't count out one or two California teams or Fort Zumwalt MO from being able to pick up that last at-large bid, either.
sisyphus
11-15-2006, 07:33 PM
I don't count intraregion competition because it clouds the issue too much.
Forgot about Lasalle. That ups the Cali teams' stock.
Danbury beat Potosi at GA right, or am I screwing something up?
I'm liking this wildcard thing less and less all the time. It seems there are teams already in that couldn't be top 10 in Cali or NE. But at least it's a "diverse" field. That gets euphamism of the year.
A shame Cali and NE have to fight it out. Both regions are so strong that two top 15 teams will probably be left home.
Edit: Nevermind about Danbury at GA. It was Tupelo and only their girls qualified. More sleep for me.
Burned_in_Style
11-15-2006, 07:43 PM
chances are Jesuit will get at large bid. that leaves only 1 left :eek:
El Cuerpo
11-15-2006, 08:00 PM
Anyone that says Glastonbury should go is forgetting one thing- Danbury beat them in three meetings at the end of the season when it matters most. Was it close? You bet. Glastonbury is probably the best runner up team in the history of the state and they showed a lot of heart and class these past few weeks losing close meets. But all the same Danbury has proven themselves to be a little bit better and should get a shot at NTN off their great meets at Great American, Manhattan and all three championships meets.
gd Dam, THANK YOU
Coatesville (while not abiding to NTN travel suggestions) is clearly the best team out there. No one can take away from that, not even if "something crazy happens at feds".
Shenendehowa has placed well at Great American and at Manhattan, and is the obvious favorite at feds. They deserve to go, but if they fall to 3rd or worse at feds (doubt it), the committe will have a hard choice to make.
I think we can all agree that as of today, we ALL KNOW THE FACTS of what the top 2 teams have done.
Unfortunatley, the commitee does not sympathize with injury or poor race conditions. The fact that Dylan has been out for Collegiate has clearly been a huge loss, but I don't think they know about how Danbury's #2 runner ran with an injured achilles and their #4ish guy was caught in a huge pile up at the beginning of New England's. Glastonbury sure has improved, but the point is that they were consistantly beaten by Danbury, and even if they were recently close, all of the times they have gone head to head have been in the last 3 weeks. Its not like Danbury won a meet against them in September and then depended on that meet for a head to head decision. In the last 3 weeks Danbury vs. Glastonbury has a clear and decsive record:
Danbury (3-0)
Glatonbury (0-3)
Danbury beat Smithtown in a merge and beat a team that was close to them at Brown 3 times in the last 3 weeks. The bottom line is that unless Smithtown wins fed's or comes in second by less than 10-15 points, Danbury should be the at large bid from the northeast and the rankings should stay in the status quo (except for collegiate, but thats a different issue)
KenA55
11-15-2006, 08:01 PM
Danbury beat Potosi at GA right, or am I screwing something up?....Edit: Nevermind about Danbury at GA. It was Tupelo...
...and Potosi didn't run GA either, they're undefeated and beat The Woodlands in the Chile Pepper.
BconXC
11-15-2006, 08:26 PM
it will be interesting to see what happens, its a shame so many NTN worthy teams are gonna be left out.
Everyone in the NE should be either at state feds or at their homes waiting for the results to come out. With bowdoin park being such a brutal course, and the competition being what it is, were bound to see some upsets. One guy having an off race=a lot of additional points for his team
Im sure 2nd place will have to be looked at to see how they compare to danbury, but if any team races close to shen or far from 3rd place, they'll get in front danbury somehow. Feds is just such a big factor
alaska55
11-15-2006, 08:46 PM
You guys that are using times at meets to judge how good a team is are nuts . Have any of you ever run a 5k in the southwest, have you seen the mountains there. As for midlothians state meet(virginia) the course ran at least 40 seconds slower than last year due to 6 inch tall grass, soft ground(like mush) under the grass,big headwind on the longest part and warm muggy weather. The week before they ave. 16:05 on a fair legit 5k course. Their #1 runner ran 22 second faster on the state course last year. The week before at their region meet last year he ran 16:01 and on the same course this year h ran 15:37, so take them speed ratings and shove them. They mean nothing unless you can reproduce conditions.
daman
11-15-2006, 09:20 PM
I wouldn't be too upset by claiming how many teams won't make it that should. US#4 Dexter MI, isn't allowed to go to NTN, so that right there pushes all your teams back one notch in the coulda, woulda, shoulda, game.
Your own Marc Bloom also lists 5 MW teams in his Super 25 and he left out Pinckney MI, who is regionally ranked higher than #23 Warren Central and is generally believed to be better than the 2 OH teams that made NTN, as are St Charles and Schaumburg from IL. He has those 2 Ohio teams ranked right behind Danbury as well. So there are several teams from the MW region alone that can claim how well they would do at NTN. The NE isn't alone in claiming how many teams should be in the meet.
Edge^'s4Free
11-15-2006, 10:02 PM
gd Dam, THANK YOU
Coatesville (while not abiding to NTN travel suggestions) is clearly the best team out there. No one can take away from that, not even if "something crazy happens at feds".
Shenendehowa has placed well at Great American and at Manhattan, and is the obvious favorite at feds. They deserve to go, but if they fall to 3rd or worse at feds (doubt it), the committe will have a hard choice to make.
I think we can all agree that as of today, we ALL KNOW THE FACTS of what the top 2 teams have done.
Unfortunatley, the commitee does not sympathize with injury or poor race conditions. The fact that Dylan has been out for Collegiate has clearly been a huge loss, but I don't think they know about how Danbury's #2 runner ran with an injured achilles and their #4ish guy was caught in a huge pile up at the beginning of New England's. Glastonbury sure has improved, but the point is that they were consistantly beaten by Danbury, and even if they were recently close, all of the times they have gone head to head have been in the last 3 weeks. Its not like Danbury won a meet against them in September and then depended on that meet for a head to head decision. In the last 3 weeks Danbury vs. Glastonbury has a clear and decsive record:
Danbury (3-0)
Glatonbury (0-3)
Danbury beat Smithtown in a merge and beat a team that was close to them at Brown 3 times in the last 3 weeks. The bottom line is that unless Smithtown wins fed's or comes in second by less than 10-15 points, Danbury should be the at large bid from the northeast and the rankings should stay in the status quo (except for collegiate, but thats a different issue)
ive talked with ahearn and he said that before New Englands he was feeling a little under the weather and he also tweaked his ankle a bit in the pile up in the begining of the race but hes alright and training very well still.
watchout
11-15-2006, 10:03 PM
You guys that are using times at meets to judge how good a team is are nuts . Have any of you ever run a 5k in the southwest, have you seen the mountains there. As for midlothians state meet(virginia) the course ran at least 40 seconds slower than last year due to 6 inch tall grass, soft ground(like mush) under the grass,big headwind on the longest part and warm muggy weather. The week before they ave. 16:05 on a fair legit 5k course. Their #1 runner ran 22 second faster on the state course last year. The week before at their region meet last year he ran 16:01 and on the same course this year h ran 15:37, so take them speed ratings and shove them. They mean nothing unless you can reproduce conditions.
the whole state of Virginia ran 30 seconds slower, give or take 3 seconds. So I'll stick with the 30 seconds slower than last year estimation, especially since most VA people I have been talking to agree that it is 25-35 seconds different from last year.
watchout
11-15-2006, 10:05 PM
I wouldn't be too upset by claiming how many teams won't make it that should. US#4 Dexter MI, isn't allowed to go to NTN, so that right there pushes all your teams back one notch in the coulda, woulda, shoulda, game.
Your own Marc Bloom also lists 5 MW teams in his Super 25 and he left out Pinckney MI, who is regionally ranked higher than #23 Warren Central and is generally believed to be better than the 2 OH teams that made NTN, as are St Charles and Schaumburg from IL. He has those 2 Ohio teams ranked right behind Danbury as well. So there are several teams from the MW region alone that can claim how well they would do at NTN. The NE isn't alone in claiming how many teams should be in the meet.
I still say that Dexter is US#1, or very close to it (Joel Ferris and York are the only two teams thus far with any other claim on that spot) ... Bloom has them underrated.
watchout
11-15-2006, 10:11 PM
chances are Jesuit will get at large bid. that leaves only 1 left :eek:
I think that Jesuit is being seen as being on the edge right now... far from an at-large PROBABILITY. Why? Because their #1, Watchempino, had been held out, or ran sub-par, for most of the last month... plus they only have their 4th place Stanford and runner-up at Clovis performances to really hang their hats on. They need a strong state meet to get the bid still, and Madera (and possibly El Toro) might challenge them for it from CA alone.
Basically what I've been trying to say is... no at-large bids are ready to be handed out yet, because there are too many teams too close to it. Central Valley WA, Fort Zumwalt MO, Jesuit CA, Madera CA, El Toro CA, Smithtown NY, Danbury CT, Collegiate NY all have potential to pick it up. That's too many teams, and they're all too close, to be able to consider anyone a near favorite to make it.
sisyphus
11-16-2006, 05:33 AM
...and Potosi didn't run GA either, they're undefeated and beat The Woodlands in the Chile Pepper.
Yeah, I had Tupelo and Potosi confused. Potosi is looking solid.
NYrunner
11-16-2006, 06:11 AM
Collegiate, with any kind of solid 2nd place finish (or better) will get the at-large. They are GA champ and were ranked top 5 USA b/c of that. They dropped only after a runner got injured so they have a chance this saturday to show how healthy they are.
Plus, don't leave Warwick out of the equation. They have just as much potential as any team. If they run to potential they are better then most of the at-large contenders listed by watchout. They just need to put it all together in one race which they have not done. most of Warwick's team fell apart at state(maybe went out too fast?) so if they learn from their mistakes there, they might be the team to watch come saturday.
But I really believe there are 6 teams that could get 2nd place this saturday.
spacemountain
11-16-2006, 06:19 AM
if warwick cant get 2nd on their own course they mostlikely wont get it at feds.
NYrunner
11-16-2006, 06:22 AM
gd Dam, THANK YOU
Coatesville (while not abiding to NTN travel suggestions) is clearly the best team out there. No one can take away from that, not even if "something crazy happens at feds".
Shenendehowa has placed well at Great American and at Manhattan, and is the obvious favorite at feds. They deserve to go, but if they fall to 3rd or worse at feds (doubt it), the committe will have a hard choice to make.
I think we can all agree that as of today, we ALL KNOW THE FACTS of what the top 2 teams have done.
Unfortunatley, the commitee does not sympathize with injury or poor race conditions. The fact that Dylan has been out for Collegiate has clearly been a huge loss, but I don't think they know about how Danbury's #2 runner ran with an injured achilles and their #4ish guy was caught in a huge pile up at the beginning of New England's. Glastonbury sure has improved, but the point is that they were consistantly beaten by Danbury, and even if they were recently close, all of the times they have gone head to head have been in the last 3 weeks. Its not like Danbury won a meet against them in September and then depended on that meet for a head to head decision. In the last 3 weeks Danbury vs. Glastonbury has a clear and decsive record:
Danbury (3-0)
Glatonbury (0-3)
Danbury beat Smithtown in a merge and beat a team that was close to them at Brown 3 times in the last 3 weeks. The bottom line is that unless Smithtown wins fed's or comes in second by less than 10-15 points, Danbury should be the at large bid from the northeast and the rankings should stay in the status quo (except for collegiate, but thats a different issue)
Didn't Collegiate crush Danbury at GA? And Warwick finished right behind them. Now Danbury may have got much better but so did all the NYS teams (except for Collegiate but that was due to injury). And Danbury running slower for what ever reason now shows they are not the team for NTN.
