NXN At-Large bids? Who get?

San Diego Section Finals on 2.75 course at Balboa Park

1. 30 La Costa Canyon ( 16:35 1:22:55)

=======================================

1 1 Emma Abrahamson 11 15:56

2 2 Kelly Lawson 12 16:17

3 3 Ellie Abrahamson 12 16:27

4 9 Sarah Abrahamson 9 16:56

5 15 Rebekah Bosler 11 17:19

6 ( 20) Alex Fromme 11 17:30

7 ( 53) Savannah Gual 10 18:31

The reason LCC didn't look good at Mt. Sac is that neither Emma nor Ellie Abrahamson ran. I'm never comfortable with converting SD short course results but I have this projected to be about equal to Saugus at Woodward. Of course, converting the Mt. Sac rain course is guess work as well.

FYI - Tesoro finished second to Saugus in D2 SS, just ahead of Redondo. D1 Capistrano Valley may be just in front of Tesoro and Redondo.

CA top girls teams going into state seem to be:

Great Oak / Simi Valley - close and well ahead of #3

Saugus / LCC / St. Francis / Buchanan / Davis - extremely close

Capistrano Valley / Tesoro / Redondo - seems tough for any to jump into top 4

Summit vs. Los Alamos is an interesting debate. Being from New Mexico, I have an obvious bias. You mention a "very noticeable off day" for one of Summit's scorers, but a quick look at the NXN SW results (and being somewhat familiar with LA's season) indicates the same for Los Alamos. In most meets, both Reardon and Hill have been further ahead of their 3-5 teammates and have regularly beat Ryan Betty of Rio Rancho (40th overall, 24 team scoring). Both Reardon and Hill have been very consistent throughout the season, including their state meet just 1 week prior to regionals. At the NM state meet, Hill ran faster than Flores of Cleveland (Storm XC), who finished 22nd overall, 13th in team scoring at the SW regional. Using your same argument in favor of Summit, Los Alamos was "off," yet still finished 3rd in one of the most competitive regions in the nation. Also, Summit scored 152 in a field of 16 complete teams. Los Alamos scored 215 in a field of 33 teams. Summit was 39 points out of 2nd while Los Alamos was 52 points from 2nd in a field that was twice as large. Summit may have an equally strong argument for an at-large bid, but the regional results only seem to give Los Alamos the edge when you consider the quality and depth of the SW region. And given the SW's consistent success at NXN, I would certainly think Los Alamos should be a legitimate consideration for an at-large berth.

While the SW field might have been twice as big, was it twice as strong up front (for team scorers)?

Yes, neither team had pristine days.

For what it's worth, based on what the teams ran at NXN Regionals, their state meet, and their big invitationals during the season... this is their "Average NXN scoring" that I've posted before (weighted most towards NXR, followed by State, followed by best of the rest essentially), and a scorers breakdown (Championship weighted ratings is the first number, unweighted rating is the second number, and rounded projected NXN finish vs. an average NXN field on the right in parenthesis):

Summit OR 308.4

188.1 192.5 Mathew Maton 10 Summit OR (21)

186.2 193.5 Travis Neuman 12 Summit OR (26)

185.2 191.0 Eric Alldritt 12 Summit OR (31)

170.0 173.0 Luke Hinz 12 Summit OR (104)

164.2 165.1 Alex Martin 9 Summit OR (126)

Los Alamos NM 341.4

180.2 183.6 Nick Hill 12 Los Alamos NM (51)

177.7 181.0 Sean Reardon 12 Los Alamos NM (60)

176.3 177.3 Orion Staples 12 Los Alamos NM (74)

175.8 176.5 Colin Hemez 11 Los Alamos NM (74)

174.0 174.9 Zak Kennison 12 Los Alamos NM (83)

... as you can see, I have Los Alamos being better at #4/5, but Summit better at #1-3 (one of the best in the nation, actually, through three). And as you can see by the difference between the unweighted and weighted ratings, both teams had some off races: Hill's rating being down by ~3.5 points means his regional race was at least 10 seconds off (probably more), same for Reardon. For Summit, their front four were all off by about that amount, with their normal #1 much further off (~7 points being over 20 seconds).

Now, that points to a few things:

1. With stronger front runners, Summit has a better chance of scoring well even on an "off" day (less runners will be there to displace them).

2. Los Alamos is "trending up", while Summit was not... maybe that was just an off race for Summit, maybe they just didn't handle the pressure and pace as well as usual, or maybe Los Alamos is just peaking at the right time (likely some mix of all three). This goes back to the "momentum" factor being discussed earlier: Los Alamos clearly has it, Summit didn't (at least at the regional meet, because they looked good though relatively unpressed at state).

