Bogus seed times at the state meet.
06/01/2016 11:44:20 PM
User
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 11
I posted an issue I'm having on the 5A/6A performance list article, and thought that also posted here. But, since it doesn't, here it goes again. From what I can see, two of the top three times in the 5A boys 300H are bogus. While they are both very talented runners, these two times were run in a race in which everyone ran, at minimum, a two second PR. These times were also used last week in the 5A South regional meet where the respective runners finished two and three and a half seconds slower than their seed time that gave them preferred position in the middle of the track. They will have that yet again this week at the state meet, pushing more deserving runners to the outside lanes and one to a slower section. So, here's the important part. THIS IS NOT AN ACUSATION OF CHEATING. Times are times, if they go in the books they're there. This is simply a crystal clear example of why we need preliminary rounds. There are a good number of bogus times that go into the database every season that end up as seed times later on. Coaches BS entry times at invitationals and hand time Wednesday meets, thats just the way it is. But when those times represent two of the three top seeds in a state championship FINAL, especially in an event where lane assignment is so vital, it is simply unnacceptable and the policy needs to be revisited and adjusted. Edit: In looking more closely, I incorrectly identified the runners in question, which adds to my confusion. Currently, the #3 seed at the state meet is entered at a time of 38.97. Last week at regionals, he was seeded at 42.27 and finished in 42.35 for 18th place. Someone explain to me how this works.
I posted an issue I'm having on the 5A/6A performance list article, and thought that also posted here. But, since it doesn't, here it goes again.

From what I can see, two of the top three times in the 5A boys 300H are bogus. While they are both very talented runners, these two times were run in a race in which everyone ran, at minimum, a two second PR. These times were also used last week in the 5A South regional meet where the respective runners finished two and three and a half seconds slower than their seed time that gave them preferred position in the middle of the track. They will have that yet again this week at the state meet, pushing more deserving runners to the outside lanes and one to a slower section. So, here's the important part. THIS IS NOT AN ACUSATION OF CHEATING. Times are times, if they go in the books they're there. This is simply a crystal clear example of why we need preliminary rounds. There are a good number of bogus times that go into the database every season that end up as seed times later on. Coaches BS entry times at invitationals and hand time Wednesday meets, thats just the way it is. But when those times represent two of the three top seeds in a state championship FINAL, especially in an event where lane assignment is so vital, it is simply unnacceptable and the policy needs to be revisited and adjusted.

Edit: In looking more closely, I incorrectly identified the runners in question, which adds to my confusion. Currently, the #3 seed at the state meet is entered at a time of 38.97. Last week at regionals, he was seeded at 42.27 and finished in 42.35 for 18th place. Someone explain to me how this works.
06/02/2016 8:29:41 AM
Power User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 415
Trevor, I don't have a dog in this fight, so I'm not taking sides. I do understand your point and agree with your frustration (although I'm fine with not having prelims). Times that are used for entry into the state meet are supposed to be only those times earned at the regional or district meet, or auto qualifiers earned at a meet of at least 10 schools (i.e.: an invitational). In theory, Wednesday times from dual/tri meets should never be used. The reason they possibly got by was because the season best times are what showed up in Milestat. It is the responsibility of the coach to adjust the times accordingly, if necessary, and up to the Region representative to double check it. It sounds as though perhaps they did so before regionals, but if I am reading you correctly, someone missed this. My advice to you be to have your coach alert the region rep or meet director and having them look at it. My last piece of advice is this though...regardless of what someone's time is on paper, or what lane you start in, you still have to run the race. If someone is over seeded, it will often show when they run the race. Take control of what you can control...your own performance. Good luck.
Trevor, I don't have a dog in this fight, so I'm not taking sides. I do understand your point and agree with your frustration (although I'm fine with not having prelims). Times that are used for entry into the state meet are supposed to be only those times earned at the regional or district meet, or auto qualifiers earned at a meet of at least 10 schools (i.e.: an invitational). In theory, Wednesday times from dual/tri meets should never be used.

The reason they possibly got by was because the season best times are what showed up in Milestat. It is the responsibility of the coach to adjust the times accordingly, if necessary, and up to the Region representative to double check it. It sounds as though perhaps they did so before regionals, but if I am reading you correctly, someone missed this.

My advice to you be to have your coach alert the region rep or meet director and having them look at it.

My last piece of advice is this though...regardless of what someone's time is on paper, or what lane you start in, you still have to run the race. If someone is over seeded, it will often show when they run the race. Take control of what you can control...your own performance.

Good luck.
06/02/2016 8:51:58 AM
Power User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 415
I rescind any suggestion that I made in my earlier post that perhaps there was an error. The meet in question where the times were run had ten teams competing, and from the looks of it, used FAT timing. I don't know if perhaps the race was started at the right line or there were any issues with the hurdles, and I don't know what the wind may have been like, but this time is certainly a legal time. I can't say why the young man finished in 18th at the regional meet....did he hit a hurdle? Straight up fatigue? Not being able to repeat a performance doesn't always mean the the original one was a bogus time. Any which way, whether or not there was a issue with the timing at the meet, it is recorded as a legal time, and thus would be eligible to be used for seeding purposes.
I rescind any suggestion that I made in my earlier post that perhaps there was an error. The meet in question where the times were run had ten teams competing, and from the looks of it, used FAT timing. I don't know if perhaps the race was started at the right line or there were any issues with the hurdles, and I don't know what the wind may have been like, but this time is certainly a legal time. I can't say why the young man finished in 18th at the regional meet....did he hit a hurdle? Straight up fatigue? Not being able to repeat a performance doesn't always mean the the original one was a bogus time.

Any which way, whether or not there was a issue with the timing at the meet, it is recorded as a legal time, and thus would be eligible to be used for seeding purposes.
06/02/2016 9:49:20 AM
User
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 11
The times were certainly run in a state qualifying meet, no disupte as to the process. My issue is the glaring disparity between those performances and all others during the season so far. While I do have an athlete that would stand to benefit from better lane assignment in this instance, my dog in this fight is an equitable landscape for all of our athletes to compete in. This is the state championships, and it has been decided to run this race as a timed final. The fast section is then earned on merit and those performances, in my eyes, are lacking. I'm totally fine with any "bulletin board material" this may provide and at the end of the day on Saturday, I hope that I'm proven wrong, and that Peninsula Distrcit Meet #3 just so happened to have been the most competetive 300H race run in any meet all season.
The times were certainly run in a state qualifying meet, no disupte as to the process. My issue is the glaring disparity between those performances and all others during the season so far. While I do have an athlete that would stand to benefit from better lane assignment in this instance, my dog in this fight is an equitable landscape for all of our athletes to compete in. This is the state championships, and it has been decided to run this race as a timed final. The fast section is then earned on merit and those performances, in my eyes, are lacking. I'm totally fine with any "bulletin board material" this may provide and at the end of the day on Saturday, I hope that I'm proven wrong, and that Peninsula Distrcit Meet #3 just so happened to have been the most competetive 300H race run in any meet all season.

You must be logged in to comment.

Click Here to Log In.