What if....Shen runs really well (can compare to previous winners after adjusting for how slow/fast course ran) Warwick or Smithtown are close (say 25-30 points) and Collegiate is 3rd right behind 2nd?
That could show Collegiate back to GA form(where Collegiate's #5 finished 13 seconds a head of Danbury's #2 guy and right behind Danbury's #1) and another NYS team between them and Shen. How would the committee sort that out?
sisyphus
11-16-2006, 06:49 AM
Danbury is not running slower. Where did that come from? If any team besides Collegiate is 2nd to Shen at Feds, Danbury is #3 in the NE. Gonzalez already said the committee treated a Manhattan merge like a head to head so Danbury has that meet and GA on other teams. Danbury's state meet was incredible as was the Open meet. NE's was a farce; it should have been recalled. Danbury won in spite of having runners mixed up in the scrum. I'm not sure where "not the team for NTN" comes from. The evidence does not back that statement up.
NYrunner
11-16-2006, 07:42 AM
Danbury is not running slower. Where did that come from? If any team besides Collegiate is 2nd to Shen at Feds, Danbury is #3 in the NE. Gonzalez already said the committee treated a Manhattan merge like a head to head so Danbury has that meet and GA on other teams. Danbury's state meet was incredible as was the Open meet. NE's was a farce; it should have been recalled. Danbury won in spite of having runners mixed up in the scrum. I'm not sure where "not the team for NTN" comes from. The evidence does not back that statement up.
Danbury is very strong they proved that at Manhattan but...
New Englands is evidence, no matter why they ran slow, it happened. If they were a "lock" to go to NTN before that and that happened it would not be a big deal but the fact that Glastonbury ran :11 per guy faster and there are 6-7 NYS teams right around Danbury level I think it is safe to say their New England race may have cost them a trip even with a fall. Who can say how much the fall slowed the runners? Who was slowed?
Again, Collegiate crushed Danbury head-to-head with Coll's #5 finishing a head of Danbury's #2 at GA. Collegiate has not been full strength since then. They will be this weekend...With Warwick having 3 guys that have hit:192-190-186 for speed rating and a couple other guys in the 170-175 range they will be tough to beat. Smithtown has the Brown win over Glastonbury and a strong 2nd in the merge at NYS behind a team that will possibly go top 5 at NTN. FM has the best 1-2, probably in the USA, and their 3-5 have had 2 weeks to focus on Feds. Liverpool has a pack with the potential to all run mid 170s or better with Heenan looking to repeat his break out race at Feds last year. Plus Queensbury, Chaminade and others are not out of the question for putting up some big performances.
I am guessing one of the many NYS teams chasing Shen will have a big day.
If any of these 6-7 NYS teams is near Shen and Shen runs well it will be:
Shen, Coatesville for the auto and Feds #2 going to NTN as at-large.....with Cali #3 at State joining them.
we need regionals now....we should have Danbury and Glastonbury come to Feds to figure this out...that would be sweet.
sisyphus
11-16-2006, 08:19 AM
Nyrunner,
I think we agree after all, we're just wording it differently. I'm thinking Feds go Shen, Collegiate 1-2, or 2-1. This will give Feds two representatives at NTN. (I'vesaid this all year) Coatesville appears to have thumbed their noses in NTN's face and pulled it off. I love that. They're going. Jesuit looks solid for a bid.
After this, it seems Danbury has to be next in line because they beat all the other teams in line and except for New England's, which was a debacle, has been running exceptionally since. Keep in mind the CT state course is a 5150 meter all grass hill course. It would be a shame if a well timed peak by Glastonbury caused Danbury to suffer.
I would love to see Feds open up to out of state teams or have teams decide to lay it on the line with full squads at Footlocker. Maybe the idea will catch on, though I doubt the NY teams will go for it if Feds keep being treated as a defacto NTN qualifier. Why should they?
watchout
11-16-2006, 08:31 AM
Collegiate, with any kind of solid 2nd place finish (or better) will get the at-large. They are GA champ and were ranked top 5 USA b/c of that. They dropped only after a runner got injured so they have a chance this saturday to show how healthy they are.
Plus, don't leave Warwick out of the equation. They have just as much potential as any team. If they run to potential they are better then most of the at-large contenders listed by watchout. They just need to put it all together in one race which they have not done. most of Warwick's team fell apart at state(maybe went out too fast?) so if they learn from their mistakes there, they might be the team to watch come saturday.
But I really believe there are 6 teams that could get 2nd place this saturday.
I only didn't list Warwick because they don't really have a claim to a bid, since they haven't really done much this season... they are certainly a team to be feared if they are all on their marks at Feds.
NYrunner
11-16-2006, 08:36 AM
Nyrunner,
I think we agree after all, we're just wording it differently. I'm thinking Feds go Shen, Collegiate 1-2, or 2-1. This will give Feds two representatives at NTN. (I'vesaid this all year) Coatesville appears to have thumbed their noses in NTN's face and pulled it off. I love that. They're going. Jesuit looks solid for a bid.
After this, it seems Danbury has to be next in line because they beat all the other teams in line and except for New England's, which was a debacle, has been running exceptionally since. Keep in mind the CT state course is a 5150 meter all grass hill course. It would be a shame if a well timed peak by Glastonbury caused Danbury to suffer.
I would love to see Feds open up to out of state teams or have teams decide to lay it on the line with full squads at Footlocker. Maybe the idea will catch on, though I doubt the NY teams will go for it if Feds keep being treated as a defacto NTN qualifier. Why should they?
I really think we'll have regionals next fall from what I have been seeing/hearing. Everyone wants it so it will happen. Think about how many teams from NE, not to mention all the other regions, will have some kind of arguement for a bid to NTN?
Big question will be who goes to regionals? I would say top team in each state and then fill the race (30-35 teams) with at-large selections made by a regional, NOT NATIONAL, committee. There are so many veteran coaches in each region that could vote (coaches poll) on top 30 teams in their region (using sites like Dyestat to get info on the teams). This way each team will still need to go to big meets to earn a bid into regionals or win their state title.
I love this now in xc. Most long distance runners like xc more then track and this just adds to the sport of xc.
watchout
11-16-2006, 08:42 AM
Nyrunner,
I think we agree after all, we're just wording it differently. I'm thinking Feds go Shen, Collegiate 1-2, or 2-1. This will give Feds two representatives at NTN. (I'vesaid this all year) Coatesville appears to have thumbed their noses in NTN's face and pulled it off. I love that. They're going. Jesuit looks solid for a bid.
After this, it seems Danbury has to be next in line because they beat all the other teams in line and except for New England's, which was a debacle, has been running exceptionally since. Keep in mind the CT state course is a 5150 meter all grass hill course. It would be a shame if a well timed peak by Glastonbury caused Danbury to suffer.
I would love to see Feds open up to out of state teams or have teams decide to lay it on the line with full squads at Footlocker. Maybe the idea will catch on, though I doubt the NY teams will go for it if Feds keep being treated as a defacto NTN qualifier. Why should they?
Wait a sec.. why does Collegiate just finishing a semi-close second (theoretically) put them in position to get an NTN bid? They are the mirror image of Central Valley out here on the west side, both teams were missing key runners (Collegiate their #2, Central Valley their #3) all throughout October after very strong September performances, and Central Valley has already shown that their #3 runner is back to his dominant self... but they don't get a shot at the bid, but Collegiate is guaranteed because they are racing at Feds?
That sounds a little fishy to me! Last I checked, finishing close to Mead is just as good as finishing close to Shenendehowa (if it even happens)...
not to play regional favorites here, but that seems a little uneven.
Sully 800
11-16-2006, 08:51 AM
I really think we'll have regionals next fall from what I have been seeing/hearing. Everyone wants it so it will happen. Think about how many teams from NE, not to mention all the other regions, will have some kind of arguement for a bid to NTN?
Where will you fit in the regional meet with New York's schedule?
I can see it happening some time soon in the MW and HL but NE and Cali won't have enough time in the schedule IMO.
sisyphus
11-16-2006, 08:51 AM
Wait a sec.. why does Collegiate just finishing a semi-close second (theoretically) put them in position to get an NTN bid? They are the mirror image of Central Valley out here on the west side, both teams were missing key runners (Collegiate their #2, Central Valley their #3) all throughout October after very strong September performances, and Central Valley has already shown that their #3 runner is back to his dominant self... but they don't get a shot at the bid, but Collegiate is guaranteed because they are racing at Feds?
That sounds a little fishy to me! Last I checked, finishing close to Mead is just as good as finishing close to Shenendehowa (if it even happens)...
not to play regional favorites here, but that seems a little uneven.
Two things:
1) Two go from Feds. I'm pretty sure it's on the committee members job description.
2) Collegiate won GA over Shen and some other ranked teams. If they are mirror images, what major meet did Central Valley beat Ferris at?
sisyphus
11-16-2006, 08:54 AM
I really think we'll have regionals next fall from what I have been seeing/hearing. Everyone wants it so it will happen. Think about how many teams from NE, not to mention all the other regions, will have some kind of arguement for a bid to NTN?
Big question will be who goes to regionals? I would say top team in each state and then fill the race (30-35 teams) with at-large selections made by a regional, NOT NATIONAL, committee. There are so many veteran coaches in each region that could vote (coaches poll) on top 30 teams in their region (using sites like Dyestat to get info on the teams). This way each team will still need to go to big meets to earn a bid into regionals or win their state title.
I love this now in xc. Most long distance runners like xc more then track and this just adds to the sport of xc.
Everyone mentions how to figure to invite regional competitors. Make it an open. That late in the season, a slew of teams that aren't in the running aren't going to go for no reason. I would bet a lot that no more than 30 teams would come to a regional at the end of the season even if it were open to all teams.
watchout
11-16-2006, 09:07 AM
Two things:
1) Two go from Feds. I'm pretty sure it's on the committee members job description.
2) Collegiate won GA over Shen and some other ranked teams. If they are mirror images, what major meet did Central Valley beat Ferris at?
1) Oh, I guess that answers that then.
2) Ferris opted to go to Stanford instead of Sunfair, since they were on the same weekends this year. So Central Valley only got to see them at Danner (with their aforementioned #3 still being able to run, but only as their #7) and a league dual meet. (plus another time, Regionals, with their #3 still not in their top 5 due to injury/sickness).
So Central Valley's major meet records: Dominated Sunfair (vs. only Washington powers not at Stanford and Flathead MT), took 2nd at Danner, and then a pretty close 3rd place at WA State (8 seconds/20 points behind Mead, significantly outdistancing any other team in the state -- by 13 seconds and 50 points)
In comparison, LaSalle was 8 seconds and 30 points behind Mead at Stanford... but Mead's state run was a bit better.
Does Central Valley have a GAXC victory to hang their hats on? No. But they also didn't implode at a meet like Brown, either. The point I was making is that both teams were missing their #2/3 runners throughout an entire month, but when one has already proved that they have recovered... the other automatically gets the nod before even proving they're at full strength again?
The only teams Central Valley lost to all season was Mead and Ferris. They beat everyone else they faced. Collegiate lost to a few teams... none of that caliber.
sisyphus
11-16-2006, 09:25 AM
I can't imagine Collegiate will go without a 1 or 2 at Feds.
watchout
11-16-2006, 09:41 AM
Of course not, but I don't think they'll go if they don't win Feds... and if they do go without winning, it will be controversial to say the least, as there are (potentially) other teams just as qualified if not more. Specifically three California teams - Jesuit, Madera and El Toro - that could make solid cases (along with the aforementioned Central Valley WA and Fort Zumwalt MO)
This is their last chance, so they have to make it at least EXTREMELY close ... within 10 points and less than 5 seconds.
