HEPS 2012 INDOOR

Crazy that Princeton goes from 1st to 6th in a single year. Really shows how competitive the women's side of the meet is.

And crazy day on the men's side. So many places those 8 points could have been made up for Cornell. A lot of big performances from the Princeton men.

Does anyone know what happened to Alex Banfich from Princeton? Is she injured? And if so, since when?

C/M Runner wrote:

Does anyone know what happened to Alex Banfich from Princeton? Is she injured? And if so, since when?

Maybe in that Boston race (where Kellner ran 16:11 and beat her pretty handily over the last few laps)? Banfich certainly did not look like herself in that race, and I don't think I've seen any results for her since.

It was a shame not to have her in the Heps. She seems to be highly regarded throughout the conference.

yr5 wrote:

C/M Runner wrote:

Does anyone know what happened to Alex Banfich from Princeton? Is she injured? And if so, since when?

Maybe in that Boston race (where Kellner ran 16:11 and beat her pretty handily over the last few laps)? Banfich certainly did not look like herself in that race, and I don't think I've seen any results for her since.

It was a shame not to have her in the Heps. She seems to be highly regarded throughout the conference.

I thought she said in the post-race interview at BU that it was her hamstring tightened up... so it's possible lingering issues from that? Hope she heals up soon for outdoor!

As a Cornell alum who was there for all of Sunday's action, I want to congratulate the Columbia women and the Princeton men on a job well done. There were a lot of terrific performances by the Cornell squads on both sides, and while getting second place isn't fun, it makes the rivalries that much stronger. Nothing to be ashamed of.

I have attended numerous Ivy Championships and never have witnessed a team having as much fun as Columbia. My wife and I were sitting directly above them cheering for our alma mater. The Columbia kids and coaching staff were having so much fun together that it was impossible not to cheer for them.

McCullough ended up with the meet MVP award, but Princeton's team award has got to go to either Dinkins or Van Ackeren.

Van Ackeren pulls out 16 points from a double that people didn't think was possible, AND came back to run the 800 leg on the DMR.

Dinkins comes back in the 4x4 after winning the 500 and tweaks his hamstring with 220 to go. If he DNF's Cornell has the chance to tie, so he limps the next lap with a bunch of Cornell spectators getting in his face from lane 2 on the backstretch, and lets Princeton shut the door.

As an aside, if Princeton had DNF'ed the 4x4, it would have been an interesting scenario as Cornell wins the fast heat but loses to Brown out of the slow heat and would have ended up losing by 2.

Ivy Observer wrote:

McCullough ended up with the meet MVP award, but Princeton's team award has got to go to either Dinkins or Van Ackeren.

Van Ackeren pulls out 16 points from a double that people didn't think was possible, AND came back to run the 800 leg on the DMR.

Dinkins comes back in the 4x4 after winning the 500 and tweaks his hamstring with 220 to go. If he DNF's Cornell has the chance to tie, so he limps the next lap . . . and lets Princeton shut the door.

Points taken, but a good case can be made for McCullough, too. Not only did he directly add 10 points to PU's cause (with BY FAR the outstanding single mark of the championship), he also cost Cornell's throwers another four points.

This, from a guy who's *not* going to the NCAAs--who basically "took one for the team": got into a preliminary meet, to get the feel for the college weight (of course he was the all-time great HS weight thrower), then threw at Heps and called it a season. (Unless he'll be throwing at IC4A? I doubt that, though, from the way they were talking.)

[Quite a number of hammer specialists refuse to throw the weight at all, because of the different timing and the potential for injury, esp. to the back.]

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Maybe one of the keys to Cornell's defeats: their horizontal jumpers' difficulties in finding the takeoff board, both in the individual events and the multis. This is the last thing I'd have expected--they were jumping in their own pit!

Obviously a lot of them still jumped far--they took four of the six places in the men's LJ!--but the number of fouls, and of takeoffs from 'way behind the board, was really striking (though, granted, maybe more so because the pit was right in front of the spectators' area). The problem showed up on Saturday, but seemed esp. apparent on Sunday.

OTOH their throwers, as a group, did an outstanding job. Their frosh SPer, Mozia, was the list leader coming into the meet and was bitterly disappointed about placing second; but overall their men and women just had a really solid meet, from top to bottom, against some very tough competition. Well done.

Hey, so, um, video?

So far we have the guys Hammer and the final height of the men's pole vault on the Ivy League site

And some interviews on Heps Track.

Is there anything anywhere else? Of anything coming?

And Heps just keeps getting better.

Obviously, the flat track slows things down in the faster events. Hopkins and especially Dinkins turned in really quick marks that would have been much faster at the Armory or Harvard.

So here's a comparison the last time Heps was at Barton Hall

Event|'08 Advance |'12 Advance|# in '12 that made '08 number|All-Time performances.

60m 7.02|6.94|13|6.79 - Aaronson, Wilson, Spooney =5th AT performance = 2nd AT performer

400m 50.23|50.82|-|-

500m 1:07.70|1:05.85|19 (the whole field!)|-

800m 1:55.53|1:54.11|10| 1:49.72 Callahan 3rd AT, 1:50.24 Amirand 4th AT

1000m 2:29.91|2:28.46|8|-

Mile 4:21.34|4:18.37|10|-

3000 Top 10: 8:39.82|8:26.50|16|-

5000 Top 10: 15:01.37|14:44.92|14|-

Cornell Men lost because of their abysmal showing in the triple and the 60 dash, both events they should have gone upper teens points-wise and scored half of what they should have. Agreed on their throwers, despite Mozia's second place performance in shot put, they did what they needed to and continue to impress. Their new coach is building a solid group, hopefully the loss of Belden next year won't hurt too much.

