|
|
Post by l2mmcoach on Sept 25, 2007 12:47:44 GMT -5
I just checked out the Frederick rankings and, honestly, at this time it isn't very accurate at all, especially on the girls side. The top girl has been consistently beaten by others all year; the 4th runner is unbeaten vs county girls all season, yet she's only 4th; the 5th 11th, and 12th girls are having terrible seasons and are way over-ranked; and I don't believe the 8th girl is even running (Rodriquez of Tusc) this season. I'm guessing the problem is too high a score is given for last year. With girls, "last year" is usually worthless. Maybe the rankings can be tweaked a bit.
Overall this ranking system is a good, objective way to rank XC runners. And this year's Carroll County rankings seem fair. I like the way the meets are listed at the bottom, so we know what the rankings include.
Q: Are "championship" meets given the same value as a dual or tri meet? This wouldn't seem right. Losing to another runner by 20 seconds at a dual meet the week before counties and then beating the same runner at counties by 20 seconds would have little or no net effect with the ranking system, correct?
just my opinions.
|
|
|
|
Post by CoachSpongeBob on Sept 25, 2007 13:13:29 GMT -5
No, Championship meets have more weight. In fact, meets with more ranked runners have slightly more weight.
With the Frederick Girls rankings, as Coach Snyder had said, a new runner (like the 4th ranked runner for girls) doesn't get to go straight up to the top. They have to work their way up. Championship meets are the most important, and some runners peak at the right time while others start the season putting up great times but slowly come back. I think this is why an emphasis is still put on the championship meet from last year. Now since we didn't do the whole season from last year, and just stared with the championship meet, it put an extra weight on the championship meet, but I think it is evening out. One more good race for the Linganore girl and she will probably be ranked #1. The Tuscarora girl we just didn't know (Emily Powell from SC just ran for the first time, and she obviously belongs up towards the top - it could be the same deal with the Tuscarora girl, we just don't know. After 4 weeks, the rankings do usually effect runners that don't compete.
|
|
|
|
Post by owlscc9104 on Sept 25, 2007 19:50:39 GMT -5
Just trying to understand, are the runners listed only the runners that have scored? Just wondering, and thanks for all the effort in these rankings.
|
|
|
|
Post by CoachSpongeBob on Sept 26, 2007 6:31:45 GMT -5
It is hard to explain briefly, but here is my best shot. The rankings is based on how runners do against other ranked runners. You move up and down based on you performance at a meet against other ranked runners. If 10 ranked runners are running in a race on Wednesday, and you have the race of your life and PR by 50 seconds, but all the other ranked runners also PR by 50 seconds, you won't move up or down.
The long and short, the current rankings are based on the last two years of meets - sort of. Every meet for the last 2 years (plus the county championship in 2005) that has multiple ranked runners in it was used to figure out the rankings. After each meet, times are plugged into a formula I have to determine each runners rise or drop in total points.
A new runner gets onto the rankings basically by beating ranked runners. Just because you beat a ranked runner doesn't necessarily mean you will get ranked. You can never go into the rankings with more points then someone that beat you. So if John Doe has 35 points and beats you - it is possible that even if you beat 3 ranked runners you won't get ranked. It all depends on how much John Doe beat you by (think of it this way, each second is worth 2 points, so if he beat you by 15 seconds, that is 30 points - I don't add people to the rankings with under 10 points, it only causes a problem cause you will be eliminated the next meet almost always)
That is a quick explanation of how it works. To learn more you can always read up on it with the link above.
|
|
|
|
Post by onestepahead on Oct 1, 2007 8:41:15 GMT -5
Will the meet at North Carroll be included?
|
|
|
|
Post by CoachCortezFSK on Oct 1, 2007 12:36:10 GMT -5
Yea there has been nothing put up not even the results or is it that i just cant find them??
|
|
|
|
Post by CoachSpongeBob on Oct 1, 2007 21:42:22 GMT -5
I had not got the NC results as of 3:00 on fRiday (but was told they were coming) but then I went to Texas. I just got back, haven't even check my mail, will try to see whta I can get done tomorrow. Hopefully I have those results so I can put them in before the Bull Run Results.
I haven't seen much, but it looked like the county did really well. I had a chance to look at a computer for about 5 minutes this weekend. I will look at it tomorrow.
|
|
|
|
Post by scdistance on Oct 2, 2007 8:05:57 GMT -5
CoachSpongeBob, I noticed that the link to get to the boys rankings (located at the bottom of the girls ranking page) leads you to last years rankings not this years. Not that it is a big deal, because the main link on the top of the page still works.
|
|
|
|
Post by CoachSpongeBob on Oct 2, 2007 8:16:58 GMT -5
I think that is fixed now, Thanks!
|
|
|
|
Post by scdistance on Oct 2, 2007 8:28:38 GMT -5
Yeah, it works now.
Good job CoachSpongeBob, you fixed that really fast. Keep up the good work.
|
|
|
|
Post by CoachSpongeBob on Oct 2, 2007 13:24:14 GMT -5
XC Rankings for boys have been done. I am working on the girls now. This includes the meet at NC last week and Bull Run (I also added points to all runners just so more runners might be included)
|
|
|
|
Post by CoachSpongeBob on Oct 2, 2007 13:24:52 GMT -5
Sorry for the delay with this. With class last week, and going to Texas, then I had to type up the results from NC, and I have just run out of time today. Hopefully I won't be so slow from now on.
|
|