NYrunner
11-16-2006, 09:46 AM
Watchout-
How would you rate Central Valley's top 5 on average speed rating? Best Estimate?
I would guess they averaged around 180-181 at state. Maybe it will be Feds #2 and Central Valley?
We will not know until after Cali state which is next weekend so until then we'll just have to guess.
watchout
11-16-2006, 09:55 AM
Watchout-
How would you rate Central Valley's top 5 on average speed rating? Best Estimate?
On a good day? Probably around ...
195
194
189
178
174
But average days would probably be more like 193-192-185-176-170. On most days, their spread is around 70 seconds...
This is what I had for them at state:
Central Valley:
15:57 = 191-194
16:03 = 189-192
16:34 = 179-182
16:47 = 175-178
17:08 = 168-171
that's a 181-182ish average..
So far, the two at-large selections are questionable. Central Valley might have been considered except for the 5th man situatiion may have cost them. Ft zumwalt closeness to Potosi times may have been undervalued because Potosi may not have been pushed at their state meet.
I have not been following the details too closely, but if the injury to Royal's runner Benson keeps him out of states, I would pick Jesuit as the merged champ.
as far as the feds are concerned, NYS has proven itself over the past two years, and this year, the champ of feds should go, and, if the 2nd team is close, within a 10 sec and 20pts, they would deserve consideration. if feds are a runaway, then Danbury. Danbury has not dominated like NTN selected teams have in the past. Coatsville, though probably not as strong as most people think will be selected based on their PA domination.
The at-large would be among, I think, the fed runner-up, IF CLOSE, the 3rd place CA team ( dependent on the Royal showing), Central Valley, Ft Zumwalt, and possibly Danbury.
Finally, I think NTN is wide open this year, any one of up to ten teams could win it.
I meant that the first two at-large selections already made are questionable as to the strength of their teams
NYrunner
11-16-2006, 10:41 AM
On a good day? Probably around ...
195
194
189
178
174
But average days would probably be more like 193-192-185-176-170. On most days, their spread is around 70 seconds... but at state, their normal #5 ran pretty well (and #4 didn't do so well) and were switched around, which gives them hope of a possible 60ish spread.
This is what I had for them at state:
Central Valley:
15:57 = 191-194
16:03 = 189-192
16:34 = 179-182
16:47 = 174-177 (normal #5)
17:08 = 167-170 (normal #4)
that's a 181-182ish average..
I think it is safe to say they were closer to the left side of these estimates at state(the fact that CV did not get an at-large bid tells me the committee would agree with the left side too). The right side estimates would give Washington 20 guys over 190, 13 guys over 192 speed rating and top runner at about 202 which I think even the strongest Wa supporter would say is over estimating this race. That would give them about 20 guys with very decent shot at Footlocker nationals (195-196ish is about what it takes to get to FLN) and 13 guys with a very solid shot at FLN.
16:30 still gives them a 180 speed rating(71 second spread) if you go by your left side estimate which puts Wa at 20 guys at 187 or higher and 13 guys at 189 or higher and top guy at 199.3 which is still much stronger then NYS when comparing front runners. (NYS had 7 guys at 190 or up, 9 at 189 or up and 12 at 187)
Going by left side(which most non-Washington people would guess is a better estimate) for CV vs. NE #7 and NYS #4 FM at their sectional meet:
CV-191-189-179-174-167
FM-198-190-178-169-167
Now this looks even up with 2-3-5 virtually even and 1,4 offset each other in big NTN type meet. Now FM could run well and finish out of the top 4 at Feds so I think we really need to wait and see what happens at Feds before saying a NYS team needs to be in a virtual tie with Shen or beat Shen to get a bid.
I would bet CV and the #3-4 cali teams would be right in the middle of that NYS 6-pack of teams with Danbury and Glastonbury and the MO team in there too. You have CV probably top at-large team where as I think FM, who is probably considered at the bottom of this 10 team pile up (not to mention some MW teams that got screwed by the "Ohio lover" decisions of last weekend), to be just about even up with CV. If not even, extremely close.
So that might mean that the #1 at-large team right now (CV) and the 15th best at-large potential teams are all within a tiny, tiny range. There are many teams going for the final two at-large that can argue they are better then the others(and all are better then the Ohio duo already in NTN which will be evident in Oregon).
watchout
11-16-2006, 10:43 AM
So far, the two at-large selections are questionable. Central Valley might have been considered except for the 5th man situatiion may have cost them. Ft zumwalt closeness to Potosi times may have been undervalued because Potosi may not have been pushed at their state meet.
I have not been following the details too closely, but if the injury to Royal's runner Benson keeps him out of states, I would pick Jesuit as the merged champ.
as far as the feds are concerned, NYS has proven itself over the past two years, and this year, the champ of feds should go, and, if the 2nd team is close, within a 10 sec and 20pts, they would deserve consideration. if feds are a runaway, then Danbury. Danbury has not dominated like NTN selected teams have in the past. Coatsville, though probably not as strong as most people think will be selected based on their PA domination.
The at-large would be among, I think, the fed runner-up, IF CLOSE, the 3rd place CA team ( dependent on the Royal showing), Central Valley, Ft Zumwalt, and possibly Danbury.
Finally, I think NTN is wide open this year, any one of up to ten teams could win it.
I'll pretty much agree with that.
Although I think Central Valley's slight was because of a couple reasons: first, their #3, as mentioned before, pretty much didn't run one single decent race during October; and second, they never beat anyone better than WA's #4 or Montana's #2 or Oregon's and Idaho's best (although they also didn't lose to any others, either...)
And instead of picking Jesuit as the merged winner of California, due to their own injury/sickness problems with their #1 Watchempino, although he did run decently last weekend... but I'll give the edge to Trabuco Hills if they can keep their spread under 85 seconds. But if Madera can somehow get someone down around 15:30, they would be a threat as well if that pack of theirs... don't be surprised if they do finish right with them. Same for El Toro and Arcadia, although less chances of that happening IMO... but not out of the question.
EDIT: Since HoriconAve highlighted it, I'll just say this, since it's just as relevant as your statement.. no team that has scored under 105 points at WA State has ever finished worse than 13th, out of 5 representatives from WA, and that was with their #2 runner running as their #7 due to an injury.
2004:
Ferris 46 (13th NTN 297)
Mead 92 (3rd NTN 146)
Eisenhower 104 (9th NTN 276)
2005:
Ferris 57 (10th NTN 217)
Mead 73 (4th NTN 176)
2006:
Ferris 51 (NTN ??)
Mead 72 (NTN ??)
Central Valley 92 (maybe a bid?)
FYI, this Central Valley team is very very similar to that Eisenhower team ... average times give an estimated 6 second edge to CENTRAL VALLEY, and spread is virtually the same (70 for Eisenhower, 71 for Central Valley)
Just as a point of reference.
Numbers Runner
11-16-2006, 10:56 AM
Danbury will be there watching and Glastonbury might be there too. Can't we sneak them into the race?
Any predictions?
I think it would go Shen, Danbury, Glastonbury, Smithtown, Collegiate, Liverpool ......... there's your semi-regional for 2006.
sisyphus
11-16-2006, 10:57 AM
My prediction is:
NY 2 bids - both top 15, possibly both top 10.
watchout
11-16-2006, 10:58 AM
I think it is safe to say they were closer to the left side of these estimates at state. The right side estimates would give Washington 20 guys over 190, 13 guys over 192 speed rating and top runner at about 202 which I think even the strongest Wa supporter would say is over estimating this race. That would give them about 20 guys with very decent shot at Footlocker nationals (195-196ish is about what it takes to get to FLN) and 13 guys with a very solid shot at FLN.
16:30 still gives them a 180 speed rating(71 second spread) if you go by your left side estimate which puts Wa at 20 guys at 187 or higher and 13 guys at 189 or higher and top guy at 199.3 which is still much stronger then NYS when comparing front runners. (NYS had 7 guys at 190 or up, 9 at 189 or up and 12 at 187)
Going by left side(which most non-Washington people would guess is a better estimate) for CV vs. NE #7 and NYS #4 FM at their sectional meet:
CV-191-189-179-174-167
FM-198-190-178-169-167
Now this looks even up with 2-3-5 virtually even and 1,4 offset each other in big NTN type meet. Now FM could run well and finish out of the top 4 at Feds so I think we really need to wait and see what happens at Feds before saying a NYS team needs to be in a virtual tie with Shen or beat Shen to get a bid.
I would bet CV and the #3-4 cali teams would be right in the middle of that NYS 6-pack of teams with Danbury and Glastonbury and the MO team in there too. You have CV probably top at-large team where as I think FM, who is probably considered at the bottom of this 10 team pile up (not to mention some MW teams that got screwed by the "Ohio lover" decisions of last weekend), to be just about even up with CV. If not even, extremely close.
So that might mean that the #1 at-large team right now (CV) and the 15th best at-large potential teams are all within a tiny, tiny range. There are many teams going for the final two at-large that can argue they are better then the others(and all are better then the Ohio duo already in NTN which will be evident in Oregon).
Few quick things though.
First, I'd like to correct the post you quoted, which I later edited when I went back to check facts, that the #5 at WA was their normal #5, not their normal #4.
but more importantly..
The left side was my estimate, the right side was based off of Meylan's estimate appeared to be from last year, only changed with the same difference as my rating was.
I also said on my post that I felt it was a better estimate, and that Meylan had slightly overrated WA last year if those numbers were correct. It's not a bias thing.
see post number 38 on this thread for more details (http://talk.dyestat.com/showpost.php?p=1110429&postcount=39)
198 to 191 at a meet like NTN would probably be about 7 places. 174 to 169 would probably be about 15. While your point still stands, let's remember that this wasn't Central Valley's ultimate performance... their #3 has ran faster than that a few times this season (just not since September, due to aforementioned reasons). Yes, there is very little seperating a #13ish team from a #55ish team in the nation ... I've said that numerous times throughout the year.
And while I don't think CV is the #1 at-large team, I do think they are the #2 team or so.... and I think that FM, in a meet like NTN, would do just fine... just as good as a LaSalle or Woodridge or Cheyenne Central or Chapel Hill, and so would be a potential top-15 team. But as we already said, there is very little separation between the second-tier NTN teams and those bubble-teams that end up on the outside looking in. The problem with FM is that, while they have the right type of build to potentially do well at NTN, they haven't been in deep enough fields to make that apparent, and thus don't have any significant performances to date to 'hang their hat' on... so they aren't in consideration for a bid.
It's just like all those Illinois teams, they are plenty good enough to compete well, but they haven't beaten anyone except themselves, so they haven't gotten anywhere.
But at least teams like Danbury, Madera, Glastonbury, Smithtown, Jesuit CA and Central Valley all have performances where they can say that they were very close to very good teams. FM can only say that they got 9th? on the merge at Manhattan and runner-up to Liverpool at their section meet (plus whatever they can claim after they finally get in a deep field, NY Feds)
watchout
11-16-2006, 11:01 AM
My prediction is:
NY 2 bids - both top 15, possibly both top 10.
I would hope they would finish top 15!! If they aren't, they didn't deserve a bid. (the cutoff between the competitive teams and non-competitive teams has been between 10-12 teams so far... I wouldn't expect more than 13 this year, and even giving room for a team or two to underachieve, any 'decent' team at NTN would finish top-15. The #16-20 teams are the teams that maybe wouldn't have gotten an invite if there were regionals, or no auto bids, or simply bombed the crap out of NTN for whatever reason.