Looking forward to outdoors, should be another close competition.

On the women's side, I think Cornell may be the favorite again due to the points they will pick up in Jav (most likely 20'ish), but just like any Heps, who knows what can happen.

shazzuy wrote:

Cornell Men lost because of their abysmal showing in the...60 dash...

In the dash final somebody (Aaronson, I'm *pretty* sure) stumbled noticeably, about five steps out of the blocks. Props to him for staying on his feet--I thought he was going down--but there was no way he could make up that tenth-second lost.

All the other Cornell guys ran faster in the final than in the prelims. The only Cornell entrant who didn't run his season's best at Heps was Chris Bain: he ran 6.82 back in December, but had been hurt (and out of action) for weeks, then ran 7.20 the week before Heps. I was very surprised that he was even entered in the Heps, and more surprised that he hit a 6.83 in the final.

All in all, I'd say the Cornell guys didn't run *terribly* in the 60, but I'd certainly agree that they were hoping for much more; the other half of the field just ran really, really well. I mean, come on, 6.89 didn't score?!? When did that ever happen before? (Pretty sure the answer is "never.")

And here are the girls - the increase in the depth of quality is even greater

So here's a comparison with the last time Heps was at Barton Hall

Event|'08 Advance |'12 Advance|# in '12 that made '08 number|All-Time performances.

60m 7.81|7.73|10|7.52 Hewitt & 7:56 Iheukwumere

200m 25.72|25.44|13|

400m 58.02|57.48|17|-

800m 2:13.57|2:10.78|11|-

Mile 4:59.46|4:56.86|12|4:46.81 D'Agostino - 6th, 4:47.37 O'Connor - 8th

3000 Top 10: 10:03.86|9:48.02|18|9:21.82 Neer - 7th, 9:23.77 Pappas - 8th

5000 Top 10: 17:45.33|17:20.23|15|-

AI, thanks for that interesting analysis! I think it's a really good demonstration of how the Ivy League continues to rise in its level of competitiveness.

For many middle-class families, and virtually all lower-income families, the Ivy League schools represent a better financial deal--when you look at the bottom line--than does even a full-tuition scholarship at someone's State university. More and more families are understanding that, and I think more of them--nationwide--are taking the Ivy option as a result.

When you also throw in the possibility of a superior educational experience, and the enhanced prospects for future employment and/or further education, the Ivies do look very attractive. More of the country's top student-athletes, and their families, seem to get that; the level of talent coming in to the Heps schools is just exploding as a result.

it also helps that a couple of the Ivy schools, not all of them mind you, have supplied more support to athletics. Not a lot, but some, and in some cases, it is enough to make a huge difference. I know Princeton has refocused a ton of effort back in to athletics because they were mad about getting beat by "other Ivy schools" *cough*Cornell*cough*.

Cornell and Princeton men are on a different level compared to the other 6 teams in the Ivy League.

I can't see any other team competing for a chance to win a championship in the next couple years. Whether it's because of #of students or money put into the program, Princeton and Cornell are on a different planet.

Obviously the other 6 teams have a chance to score well if they land a couple big-time recruits who can score tens of points each, but it seems unlikely that any of them will have as complete a team as Princeton or Cornell.

This is bad for the Ivy League, isn't it?

Wanted to say thanks to Cornell for an outstanding meet. As a parent of a freshman, this was my first ever Heps meet, and it did not disappoint. My wife and I absolutely loved the venue, the level of competition, and the professionalism with which the meet was run. Job well done!

Looking forward to the Outdoor Heps!

maybe this was addressed somewhere else in the thread and I didn't see it. Cornell only had one person competing in the mile and 0 in the 3000/5000. Anyone know why?

ivyrunner27 wrote:

Cornell and Princeton men are on a different level compared to the other 6 teams in the Ivy League.

I can't see any other team competing for a chance to win a championship in the next couple years. Whether it's because of #of students or money put into the program, Princeton and Cornell are on a different planet.

Obviously the other 6 teams have a chance to score well if they land a couple big-time recruits who can score tens of points each, but it seems unlikely that any of them will have as complete a team as Princeton or Cornell.

This is bad for the Ivy League, isn't it?

If you have seen other conference meets, you will see this is not uncommon. From my experience, the Atlantic 10 track championships are always between Charlotte and URI (in the last 6 years anyways), due to them having a more well-rounded team than the rest of the conference AND being able to bring in the recruits.

I'm sure if you look at any other conference, you will find more situations like this where the top point schools tend to be more well-rounded than the rest of the conference.

If anything, I think the dominance by Princeton and Cornell is forcing the rest of the conference to adapt. Wasn't Columbia more of a distance powerhouse a few years ago? And now, the women have the title. Dominance ebbs and flows between the teams based on the coaching and recruits. I'd be concerned if you don't see the other teams trying to adjust and having Cornell and Princeton dominate for over 20 years straight.