Statistics
15,186 total views | Who I Am...Latest BlogsNo articles found
Wall - 0 followersLatest NewsNo articles found
| VideosYou can link to any video on RunnerSpace and put it in your video box on your profile! |
runhappy, on , said:
It's an ok baseline to start from but there are too many variables in cross country to only use times for rankings.
DougB, on , said:
Ok great - I actually commented on the article before it went to the forum. Graves is only a soph and has already shown a lot of improvement this season. She's on a trajectory to be a national contender in the next couple of years.
runhappy, on , said:
Exactly. So many big races this weekend -- including Griak -- that this picture should become much clearer by Sunday. Anna French, the Hasz twins, can they beat Samantha Ortega from Saugus? Lots to sort out there.
I understand some other girls have run times that put them high on lists ... but I'm more interested in whether they've beaten anyone on this top 30 list.
GeorgieTheK, on , said:
I'll be honest with you guys. When I found out she was running for Heritage and she stopped to tie her shoes twice and still almost broke a course record ... I thought wow...maybe I should just insert her at No. 1.
But I talked to her new coach on Monday. He doesn't think she took any sort of rest period after World Juniors. That, combined with a massive adjustment to a new life (and whatever led to it, which I have no idea of), makes me feel like maybe she's not that 9:12 girl right now. She could surely get back to that at some point, but I'm not convinced she's going to blow the doors off everybody this fall. So that's why I decided to go a bit conservative with her. Saturday will reveal more when she runs at the DC XC Invite.
cerutty fan, on , said:
Methinks they underestimate her.
In the preseason I identified 100 of the top girls. The intervening weeks have showed that I missed a couple who were deserving, but I started by looking at what all of them have done so far... who they've beaten and who they've lost to.
Although we do gather top times for rankings, I'm more interested in what a top time means historically on that course. Because not everything is exactly 3 miles or 5K, etc.
I took input from the editors of DyeStatCAL and DyeStatIL on how they see the top individuals in the states they cover.
I ordered most everyone by their accomplishments so far -- winning big invitationals, beating other top runners, etc. Some people haven't raced yet and so I gave them the benefit of the doubt and kept them where they were or bumped them down just a few spots.
I look at several criteria. Recent success. Past history. Proven track times. But it's also still an opinion of where things are right now.
I will be honest and say one source I do touch base with is Bill Meylan and his speed ratings (tullyrunners.com). I'm not sure if I believe in them 100 percent, but I sometimes use them to break deadlocks when I feel a few names are more or less equal.
I welcome the questions and hope it leads to worthwhile discussion.
runhappy, on , said:
Which Milesplit lists are you looking at? Their time rankings database or the thought out subjective rankings? Time based rankings for XC are basically pointless.
Scott Joerger, on , said:
Actually Graves IS on the bubble. I think this got pushed into the forum just a little before I was done with it.