BMeylan
11-16-2006, 11:15 AM
I am just starting to look some NTN teams (already invited) ... Here are some preliminary ratings (subject to change ... Cheyenne WY had a couple better ratings at WY States):
Central Valley at WA States:
4 Tylor Thatcher-12 15:57 192.0 192
10 Sean Coyle-12 16:03 190.0 190
28 Jayson Taylor-11 16:34 179.7 180
33 Bryce Aguilar-11 16:47 175.3 175
59 Jason Stoker-11 17:08 168.3 168
Cheyenne WY (at Rocky Mountain Champ):
7 Scott Foley Sr 16:26.7 185.1 185
23 Josh Franke Jr 16:58.9 174.4 174
30 Laine Parish Jr 17:03.2 172.9 173
36 Sean Wilde Sr 17:05.7 172.1 172
42 Devin Rathburn Fr 17:10.8 170.4 170
91 Matt Carey Sr 17:37.3 161.6 162
171 Eric Tollis Sr 18:33.9 142.7 143
LaSalle OH (OH States)
11 Jake Nusekabel, Sr 15:48 187.0 187
16 Kyle Lang, Sr 15:57 184.0 184
28 Ricky Lupp, Sr 16:19 176.7 177
41 Corey Spriggs, Sr 16:31 172.7 173
63 Michael Inderhees, So 16:46 167.7 168
74 Mitchell Huesman, Sr 16:54 165.0 165
97 Sean Comer, Jr 17:07 160.7 161
NYrunner
11-16-2006, 11:21 AM
Few quick things though.
First, I'd like to correct the post you quoted, which I later edited when I went back to check facts, that the #5 at WA was their normal #5, not their normal #4.
but more importantly..
The left side was my estimate, the right side was based off of Meylan's estimate appeared to be from last year, only changed with the same difference as my rating was.
I also said on my post that I felt it was a better estimate, and that Meylan had slightly overrated WA last year if those numbers were correct. It's not a bias thing.
see post number 38 on this thread for more details (http://talk.dyestat.com/showpost.php?p=1110429&postcount=39)
198 to 191 at a meet like NTN would probably be about 7 places. 174 to 169 would probably be about 15. While your point still stands, let's remember that this wasn't Central Valley's ultimate performance... their #3 has ran faster than that a few times this season (just not since September, due to aforementioned reasons). Yes, there is very little seperating a #13ish team from a #55ish team in the nation ... I've said that numerous times throughout the year.
And while I don't think CV is the #1 at-large team, I do think they are the #2 team or so.... and I think that FM, in a meet like NTN, would do just fine... just as good as a LaSalle or Woodridge or Cheyenne Central or Chapel Hill, and so would be a potential top-15 team. But as we already said, there is very little separation between the second-tier NTN teams and those bubble-teams that end up on the outside looking in. The problem with FM is that, while they have the right type of build to potentially do well at NTN, they haven't been in deep enough fields to make that apparent, and thus don't have any significant performances to date to 'hang their hat' on... so they aren't in consideration for a bid.
It's just like all those Illinois teams, they are plenty good enough to compete well, but they haven't beaten anyone except themselves, so they haven't gotten anywhere.
But at least teams like Danbury, Madera, Glastonbury, Smithtown, Jesuit CA and Central Valley all have performances where they can say that they were very close to very good teams. FM can only say that they got 9th? on the merge at Manhattan and runner-up to Liverpool at their section meet (plus whatever they can claim after they finally get in a deep field, NY Feds)
FM did win their race at Manhattan in a very thin field (big gaps) and they had the second fastest team time there. Their 3-5 had off days while it seemed like most teams between them and Shen had very good team days. Their 3-5 have run much better since then (remember Meylan said he thought the Manhattan ratings were too high by a bit which means FM's 3-4-5 were probably more like 171-169-163.5 and at sectionals they ran 178-169-167. FM and Liverpool both seemed to have improved a lot since Manhattan. Remember that was FM's 2nd race of year and for many other teams it was their 4th or 5th. Feds will be only FM's 5th big race (at least for #3-4-5 guys) while some of the other teams probably peaked at sectionals or state.
Feds will be the final cut for some NYS teams and then Cali state will clear things up more (hopefully). But what if Shen runs very well (187ish speed rating putting them as strong contenders for win at NTN) and one or two of the other NYS teams hits 180 or higher with either a tight pack (collegiate/Liverpool) or several elite front runners and solid 4-5(FM, Smithtown or Warwick).
Most of the 12-15 teams on the bubble really could do well at NTN and clearly most would do better then the two Ohio teams and the other at-large. If the committee really thinks the SW #3 was better then NW #3 then I can't see how NW#3, at least in committee's eyes, will get a bid over the NE #3 (either Danbury or #2 NYS team).
What should have happened is the NW #3 and HL #3 should have got the first two at-large bids and then the Cali and NE #3's would likely take the final two. That got messed up when the MW ranked the Ohio teams way too high. If York is a strong contender for top 3 at NTN or even top 6 and the Illinois teams were all that close (time wise) how did Ohio get the #3-4 spots over them?
MESSED UP!!!
I hope that when Mr. Meylan does his NTN projections he can add in some of the bubble teams that don't get in. Maybe do a NTN projection and then another one with the next best 10 teams thrown in?
watchout
11-16-2006, 11:22 AM
I am just starting to look some NTN teams (already invited) ... Here are some preliminary ratings (subject to change ... Cheyenne WY had a couple better ratings at WY States):
Central Valley at WA States:
4 Tylor Thatcher-12 15:57 192.0 192
10 Sean Coyle-12 16:03 190.0 190
28 Jayson Taylor-11 16:34 179.7 180
33 Bryce Aguilar-11 16:47 175.3 175
59 Jason Stoker-11 17:08 168.3 168
Cheyenne WY (at Rocky Mountain Champ):
7 Scott Foley Sr 16:26.7 185.1 185
23 Josh Franke Jr 16:58.9 174.4 174
30 Laine Parish Jr 17:03.2 172.9 173
36 Sean Wilde Sr 17:05.7 172.1 172
42 Devin Rathburn Fr 17:10.8 170.4 170
91 Matt Carey Sr 17:37.3 161.6 162
171 Eric Tollis Sr 18:33.9 142.7 143
LaSalle OH (OH States)
11 Jake Nusekabel, Sr 15:48 187.0 187
16 Kyle Lang, Sr 15:57 184.0 184
28 Ricky Lupp, Sr 16:19 176.7 177
41 Corey Spriggs, Sr 16:31 172.7 173
63 Michael Inderhees, So 16:46 167.7 168
74 Mitchell Huesman, Sr 16:54 165.0 165
97 Sean Comer, Jr 17:07 160.7 161
Thanks Bill! Looks like we are pretty close throughout ...
your 200.0's vs. mine:
WA: 15:33 vs. 15:32 (That's pretty much right on!)
RM: 15:42 vs. 15:47
OH: 15:09 vs. 15:01
and Michigan was pretty close too... thanks for the updates!
NYrunner
11-16-2006, 11:24 AM
Could you rate the Illinois state race and post it? I would be very interested to see how the Illinois teams match up. I don't believe you have posted speed ratings for them in the past? I know the Illinois guys would like it.
Thanks and keep up the awesome work,
NYrunner.
watchout
11-16-2006, 11:26 AM
Illinois... land where you can never get a good gauge on the competition ;)
I've gotten anywhere from 13:50 - 14:08 for a 200.0 mark there this year... Illinois and Michigan were definitely the two most confusing states for me.
and individually, going by Jager, I would say 14:08 is about right. But that's just a guess.
(just my opinion though, not Meylan's analysis)
Which would put York, St. Charles North and Schaumburg at...
8. 4 Tom Achtien Jr Elmhurst (York) 14:30 4:50 192.7
9. 5 Mike Fry Sr Elmhurst (York) 14:33 4:51 191.7
15. 9 Steve Sulkin So Elmhurst (York) 14:41 4:54 189.0
30. 20 Mark Sulkin Sr Elmhurst (York) 14:54 4:58 184.7
32. 22 Alan D'Ambrogio Sr Elmhurst (York) 14:56 4:59 184.0
26. 17 Scott Speare Jr St. Charles (North) 14:52 4:58 185.3
28. 19 Chris DeSilva Jr St. Charles (North) 14:53 4:58 185.0
38. 27 Zack Johnson Sr St. Charles (North) 14:58 5:00 183.3
64. 44 Bryan Barker Sr St. Charles (North) 15:11 5:04 179.0
83. 58 Maxwell Clink So St. Charles (North) 15:21 5:07 175.7
17. 11 Mike Spain Sr Schaumburg (H.S.) 14:42 4:54 188.7
23. 15 Jon Roberts Sr Schaumburg (H.S.) 14:48 4:56 186.7
49. 32 Jim Link Sr Schaumburg (H.S.) 15:05 5:02 181.0
69. 48 Nathan Rutz Jr Schaumburg (H.S.) 15:15 5:05 177.7
92. 64 Joey Myszka Sr Schaumburg (H.S.) 15:24 5:08 174.7
sorry if my math is off, I'm tired.
Also, here is what I got for Michigan ... well, actually Meylan helped me on it, he guessed at what it was and this is based off the closest I had to it, which was just 6 seconds different:
1 Bobby Aprill Dexter 11 15:15.1 194.0
2 Dan Jackson Dexter 12 15:15.7 193.8
5 Jason Bishop Dexter 10 15:33.5 187.8
8 Ryan Neely Dexter 12 15:39.5 185.8
13 Ben Steavenson Dexter 11 15:56.3 180.2
1 David Emery Pinckney 12 15:34.8 187.4
2 Mike Katsefaras Pinckney 11 15:39.6 185.8
8 Brian Hankins Pinckney 11 15:55.1 180.6
10 Jake Hohl Pinckney 11 15:57.0 180.0
12 Matt Wines Pinckney 10 15:58.3 179.6
I got most of the state meets up till now accounted for... almost. I was thinking about including them all on post 38 yesterday, but then I got tired of putting them all in and it would have made that post huge anyways. So maybe another time.
sisyphus
11-16-2006, 11:47 AM
I would hope they would finish top 15!! If they aren't, they didn't deserve a bid. (the cutoff between the competitive teams and non-competitive teams has been between 10-12 teams so far... I wouldn't expect more than 13 this year, and even giving room for a team or two to underachieve, any 'decent' team at NTN would finish top-15. The #16-20 teams are the teams that maybe wouldn't have gotten an invite if there were regionals, or no auto bids, or simply bombed the crap out of NTN for whatever reason.
That was kind of my point. Both NY teams would deserve a bid. Like I said though, I feel pretty good about a top ten. If Coatesville performs, that will put 3 NE teams top ten... again.
BMeylan
11-16-2006, 11:51 AM
Could you rate the Illinois state race and post it? I would be very interested to see how the Illinois teams match up. I don't believe you have posted speed ratings for them in the past? I know the Illinois guys would like it.
Thanks and keep up the awesome work,
NYrunner.
York at Illinios States:
8. Tom Achtien Jr 14:30 191.0 191
9. Mike Fry Sr 14:33 190.0 190
15. Steve Sulkin So 14:41 187.3 187
30. Mark Sulkin Sr 14:54 183.0 183
32. Alan D'Ambrogio Sr 14:56 182.3 182
42. Nick Kuczwara Sr 15:01 180.7 181
60. Tim Jung Sr 15:09 178.0 178
Once again, watchout and and my ratings are close.
NYrunner
11-16-2006, 11:52 AM
Illinois... land where you can never get a good gauge on the competition ;)
I've gotten anywhere from 13:50 - 14:08 for a 200.0 mark there this year... Illinois and Michigan were definitely the two most confusing states for me.
and individually, going by Jager, I would say 14:08 is about right. But that's just a guess.
