Article Comment: Elite 10: Boys Team Rankings by Class
09/25/2014 8:51:50 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 5
There is a remarkable disconnect between the fans' rankings and these lists.
There is a remarkable disconnect between the fans' rankings and these lists.
09/25/2014 8:59:58 PM
Admin
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 846
@Redstormfan this list are based on times from this season, so the fan's rankings are a bit more accurate right now. After FOC things will even out.
@Redstormfan this list are based on times from this season, so the fan's rankings are a bit more accurate right now. After FOC things will even out.
09/26/2014 12:04:40 AM
User
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 0
I would agree with Redstormfan. Many teams are excluded based on the "5k" requirement. Many individual runners too. Using standardized data would be fair to all teams and runners. Not too hard to convert a 2.9 to a 3.1. Based on the fan rankings being more accurate and having to wait for FOC to accurately rank teams and runners shows that the current ranking system is not very fair to the athletes.
I would agree with Redstormfan. Many teams are excluded based on the "5k" requirement. Many individual runners too. Using standardized data would be fair to all teams and runners. Not too hard to convert a 2.9 to a 3.1. Based on the fan rankings being more accurate and having to wait for FOC to accurately rank teams and runners shows that the current ranking system is not very fair to the athletes.
09/26/2014 8:20:37 AM
User
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 39
Not too hard to convert, but imagine having to do that for 3/4 of the meets out there and not even knowing the accurate distances on many of them. On top of all the work that already goes into this stuff.
Not too hard to convert, but imagine having to do that for 3/4 of the meets out there and not even knowing the accurate distances on many of them. On top of all the work that already goes into this stuff.
09/26/2014 12:01:40 PM
User
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 13
There is nothing unfair about these rankings. They are just for fun anywho. Besides the first meet I am unsure why people are racing so many short courses these days if they have not run a 5k and it is going to be October.
There is nothing unfair about these rankings. They are just for fun anywho. Besides the first meet I am unsure why people are racing so many short courses these days if they have not run a 5k and it is going to be October.
09/27/2014 1:15:25 AM
User
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 0
FIT1 I agree that no 2 courses are the same for sure. Conversion of times is simple and does not take much effort. It is difficult if a site does not report every runners time if they have not met the sites "5k" standard. Math is math. Nofinishingkick, It is unfair in my opinion as many young runners look at the information on this site and the information as far as rankings is subjective and biased. A just for fun and anywho site should not charge money. The Sub5.com site does a great job and doesn't cost a dime.
FIT1 I agree that no 2 courses are the same for sure. Conversion of times is simple and does not take much effort. It is difficult if a site does not report every runners time if they have not met the sites "5k" standard. Math is math. Nofinishingkick, It is unfair in my opinion as many young runners look at the information on this site and the information as far as rankings is subjective and biased. A just for fun and anywho site should not charge money. The Sub5.com site does a great job and doesn't cost a dime.

You must be logged in to comment.

Click Here to Log In.