Who has the most accurate high school lists these days?
Who has the most accurate high school lists these days?
Milesplit definitely has the most comprehensive rankings. The results to pretty much every invitational are posted to milesplit. Athletic.net is pretty bad and only has results for about a quarter of the meets I have run in. The only drawback to milesplit is that you have to pay $48 per year to see the rankings, but it is well worth it in my opinion.
list guy wrote:
Who has the most accurate high school lists these days?
Hands down, it is Track & Field News.
milesplittttt wrote:
Milesplit definitely has the most comprehensive rankings. The results to pretty much every invitational are posted to milesplit. Athletic.net is pretty bad and only has results for about a quarter of the meets I have run in. The only drawback to milesplit is that you have to pay $48 per year to see the rankings, but it is well worth it in my opinion.
Far from every meet is posted on milesplit. What state are you in? My state is terrible on there.
I am also looking for the best national rankings.
milesplit
TrackDot wrote:
milesplittttt wrote:Milesplit definitely has the most comprehensive rankings. The results to pretty much every invitational are posted to milesplit. Athletic.net is pretty bad and only has results for about a quarter of the meets I have run in. The only drawback to milesplit is that you have to pay $48 per year to see the rankings, but it is well worth it in my opinion.
Far from every meet is posted on milesplit. What state are you in? My state is terrible on there.
I am also looking for the best national rankings.
I'm in PA and every invitational I have ever gone to has been posted to milesplit. Some even get a live webcast. I guess it must vary by state.
list guy wrote:
Who has the most accurate high school lists these days?
People from states will have different answers here.
If you're on the west coast, Milesplit isn't great. Nationally elite times are run in Texas and SoCal dual meets every season (I can think of at least one occasion in the last 5 years where the #1 and #2 midseason 3200 times in the nation were run in SoCal dual meet), but almost none of those meets make it onto Milesplit.
East coast tends to have better documentation on Milesplit but relatively poor documentation on Athletic.net.
If you want to be thorough, check both Athletic.net and Milesplit. And check T&F news. Dyestat, even though it's fallen apart quite a bit in recent years, also tends to keep decent track of the season leaders.
If you want a true top 10 it's track & field news.
Remember...Your 100m dual meet hand timed without a wind reading doesn't count.
Sadly coaches lie and fabricate marks. If a n unaffiliated timing company does not time the meet the results can not be truly verified.
CWRP wrote:
If you want a true top 10 it's track & field news.
Remember...Your 100m dual meet hand timed without a wind reading doesn't count.
Sadly coaches lie and fabricate marks. If a n unaffiliated timing company does not time the meet the results can not be truly verified.
T&F news keeps a regularly updated high school national leaderboard each season?
Again, I can think of at least one occasion in the last 3 years where the nation's #1 and #2 times in the 3200 at that point in the season (very end of March) were set in a dual meet.
I imagine T&F news would not have included these times, but you could find them on Athletic.net.
Take sprint results from dual meets with a grain of salt (especially if something looks very sketchy, all the times appear truncated, etc), but theres on reason to completely dismiss them either. Regions with strong track programs shell out the cash to have wind gauges and FAT timing in duals.
It's too bad everyone just doesn't use athletic.net it works so much better and doesn't cost anything(costs the hosts a little bit if they choose but not the viewer).
In Michigan results go up for probably 95% of the meets, so it works well here.