(just my opinion though, not Meylan's analysis)
Which would put York, St. Charles North and Schaumburg at...
8. 4 Tom Achtien Jr Elmhurst (York) 14:30 4:50 192.7
9. 5 Mike Fry Sr Elmhurst (York) 14:33 4:51 191.7
15. 9 Steve Sulkin So Elmhurst (York) 14:41 4:54 189.0
30. 20 Mark Sulkin Sr Elmhurst (York) 14:54 4:58 184.7
32. 22 Alan D'Ambrogio Sr Elmhurst (York) 14:56 4:59 184.0
26. 17 Scott Speare Jr St. Charles (North) 14:52 4:58 185.3
28. 19 Chris DeSilva Jr St. Charles (North) 14:53 4:58 185.0
38. 27 Zack Johnson Sr St. Charles (North) 14:58 5:00 183.3
64. 44 Bryan Barker Sr St. Charles (North) 15:11 5:04 179.0
83. 58 Maxwell Clink So St. Charles (North) 15:21 5:07 175.7
17. 11 Mike Spain Sr Schaumburg (H.S.) 14:42 4:54 188.7
23. 15 Jon Roberts Sr Schaumburg (H.S.) 14:48 4:56 186.7
49. 32 Jim Link Sr Schaumburg (H.S.) 15:05 5:02 181.0
69. 48 Nathan Rutz Jr Schaumburg (H.S.) 15:15 5:05 177.7
92. 64 Joey Myszka Sr Schaumburg (H.S.) 15:24 5:08 174.7
sorry if my math is off, I'm tired.
Also, here is what I got for Michigan ... well, actually Meylan helped me on it, he guessed at what it was and this is based off the closest I had to it, which was just 6 seconds different:
1 Bobby Aprill Dexter 11 15:15.1 194.0
2 Dan Jackson Dexter 12 15:15.7 193.8
5 Jason Bishop Dexter 10 15:33.5 187.8
8 Ryan Neely Dexter 12 15:39.5 185.8
13 Ben Steavenson Dexter 11 15:56.3 180.2
1 David Emery Pinckney 12 15:34.8 187.4
2 Mike Katsefaras Pinckney 11 15:39.6 185.8
8 Brian Hankins Pinckney 11 15:55.1 180.6
10 Jake Hohl Pinckney 11 15:57.0 180.0
12 Matt Wines Pinckney 10 15:58.3 179.6
I got most of the state meets up till now accounted for... almost. I was thinking about including them all on post 38 yesterday, but then I got tired of putting them all in and it would have made that post huge anyways. So maybe another time.
I think a short, fast course messes with numbers a lot since many more runners, on average, run well compared to a tough, full 5k. If the conditions are fast, course is fast (and short) it really sets you up for a good race. A true xc course is 5k and hilly. Warwick's course is a little short I think but it is very tough and the course had some muddy spots with some wind gusts (but nothing too bad). When you have a tough course for a big meet you tend to see many athletes go out way too fast and then die hard core. I hope the NYS kids have learned the lesson and will be smarter at Feds. Get out in good position early (first 800-1200m) then settle into a "comfortable" stride. It is ok if a few guys pass you there b/c they will fall apart.
To: NYS runners going to Feds.
!!!!!RUN SMART, PLEASE!!!!!!!
From: NYrunner (big NYS running fan:D who wants to see 2 NY teams at NTN)
NYrunner
11-16-2006, 11:58 AM
York at Illinios States:
8. Tom Achtien Jr 14:30 191.0 191
9. Mike Fry Sr 14:33 190.0 190
15. Steve Sulkin So 14:41 187.3 187
30. Mark Sulkin Sr 14:54 183.0 183
32. Alan D'Ambrogio Sr 14:56 182.3 182
42. Nick Kuczwara Sr 15:01 180.7 181
60. Tim Jung Sr 15:09 178.0 178
Once again, watchout and and my ratings are close.
That is a deep team.
here are the other two teams based on Meylan's ratings.
26. 17 Scott Speare Jr St. Charles (North) 14:52 4:58 183.7
28. 19 Chris DeSilva Jr St. Charles (North) 14:53 4:58 183.3.0
38. 27 Zack Johnson Sr St. Charles (North) 14:58 5:00 181.7
64. 44 Bryan Barker Sr St. Charles (North) 15:11 5:04 177.3.0
83. 58 Maxwell Clink So St. Charles (North) 15:21 5:07 174
17. 11 Mike Spain Sr Schaumburg (H.S.) 14:42 4:54 187
23. 15 Jon Roberts Sr Schaumburg (H.S.) 14:48 4:56 185
49. 32 Jim Link Sr Schaumburg (H.S.) 15:05 5:02 179.3
69. 48 Nathan Rutz Jr Schaumburg (H.S.) 15:15 5:05 176
92. 64 Joey Myszka Sr Schaumburg (H.S.) 15:24 5:08 173
Both are very strong and I think way better then the two Ohio teams already at NTN. part of that might be the "easy" course at Ill. state compared to other tougher courses where the fields tend to seperate more but it still seems like Illinois teams are better then the Ohio teams by a solid margin.
St. C. N. looks a lot like a typical Collegiate race.
gofast11
11-16-2006, 12:32 PM
[QUOTE=NYrunner;1113053]I think a short, fast course messes with numbers a lot since many more runners, on average, run well compared to a tough, full 5k. If the conditions are fast, course is fast (and short) it really sets you up for a good race. A true xc course is 5k and hilly. Warwick's course is a little short I think but it is very tough and the course had some muddy spots with some wind gusts (but nothing too bad). When you have a tough course for a big meet you tend to see many athletes go out way too fast and then die hard core. I hope the NYS kids have learned the lesson and will be smarter at Feds. Get out in good position early (first 800-1200m) then settle into a "comfortable" stride. It is ok if a few guys pass you there b/c they will fall apart.
I think you are grasping for straws. You know there is no such thing as a real cross country course. Many college and International courses are flat.
You must know that the York guys are very good and have proved it many times now. Just because they have better ratings than any New York team will have do not try to play it down.
They are simply better.
If the "short course" at VCP works against the top runners why should the short course at Illinois not do the same thing just by a much smaller margin
NYrunner
11-16-2006, 12:50 PM
Ferris
1 Cameron Quackenbush-12 15:44 Joel Ferris-196.3
5 4 David Hickerson-12 15:58 Joel Ferris-191.7
6 5 Stephen Olsen-12 15:58 Joel Ferris-191.7
25 17 Nick Laplante-12 16:31 Joel Ferris-180
34 24 Pat Maloney-12 16:47 Joel Ferris-174.7
36 25 Jeff Devlin-12 16:50 Joel Ferris
103 69 Paul Hawkins-11 17:41 Joel Ferris
Mead Top-7
7 6 Kelly Lynch-11 16:00 Mead-191
8 7 Kelvin Daratha-12 16:02 Mead-190.3
13 9 Dylan Hatcher-12 16:07 Mead-188.7
31 21 Mario Abata-12 16:40 Mead-177.7
42 29 Ryan Bishop-12 16:57 Mead-172
49 31 Jordan Curnutt-10 17:01 Mead
121 85 Taylor Nepon-12 18:03 Mead
Based on Meylan's ratings
Shen at State (very poor race by usual #4 guy but off set by very good race by usual #5)
Steve Murdock-12 Shenendehowa 15:12.5 197.8
Zach Predmore-12 Shenendehowa 15:51.9 184.7
Adam Quinn-12 Shenendehowa 15:59.6 182.1
Mike Danaher-10 Shenendehowa 16:01.4 181.5(usual #5)
Tom Soeller-12 Shenendehowa 16:26.6 173.1
Zac Suriano-11 Shenendehowa 16:32.6 171.1(usual #4, ran 184 week before at sectionals)
Mike Wilbur-12 Shenendehowa 16:37.5 169.5
Shen looks very comparable (not saying better or even as good) to top two teams. If they run their best, all at same time, I would say they could be better then FM/Toga 2005. That might not be good enough though....
Ferris and Mead will both be tough to beat at NTN with 3 guys on each team rated 190ish or higher. A 180 has typically been good for about 40th at NTN but I have a feeling it will be good for only about a 45-50th this year. With so many more super, elite runners (above 190) in this year's NTN it will favor the more top heavy teams I believe.
NYrunner
11-16-2006, 12:55 PM
I think you are grasping for straws. You know there is no such thing as a real cross country course. Many college and International courses are flat.
You must know that the York guys are very good and have proved it many times now. Just because they have better ratings than any New York team will have do not try to play it down.
They are simply better.
If the "short course" at VCP works against the top runners why should the short course at Illinois not do the same thing just by a much smaller margin
York guys are awesome(please check my sig that has been there for like 2 months) and my pick to win NTN and Ill. is very deep in talent, but....
Ill. teams are not "simply better". They just ran fast on that day. Do you want me to pull up the NYS teams(and Danbury) ratings from Manhattan and other fast races to compare to these Ill. teams? Later when I have time I can do it for you but got to go now.
NYrunner
11-16-2006, 01:07 PM
Interesting point please read and really take time to think over (especially Horiconave who usually likes to rag on FM and their supporters)
Should NTN start looking for at-large teams that will do well at NTN or who did well in much smaller meets? Also, will final super 25 be based on how well the teams will do at a National champ meet? Or head-to-head in much smaller meet? Results would be very different.....
Perfect example would be FM vs. Liverpool. A meet like feds would favor a team with a pack like Liverpool's in the 175-180 range since so many scorers are in that 167-180 range at Feds. At NTN the level of comp goes way up and that pack team in the 175-180 range would get totally crushed with maybe top guy around 50th this year while that FM team would likely put up to 100 points on Liverpool's 1-2 in a NTN type meet while not losing much at the 3-4-5 spots.
Plugging in sectional performance of these teams (liverpool won by 3 points over FM) to 2005 NTN
Liverpool at 2005 NTN
45-50-55-60-65=275
FM at 2005 NTN
4-11-50-88-92=245
Liverpool is likely to beat FM at Feds but would likely finish 50 points back of FM at a NTN type meet with same exact performance (assuming this year's race will be stronger then last year but if not then FM still wins by 25-35 points).
Which team is better?
At a state level Liverpool but compared to National comp?
No question FM is the better team at a National champ type meet. I think most of the other NYS bubble teams (Collegiate, Warwick, Smithtown, etc...) would finish between FM and Liverpool at a NTN type meet but I don't see any NYS team(excluding Shen of course) taking FM down at NTN.
Since NTN is used to do final super 25 I don't see how a team like FM(with their 1-2 combo) could be kept off the final super 25 even if they are not at NTN....If the final national rankings are now based on how a team does in an actual end-of-season National Championship event, then should a team like FM, that would clearly beat a good amount of teams there, be included in those final rankings?
s2fan
11-16-2006, 01:23 PM
I am just starting to look some NTN teams (already invited) ... Here are some preliminary ratings (subject to change ... Cheyenne WY had a couple better ratings at WY States):
Central Valley at WA States:
4 Tylor Thatcher-12 15:57 192.0 192
10 Sean Coyle-12 16:03 190.0 190
28 Jayson Taylor-11 16:34 179.7 180
33 Bryce Aguilar-11 16:47 175.3 175
59 Jason Stoker-11 17:08 168.3 168
Cheyenne WY (at Rocky Mountain Champ):
7 Scott Foley Sr 16:26.7 185.1 185
23 Josh Franke Jr 16:58.9 174.4 174
30 Laine Parish Jr 17:03.2 172.9 173
36 Sean Wilde Sr 17:05.7 172.1 172
42 Devin Rathburn Fr 17:10.8 170.4 170
91 Matt Carey Sr 17:37.3 161.6 162
171 Eric Tollis Sr 18:33.9 142.7 143
LaSalle OH (OH States)
11 Jake Nusekabel, Sr 15:48 187.0 187
16 Kyle Lang, Sr 15:57 184.0 184
28 Ricky Lupp, Sr 16:19 176.7 177
41 Corey Spriggs, Sr 16:31 172.7 173
63 Michael Inderhees, So 16:46 167.7 168
74 Mitchell Huesman, Sr 16:54 165.0 165
97 Sean Comer, Jr 17:07 160.7 161
throwing these teams into NYS Public merge + adding other teams discussed in this thread...danbury@manhatten..collegiate@ga...and other 3 FM guys@(180,168,165) this is what spits out (oops forgot chaminade& shaker)
shen 136
danbury 174
central valley 180
collegiate 198
FM 217
smith 226
lasalle 231
cheyanne 280
liverpool 285
warwick 296
Q 298
central valley must be pretty confused right now.
NYrunner
11-16-2006, 02:23 PM
throwing these teams into NYS Public merge + adding other teams discussed in this thread...danbury@manhatten..collegiate@ga...and other 3 FM guys@(180,168,165) this is what spits out (oops forgot chaminade& shaker)
shen 136
danbury 174
central valley 180
collegiate 198
FM 217
smith 226
lasalle 231
cheyanne 280
liverpool 285
warwick 296
Q 298
central valley must be pretty confused right now.
How about throwing each into NTN 2004 and 2005 (one at a time based on speed rating) and finding an average score at NTN? FM thrown into 2005 NTN would be around 245 and Liverpool would be around 270-275
State was a terrible race for Warwick (ackerman for ex. ran 186 at sectionals and like 140 at state--which was not expected on home course). Liverpool ran a little below sectional form. FM's 4-5 were 169-167 last race(best team race) which would drop them down near 200 I would guess. Toss in the Illinois kids and they must be really, really pissed right now(I think they already were since this is 3 for 3 years Ill. getting screwed over by NTN).
Manhattan (like the short fast Ill. course ;) ) resulted in very high speed rating for most runners. I would use Danbury's from state which would still be very good and prob. better and more recent (throw in Glastonbury too).
Maybe Mr. Meylan has the Conn. ratings available? Maybe someone can start compiling some of this stuff?
If Ill. and NY both get 1 team into NTN and Ohio gets two in that will be really bad....Think about how much York and Shen will crush the top Ohio team? Both teams have #5 guy better then Ohio teams #3.....Think about how the MW will look if the "3-4" teams in that region finish around 19-20 at NTN and way behind in time/points?
What did the Ill. people do to make the NTN people hate them so much?
NYrunner
11-16-2006, 03:07 PM
Cheyenne WY (at Rocky Mountain Champ):
16:26.7 185.1 185
16:58.9 174.4 174
17:03.2 172.9 173
17:05.7 172.1 172
17:10.8 170.4 170
17:37.3 161.6 162
18:33.9 142.7 143
LaSalle OH (OH States)
15:48 187.0 187
15:57 184.0 184
16:19 176.7 177
16:31 172.7 173
16:46 167.7 168[/B]
16:54 165.0 165
Woodridge Oh (OH states)
15:46-187.7
15:47-187.3
16:05-181.7
16:26-174.7
16:58-164
Woodridge got an auto bid over the Ill. teams...How would Woodridge and Lasalle do if plugged into the Ill. meet? (164= 125th place in team scoring at Ill state meet)
http://www.dyestat.com/3state/r4mw/6xc/IL-StateMeet/AAResults.html#bi
That means Woodridge's #5 would score almost as much as St. Charles North's 3-4-5 combined if you throw them into Ill. meet. Ouch!
Nothing against these teams but this is just not fair to the Ill. teams and many others who clearly deserve it more.
PS--174 will be projected between 90-100 at NTN....164 would be about 125th....
s2fan
11-16-2006, 04:40 PM
For what it's worth... Fitzgibbons hasn't run a 180 this season. His average for the year is 177. Don't know how much that impacts FM's projected score; probably 15-20 points in that range. This is not intended as a bash, etc, just a correction.
Yes i noted that too late - it does move it about 15 points - but the other two make up for the difference since they have improved upon 168/165 - meylan has them at 170/167 in his sec III database. So about same result for them.
And I agree that CV is confused and the Illinois teams are getting hosed. Those Ohio teams look like Shaker before Shaker's #5 stepped up to the mid-170's (and their 2-3 got injured) - I doubt either would be top-5 at Feds.
NYRunner makes an interesting point, in that FM fares far better in an NTN-type race than a Federation-type race. But should they (or anybody) be rated that way? My initial answer was "beats me", but after thinking about it a while, my feeling is you should get rated on the races you actually run. If Liverpool beats FM at Feds, then Liverpool should be ranked ahead of FM at seasons-end, even if FM projects better at NTN. Of course, if Liverpool were to qualify for NTN and pull a Clear Creek there, then FM could slide back in front of them with no objection from me.
In short, I think that if you qualify for NTN (which means beating your close competitors in a state-level meet), you get evaluated based on how you do at NTN... while if you don't qualify, your hypothetical NTN placing shouldn't matter.
All makes sense.
Since these numbers for the NTN qualifiers Lasalle & Cheyenne clearly dont measure up to central valley, WA - makes you think the committee uses far different criteria than our "what have you done for me lately" simple calculations for making the award.
Could it be that performances throughout year are weighted enough to overcome this state meet discrepency? Did central valley had injury problems?
Was Cheyenne consistent all year?
I also see that the Illinois 2nd in state meet was unrated throughout year. Could be same issue relative to Ohio teams? DOnt know - just guessing - trying to make sense of it.
If true - teams with uneven performances like collegiate or warwick or FM really have to take the win to get in.
A team like smithtown may not have to win ; just be close enough to Shen to get the nod over another consistent team....danbury.
Will be interesting - for sure somebody will be sitting at home "confused" - like central valley.
I know Central valley isn't eliminated - but must know their best chance was against lasalle or cheyenne compared to rest of field.
BMeylan
11-16-2006, 05:26 PM
Remember that relative speed is just one factor in determining the NTN bids.
Cheyenne Central WY won their State Championship ... They then traveled out-of-state and competed in the Rocky Mountain Championships (which was billed as five state regional championship) ... and they won! That satisfies a number of NTN selection criteria, and most other teams do not have that on their resume.
Danbury CT traveled out-of-state on several occsasions during the season ... They won their State Championship ... and they then won the New Championships ... and that may help them a great deal.
s2fan
11-16-2006, 05:53 PM
Remember that relative speed is just one factor in determining the NTN bids.
Cheyenne Central WY won their State Championship ... They then traveled out-of-state and competed in the Rocky Mountain Championships (which was billed as five state regional championship) ... and they won! That satisfies a number of NTN selection criteria, and most other teams do not have that on their resume.
Danbury CT traveled out-of-state on several occsasions during the season ... They won their State Championship ... and they then won the New Championships ... and that may help them a great deal.
I like the idea of using the playing by the nike game rules as a tie breaker - when you compare the teams and its too close to call - within margin of measurement error, say.
Then you give the nod to the team that played the game and you have a good reason for it.
I look at your numbers for the 3 teams posted above and it doesnt seem close enough. 100 point difference in something kindof like NYS merge? Thats a bunch.
Now maybe they have a diff standard of measurement that does make these 3 teams too close to call, i'd be interested in seeing that calculation.
If you veer too far away from relative speed - its tough to swallow, imo.
watchout
11-16-2006, 06:01 PM
Since these numbers for the NTN qualifiers Lasalle & Cheyenne clearly dont measure up to central valley, WA - makes you think the committee uses far different criteria than our "what have you done for me lately" simple calculations for making the award.
Could it be that performances throughout year are weighted enough to overcome this state meet discrepency? Did central valley had injury problems?
Was Cheyenne consistent all year?
I also see that the Illinois 2nd in state meet was unrated throughout year. Could be same issue relative to Ohio teams? DOnt know - just guessing - trying to make sense of it.
If true - teams with uneven performances like collegiate or warwick or FM really have to take the win to get in.
A team like smithtown may not have to win ; just be close enough to Shen to get the nod over another consistent team....danbury.
Will be interesting - for sure somebody will be sitting at home "confused" - like central valley.
I know Central valley isn't eliminated - but must know their best chance was against lasalle or cheyenne compared to rest of field.
You're absolutely right. The committee, I believe, has to make decisions based on not just their last meet, or even just their last couple meets, but meets throughout the year that showed they are at the level hoped for (by winning, or coming close to winning, certain big meets). Your last meet is going to have the biggest impact, but you have to find a justifiable way to put one team ahead of another without having raced them. The Ohio teams got in because of this (in my opinion):
LaSalle raced and beat Carmel IN at Trinity Invite (Key: Beat another states' top ranked - or 2nd ranked - squad), and then raced Woodridge and took 2nd at Midwest Meet of Champions (Key: Battle for state supremacy). They followed that up by a solid 6th place at Stanford and were comparable to Jesuit CA at the time (Key: Inter-regional justification). Finally, it was followed up by a victory at state (Key: State supremacy plus showing they are still a solid team after early season success).
Because of that, they got a good ranking early, got beat and therefore brought Woodridge into good position as well, justified a high ranking, and closed out with a state championship against another ranked squad.
Same with Cheyenne Central:
-Wins in-state battle against Campbell County for state supremacy
-Takes second to well respected Fort Collins
-Third at Liberty Bell behind regional #1 Albuquerque Academy and in-state rival Campbell County, beating several other ranked squads including Fort Collins (this is the Manhattan of the Southwest in terms of widespread regional top-ranking participation)
-Beats Campbell County in round 3 for state supremacy
-Lone slip-up of season at Centarra Invite where #4/5 guys were horribly sick, they took a very distant 4th behind Los Alamos NM and a couple CO teams (Grand Junction and Dakota Ridge).
-Roars back into the picture with a state championship over then SW#2 Campbell County, showing that their #4/5 are now ok.
-Backs that up with a Rocky Mountain Regional championship over NW#5 Bozeman MT and all the Colorado and Utah (and Idaho) teams.
And yes, as has been mentioned, Central Valley had injury problems throughout October, just like Collegiate has had, but in their last meet (State) they showed that their #3 is at least close to where he was back in September.
The common problem with all the remaining teams up for at-large bids is one in the same: None have marquee wins. California teams haven't beaten Royal and didn't travel out of their region to beat other region's top squads. Central Valley did the same thing in comparison to Mead and Ferris. Fort Zumwalt only won against lower regional competition, just like the rest of the teams. No team not named Collegiate or Smithtown have won a big match-up against the top-ranked squads all year in the Northeast (not including Shen).
What this means: Smithtown and Collegiate have the best arguments if either of them finish a CLOSE second to Shen, or beats Shen, at Feds. If Collegiate is too far back, then they are out of it and so is Smithtown (because Smithtown is based on having beat Collegiate earlier).
Scenario A: Collegiate wins Feds, Shen 2nd
Result A: Collegiate and Shen get invited
Scenario B: Collegiate wins Feds, Smithtown 2nd, Shen 3rd
Result B: All 3 probably get invited
Scenario C: Smithtown wins, Shen 2nd (Collegiate is irrelevant)
Result C: Both teams get invited.
Scenario D: Shen wins, Collegiate close second (Smithtown irrelevant)
Result D: Both teams get invited.
Scenario E: Shen wins, Smithtown close second, Collegiate close third
Result E: Shen in for sure, Smithtown very questionable but have a shot.
Scenario F: Shen wins, Smithtown close second, Collegiate way back
Result F: Shen gets invited, Smithtown probably gets edged out by Central Valley, if not by a pair of CA teams or maybe even Ft. Zumwalt MO.
But the California State meet will have just as much, or possibly more, affect... with Royal and Jesuit facing issues, that opens the door for the meet to be WIDE open, and anything could happen.
daman
11-16-2006, 06:29 PM
Ill. teams are not "simply better". They just ran fast on that day. It was the state meet. Teams peak for state, and the goal is to run fast "on that day".....If you don't do it then, you're not going to do it.
That is much more impressive than times run on Manhattan in early October. That meet means nothing if that's as fast as they will run for the rest of the year.
usatf44
11-17-2006, 12:08 AM
[QUOTE=watchout;
Scenario B: Collegiate wins Feds, Smithtown 2nd, Shen 3rd
Result B: All 3 probably get invited
No this just shows that NY Teams are overrated! Collegiate has loss multiple times and finshed lower than 2nd. If Shen can't bet them than they are not that good or had an bad race.
No this just shows that NY Teams are overrated! Collegiate has loss multiple times and finshed lower than 2nd. If Shen can't bet them than they are not that good or had an bad race.
Wait... so if Collegiate beat Shen at Feds, you would invite Shen and not Collegiate? Even though Collegiate has shown they have the potential to be good all year and beat Shen in their only meeting?
sisyphus
11-17-2006, 06:03 AM
I obviously haven't been following closely enough. Where has Collegiate suffered all these losses besides Brown? Not sure how all those teams at sub 13:10 at Manhattan is overrated. We'll see at NTN though.
NYrunner
11-17-2006, 08:53 AM
Watchout what do you get?
Meylan?
This clearly was not an all out performance by the winner(my est. is 190)
I would guess top Danbury guy at 188 which would put Danbury's 1-5 at:
188-181.7-174.7-173.7-169
This is very good but I think a NYS team might look better at Feds. I think the only NYS team that will get a bid over Danbury without beating Shen would be a semi-close 2nd place by Collegiate.
If these numbers are accurate and New Englands was clearly way below this then State should be looked at as Danbury's best late season performance.
watchout
11-17-2006, 09:20 AM
Watchout what do you get?
Meylan?
This clearly was not an all out performance by the winner(my est. is 190)
I would guess top Danbury guy at 188 which would put Danbury's 1-5 at:
188-181.7-174.7-173.7-169
This is very good but I think a NYS team might look better at Feds. I think the only NYS team that will get a bid over Danbury without beating Shen would be a semi-close 2nd place by Collegiate.
If these numbers are accurate and New Englands was clearly way below this then State should be looked at as Danbury's best late season performance.
My rating for them (although it's probably not as accurate as Meylan's, I had to do it through FLNE) would put Danbury (only in the Open race, not the class races) at... (roughly)
2 Matt Terry 33 Danbury 11 16:07 = 188.7
5 Willie Ahearn 28 Danbury 11 16:26 = 182.3
21 Joseph Bubniak 31 Danbury 10 16:45 = 176.0
25 Justin Rau 32 Danbury 11 16:48 = 175.0
34 Brady Becker 29 Danbury 12 17:04 = 169.7
so yeah, your guess looks pretty solid.
although I think Meylan would have a better read than I on this one... so maybe he comes up with something different, I don't know.
I couldn't decide between a 15:33 or 15:34 standard, but I think it's around a 15:30-35 range...
sisyphus
11-17-2006, 01:47 PM
Using Manhattan as a baseline, (14 data points) 16:23 should be your 186 mark. this averages out exactly for the 14 runners who have results for both Manhattan and the CT Open meet.
BTW- If you want any accuracy at all, you need to reset Brown to a 15:09=200. Look at the guys and girls who ran both manhattan and Brown and this works very well on average. Not to mention, it also corresponds well to the 2004 meet at Brown which was a cleaner course. Look at Gubbins, TSchirt and Sheridan at Brown vs. their season averages in 2004 and it works perfectly. Keep going beyond that and it still works pretty well.
usatf44
11-17-2006, 03:18 PM
I obviously haven't been following closely enough. Where has Collegiate suffered all these losses besides Brown? Not sure how all those teams at sub 13:10 at Manhattan is overrated. We'll see at NTN though.
Let’s see Neely Spence runs 18:07 to win PA AA Girls at Hershey Parkland 5k and then goes to VCP 5K a week later and runs 17:37 at New York Road Runners Club XC Champs on 5K VCP. So VCP is significantly faster which fits with what anyone that knows both courses knows.
But lets not even count that for all our voodoo math NY’s and Speed raters.
Let’s use simple 5 grade math.
You think 13:10 is good for 2.5M VCP that’s 5:16 a mile good for a girls team maybe!
Coatesville Team avg on Hershey Parkland 5K 15:43 or 943sec / 3.1 = 5:04 mile * 2.5 = 760 or 12:40
How many New York teams were under 12:40 at Manhattan? I Believe Shen had a 12:56.6
That is without any adjustment for:
Shorter race length at Manhattan
Tougher course at Hershey Parkland
Now for Radnor they run 19:17 at Hershey Parkland same math above and we will use 30sec correction for Spence Parkland vs VCP 5K adjusted to 2.5Miles 30 /3.1 * 2.5 = 24sec
So Radnor adjusted 2.5VCP Avg = 15:09
Let’s see Hilton had 15:21 and Saratoga Springs 15:16 That is still without an adjustment for shorter race!
I know avg Times do not tell a full story in XC but they do when they are this far apart!
NEW YORK OVERRATED ON BOTH GIRLS AND BOYS
END OF STORY
s2fan
11-17-2006, 03:38 PM
Coatesville Team avg on Hershey Parkland 5K 15:43 or 943sec / 3.1 = 5:04 mile * 2.5 = 760 or 12:40
How many New York teams were under 12:40 at Manhattan? I Believe Shen had a 12:56.6
Best ever team was 5 man average is 12:48, 12:56 was 3rd best ever.
I think your "simple 5th grade math" is off somewhere. Cville is good but that good. Sorry.
NEW YORK OVERRATED ON BOTH GIRLS AND BOYS
END OF STORY
LOL - the story will end in a few weeks in portland - we can see if coatsville finishes 16sec/man over shen.
Hopefully radnor will get a bid as well so your opinion can be measured on both counts.:)
usatf44
11-17-2006, 03:53 PM
Best ever team was 5 man average is 12:48, 12:56 was 3rd best ever.
I think your "simple 5th grade math" is off somewhere. Cville is good but that good. Sorry.
LOL - the story will end in a few weeks in portland - we can see if coatsville finishes 16sec/man over shen.
Hopefully radnor will get a bid as well so your opinion can be measured on both counts.:)
Let's get out your workbook and follow the blackboard
Coatesville 15:43 avg on 3.1Mile Parkland = 943sec
943 / 3.1 = 304 a Mile ( 5:04 ) * 2.5 = 760sec ( 12:40 )
What do you not understand! Go back and repeat 5th grade ( Actually we teach this in the 4th grade in PA so our schools are better academically as well )
NYrunner
11-17-2006, 04:03 PM
Let's get out your workbook and follow the blackboard
Coatesville 15:43 avg on 3.1Mile Parkland = 943sec
943 / 3.1 = 304 a Mile ( 5:04 ) * 2.5 = 760sec ( 12:40 )
What do you not understand! Go back and repeat 5th grade ( Actually we teach this in the 4th grade in PA so our schools are better academically as well )
You teach kids in 4th grade how to figure out their estimated times at VCP? That is sweet!!
Here some math for such a smart guy...I am an idiot NYer so please help me out. What is faster pace for 5k?
18:41 or 18:59?
I am really kind of retarded so please do the math for me and get back to me on that....In NY we would say the 18:41 is faster but we are not as smart as the Pa people. Any help?
Scotty
11-17-2006, 04:06 PM
Let's get out your workbook and follow the blackboard
Coatesville 15:43 avg on 3.1Mile Parkland = 943sec
943 / 3.1 = 304 a Mile ( 5:04 ) * 2.5 = 760sec ( 12:40 )
What do you not understand! Go back and repeat 5th grade ( Actually we teach this in the 4th grade in PA so our schools are better academically as well )
Dude, you are without a clue.
Coatesville??? Running 12:40 AVG at Vanny??? Too funny!!
The ALLTIME mark is 12:48.8 (FM). You cannot be serious with this stuff.
NYrunner
11-17-2006, 04:12 PM
Best ever team was 5 man average is 12:48, 12:56 was 3rd best ever.
I think your "simple 5th grade math" is off somewhere. Cville is good but that good. Sorry.
LOL - the story will end in a few weeks in portland - we can see if coatsville finishes 16sec/man over shen.
Hopefully radnor will get a bid as well so your opinion can be measured on both counts.:)
s2fan I think we should skip FLNE and just send Coatesville to footlocker as the NE representatives based on usatf44's stuff(we don't really need 8-10 with such a dominant 1-5)....With their 15:43 average on a course that runs way slower then VCP that is what a 15:30 average? 2nd place last year was what a 15:28?
I assume this kid is joking but he is acting like a jerk....
usatf44--are you joking or do you really believe this? You must know it is insane what you are saying so I hope it is a bad joke?
Kalaby
11-17-2006, 04:16 PM
Dude, you are without a clue.
Coatesville??? Running 12:40 AVG at Vanny??? Too funny!!
The ALLTIME mark is 12:48.8 (FM). You cannot be serious with this stuff.
Unfortunately (for him) I think he is dead serious.
Numbers Runner
11-17-2006, 04:31 PM
Look, I know Coatesville is good. But NY Boys and Girls overrated? Are you serious? What an idiot.
I'll make it simple ..... Look at Paul Springer at Van Cortlandt and then how he ran a dominating 2nd in PA States.
Other than Coatesville ......, Shen, Danbury, Collegiate (when healthy), Glastonbury, Liverpool, Warwick, FM, Shaker etc. are ALL better than anything PA has left.
And the girls, other than one team (Radnor), are just tons better in NY.
What are you thinkin', man?
Have you even SEEN NY and CT teams race this year? Get a clue.
NYrunner
11-17-2006, 04:33 PM
Let’s see Neely Spence runs 18:07 to win PA AA Girls at Hershey Parkland 5k and then goes to VCP 5K a week later and runs 17:37 at New York Road Runners Club XC Champs on 5K VCP. So VCP is significantly faster which fits with what anyone that knows both courses knows.
So the top 2 Pa guys think they could kill AJ Acosta? I mean absolutely crush him at his best?
Jason Weller, Sr Boyertown (1) 15:04
Paul Springer, Sr Unionville (1) 15:06
Kyle Dawson, Sr Coatesville (1) 15:17
AJ's best race =appx. 15:12 at VCP (using FLN as his best race, 207 speed rating, and last year's speed ratings at FLNE).
15:43 at VCP =197 speed rating in 2005 and this coatesville team can run faster? Man I can't wait to see this team. This is before we even factor in that Hersey is way slower then VCP. So a 15:43 would have to be at least a 15:30. That is a 201 speed rating average.
I know I didn't need to show this to prove how stupid these comments were by usatf44 but I had the time.
ChirpyBoy
11-17-2006, 04:38 PM
Let’s see Neely Spence runs 18:07 to win PA AA Girls at Hershey Parkland 5k and then goes to VCP 5K a week later and runs 17:37 at New York Road Runners Club XC Champs on 5K VCP. So VCP is significantly faster which fits with what anyone that knows both courses knows.
But lets not even count that for all our voodoo math NY’s and Speed raters.
Let’s use simple 5 grade math.
You think 13:10 is good for 2.5M VCP that’s 5:16 a mile good for a girls team maybe!
Coatesville Team avg on Hershey Parkland 5K 15:43 or 943sec / 3.1 = 5:04 mile * 2.5 = 760 or 12:40
How many New York teams were under 12:40 at Manhattan? I Believe Shen had a 12:56.6
That is without any adjustment for:
Shorter race length at Manhattan
Tougher course at Hershey Parkland
Now for Radnor they run 19:17 at Hershey Parkland same math above and we will use 30sec correction for Spence Parkland vs VCP 5K adjusted to 2.5Miles 30 /3.1 * 2.5 = 24sec
So Radnor adjusted 2.5VCP Avg = 15:09
Let’s see Hilton had 15:21 and Saratoga Springs 15:16 That is still without an adjustment for shorter race!
I know avg Times do not tell a full story in XC but they do when they are this far apart!
NEW YORK OVERRATED ON BOTH GIRLS AND BOYS
END OF STORY
hahaha.....haha.....hahahahahahahaha
usatf44
11-17-2006, 04:40 PM
You teach kids in 4th grade how to figure out their estimated times at VCP? That is sweet!!
Here some math for such a smart guy...I am an idiot NYer so please help me out. What is faster pace for 5k?
18:41 or 18:59?
I am really kind of retarded so please do the math for me and get back to me on that....In NY we would say the 18:41 is faster but we are not as smart as the Pa people. Any help?
I guess read comprehension is a problem too, where was the 18:41 and 16:59 from?
juicynacho
11-17-2006, 04:41 PM
Look, I know Coatesville is good. But NY Boys and Girls overrated? Are you serious? What an idiot.
I'll make it simple ..... Look at Paul Springer at Van Cortlandt and then how he ran a dominating 2nd in PA States.
Other than Coatesville ......, Shen, Danbury, Collegiate (when healthy), Glastonbury, Liverpool, Warwick, FM, Shaker etc. are ALL better than anything PA has left.
And the girls, other than one team (Radnor), are just tons better in NY.
What are you thinkin', man?
Have you even SEEN NY and CT teams race this year? Get a clue.
I'm from PA this guy is very ridiculous. Coatesville is very good, but not even dominatingly better than what Shen has ran. I give Coatesville the slighest of edges because Murdock can't do too much damage to Coatesville because of Kyle Dawson being a legitimate number 1, but C-ville has a slightly (very slightly) stronger pack.
But what I disagree on is saying that no one from PA can beat any of those other teams. Look at Henderson, they ran almost exactly equivalent speedratings to Smithtown when you compare the two teams from each's respective state meet. So I think they are very underrated because they had a bad race at Briarwood. It would be interesting to throw Coatesville's speedratings as well as Hendersons into the NYS state race and see what happens. Because I think Henderson would place a lot higher up than most give them credit for, and I'm just curious who would win Coatesville or Shen. So maybe a stat guy could whip something up for us...
NYrunner
11-17-2006, 04:43 PM
I guess reading comprehension is a problem too, where was the 18:41 and 18:59 from?
you don't know?
but who cares....which is better?
hint: check Warwick invite results....
Originally Posted by usatf44
"Coatesville 15:43 avg on 3.1Mile Parkland = 943sec
943 / 3.1 = 304 a Mile ( 5:04 ) * 2.5 = 760sec ( 12:40 )
Actually we teach this in the 4th grade in PA so our schools are better academically as well"
NYrunner
11-17-2006, 04:46 PM
I'm from PA this guy is very ridiculous. Coatesville is very good, but not even dominatingly better than what Shen has ran. I give Coatesville the slighest of edges because Murdock can't do too much damage to Coatesville because of Kyle Dawson being a legitimate number 1, but C-ville has a slightly (very slightly) stronger pack.
But what I disagree on is saying that no one from PA can beat any of those other teams. Look at Henderson, they ran almost exactly equivalent speedratings to Smithtown when you compare the two teams from each's respective state meet. So I think they are very underrated because they had a bad race at Briarwood. It would be interesting to throw Coatesville's speedratings as well as Hendersons into the NYS state race and see what happens. Because I think Henderson would place a lot higher up than most give them credit for, and I'm just curious who would win Coatesville or Shen. So maybe a stat guy could whip something up for us...
Kind of sucks for Pa to have such a total idiot posting this stuff.
sisyphus
11-17-2006, 05:07 PM
Let’s see Neely Spence runs 18:07 to win PA AA Girls at Hershey Parkland 5k and then goes to VCP 5K a week later and runs 17:37 at New York Road Runners Club XC Champs on 5K VCP. So VCP is significantly faster which fits with what anyone that knows both courses knows.
But lets not even count that for all our voodoo math NY’s and Speed raters.
Let’s use simple 5 grade math.
You think 13:10 is good for 2.5M VCP that’s 5:16 a mile good for a girls team maybe!
Coatesville Team avg on Hershey Parkland 5K 15:43 or 943sec / 3.1 = 5:04 mile * 2.5 = 760 or 12:40
How many New York teams were under 12:40 at Manhattan? I Believe Shen had a 12:56.6
That is without any adjustment for:
Shorter race length at Manhattan
Tougher course at Hershey Parkland
Now for Radnor they run 19:17 at Hershey Parkland same math above and we will use 30sec correction for Spence Parkland vs VCP 5K adjusted to 2.5Miles 30 /3.1 * 2.5 = 24sec
So Radnor adjusted 2.5VCP Avg = 15:09
Let’s see Hilton had 15:21 and Saratoga Springs 15:16 That is still without an adjustment for shorter race!
I know avg Times do not tell a full story in XC but they do when they are this far apart!
NEW YORK OVERRATED ON BOTH GIRLS AND BOYS
END OF STORY
I'm still not sure where in that post is the answer to my question of where Collegiate lost all these meets besides Brown. Perhaps someone else can help.
I have no doubt that there is a possibility Coatesville is the best team in the NE. That's why we have this thing called NTN, to help us know for sure not only that but where they stand upo nationwide.
Am I to infer that the times by Spence suggest the PA state meet is 30 seconds slower than VCP? Should I then deduce that the top 3 PA guys will be under 15 at VCP?
As to Radnor, a very good team to be sure, but forgetting abstract conversions for a second... did they race any NY teams this year and if so, what was the result?
s2fan
11-17-2006, 05:47 PM
It would be interesting to throw Coatesville's speedratings as well as Hendersons into the NYS state race and see what happens. Because I think Henderson would place a lot higher up than most give them credit for, and I'm just curious who would win Coatesville or Shen. So maybe a stat guy could whip something up for us...
you knew this result already :)
1 coatesville (by a bunch - about 30 - most of Cville advantage due to 5th man)
2 shen
3 smith
4 henderson
5 liverpool
6 queensbury
juicynacho
11-17-2006, 06:04 PM
you knew this result already :)
1 coatesville (by a bunch - about 30 - most of Cville advantage due to 5th man)
2 shen
3 smith
4 henderson
5 liverpool
6 queensbury
I knew I had seen that somewhere. So I think people could lay off of Henderson, they only lost to Smithtown by 1 point in this merge.
Let’s see Neely Spence runs 18:07 to win PA AA Girls at Hershey Parkland 5k and then goes to VCP 5K a week later and runs 17:37 at New York Road Runners Club XC Champs on 5K VCP. So VCP is significantly faster which fits with what anyone that knows both courses knows.
But lets not even count that for all our voodoo math NY’s and Speed raters.
Let’s use simple 5 grade math.
You think 13:10 is good for 2.5M VCP that’s 5:16 a mile good for a girls team maybe!
Coatesville Team avg on Hershey Parkland 5K 15:43 or 943sec / 3.1 = 5:04 mile * 2.5 = 760 or 12:40
How many New York teams were under 12:40 at Manhattan? I Believe Shen had a 12:56.6
That is without any adjustment for:
Shorter race length at Manhattan
Tougher course at Hershey Parkland
Now for Radnor they run 19:17 at Hershey Parkland same math above and we will use 30sec correction for Spence Parkland vs VCP 5K adjusted to 2.5Miles 30 /3.1 * 2.5 = 24sec
So Radnor adjusted 2.5VCP Avg = 15:09
Let’s see Hilton had 15:21 and Saratoga Springs 15:16 That is still without an adjustment for shorter race!
I know avg Times do not tell a full story in XC but they do when they are this far apart!
NEW YORK OVERRATED ON BOTH GIRLS AND BOYS
END OF STORY
I really really hope you are joking. If you aren't, I feel really bad for you and anyone who knows you.
juicynacho
11-17-2006, 06:42 PM
Briarwood was also Chaminade's worst race of the season, in all honesty.
Agreed, I have no arguement against that. I basically think that you could almost just eliminate those races for both teams because they are such outlayers to the rest of their data. And when you do that and then look at the rest of the body of work from Henderson I think they probably fall around #6 in the NE behind:
1. Coatesville
2. Shen
3. Danbury
4. Smithtown
5. Glastonbury
6. WC Henderson
7. Collegiate
which really is pretty decent for a states number 2 team. not great but not horrible like most say.
usatf44
11-17-2006, 11:57 PM
I'm still not sure where in that post is the answer to my question of where Collegiate lost all these meets besides Brown. Perhaps someone else can help.
The New York Mayors Cup, and Brown, and The Feds wil be 3. Show me a Undefeated Elite NY boys team after Feds!
sisyphus
11-18-2006, 07:30 AM
The New York Mayors Cup, and Brown, and The Feds wil be 3. Show me a Undefeated Elite NY boys team after Feds!
I've finally got your logic down. Using it, I can figure out how every PA team is better than Smithtown.
Chris Williams did not run at Mayors Cup.
Chris Williams ran 15:35 for 4th at Brown.
No PA teams ran at Mayors Cup.
Therefore: Every PA guy could run 15:35 at Brown giving their team around 40 points for a decisive win over Smithtown. I really don't see why more people can't understand this.
Sully 800
11-18-2006, 12:47 PM
:d
watchout
11-18-2006, 06:15 PM
So, I guess only 1 NY team is likely headed to NTN now...
CornathaCantersmack
11-18-2006, 06:40 PM
So, I guess only 1 NY team is likely headed to NTN now...
Yeah, that's what it looks like.
But hey, at least now the whole region can prove its dominance with PA and CT in the mix as well.
watchout
11-18-2006, 06:41 PM
Yeah, that's what it looks like.
But hey, at least now the whole region can prove its dominance with PA and CT in the mix as well.
CT is still a big question mark...
sisyphus
11-18-2006, 07:36 PM
CT is still a big question mark...
Agreed. I would say Danbury has earned a spot but the CA SS schools certainly put some good showings in today. If they do that again next week at Woodward, 78:45 or under for a non auto team, it might be Jesuit and another SS team as Wild Cards.
NYrunner
11-18-2006, 08:56 PM
Henderson at pa state
191
184
183
168
165
Looks like either 4th or 5th at Feds so not bad....
juicynacho
11-18-2006, 09:19 PM
Henderson at pa state
191
184
183
168
165
Looks like either 4th or 5th at Feds so not bad....
the modest people of PA say thank you for throwing us a bone. As I said earlier in a few posts I would rank them right around 6th in the NE, of course now you have to move Collegiate above them (who I had at 7th) so maybe #7 in the NE is the right spot for Henderson.
watchout
11-18-2006, 09:26 PM
the modest people of PA say thank you for throwing us a bone. As I said earlier in a few posts I would rank them right around 6th in the NE, of course now you have to move Collegiate above them (who I had at 7th) so maybe #7 in the NE is the right spot for Henderson.
What about Jackson NJ and Brockton (among others) MA?
vBulletin v3.6.2, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.