3. Summit has shown a higher potential ceiling.

All in all, both have their pros and cons as to why one would be chosen over the other.

By the way, for the sake of discussion, here's the same breakdown for the other boys team in that mix ... and note that these are generous ratings for the Midwest, gauging by what other people that I've talked to or seen online have them at.

Cincinnati St. Xavier OH 320.8

182.0 183.9 Michael Hall 11 Cincinnati St. Xavier OH (40)

177.2 180.7 Jake Graboski 12 Cincinnati St. Xavier OH (67)

176.5 176.7 Michael Momper 12 Cincinnati St. Xavier OH (67)

176.2 176.7 Alex Kuvin 12 Cincinnati St. Xavier OH (74)

175.6 178.8 Evan Stifel 11 Cincinnati St. Xavier OH (74)

... or, here's what they look like with the lower estimate that fits more along the lines of what I've seen other people have the Midwest pegged at:

Cincinnati St. Xavier OH 378.2

179.9 181.7 Michael Hall 11 Cincinnati St. Xavier OH (51)

175.4 179.6 Jake Graboski 12 Cincinnati St. Xavier OH (78)

174.4 174.4 Michael Momper 12 Cincinnati St. Xavier OH (83)

174.1 174.9 Alex Kuvin 12 Cincinnati St. Xavier OH (83)

173.9 178.4 Evan Stifel 11 Cincinnati St. Xavier OH (83)

.. either way, you'll note that St. Xavier had good races from three of their scorers, and they have a good pack, but they are lacking the front runners to challenge for a top 10 finish (IMO).

Another CA Guy wrote:

San Diego Section Finals on 2.75 course at Balboa Park

1. 30 La Costa Canyon ( 16:35 1:22:55)

=======================================

1 1 Emma Abrahamson 11 15:56

2 2 Kelly Lawson 12 16:17

3 3 Ellie Abrahamson 12 16:27

4 9 Sarah Abrahamson 9 16:56

5 15 Rebekah Bosler 11 17:19

6 ( 20) Alex Fromme 11 17:30

7 ( 53) Savannah Gual 10 18:31

The reason LCC didn't look good at Mt. Sac is that neither Emma nor Ellie Abrahamson ran. I'm never comfortable with converting SD short course results but I have this projected to be about equal to Saugus at Woodward. Of course, converting the Mt. Sac rain course is guess work as well.

FYI - Tesoro finished second to Saugus in D2 SS, just ahead of Redondo. D1 Capistrano Valley may be just in front of Tesoro and Redondo.

CA top girls teams going into state seem to be:

Great Oak / Simi Valley - close and well ahead of #3

Saugus / LCC / St. Francis / Buchanan / Davis - extremely close

Capistrano Valley / Tesoro / Redondo - seems tough for any to jump into top 4

I seemed to remember another meet where they were only missing one of their scorers, and still didn't look too strong. Don't remember what it was, but it was early in the year and the only invite besides Mt. SAC I saw them nearly full strength at... was that Woodbridge maybe?

At any rate, it looks like we have about the same groupings, except I might be a little higher on Redondo that's all.

Looks like Great Oak and Simi Valley ran almost the same time as La Costa Canyon, but they ran on a 2.95 mile course up at Mt. SAC. La Costa could be good if Bosler returns to last years leavel.

Watchout posted some more great data at his blog

http://watchoutxcrankings.blogspot.com/

comparing how regions have fared since 2007. Just thought I'd take a peak at more recent performance trends, i.e., last couple of years alone. Can't compare At-Large teams, because most regions have gotten zero (whereas Calif got 7 over 2 years, boys & girls combined). Here is average score of all auto qualifying teams from each region, for 2010 and 2011, separately for boys and girls (note the obscenely low totals from NY girls).

BOYS:

SW 195

CA 196

Heartland 205

NE 261

MidW 269

NY 277

NorthW 277

South 291

Se 430

GIRLS:

NY 69

MidW 225

SW 257

CA 275

SE 291

Northwest 317

South 383

Heartland 387

NE 491

(For what it's worth, which is probably nothing, Calif at-large teams averaged 346 pts for 3 boys teams, 307 for 4 girls teams)

LCC ran at Mt. Carmel not at Woodbridge. SD Sectional was by far their best race of the season and I think the first time their top five appeared more or less healthy (not sure if something's up with Bosler, though).

Don't forget - MileSplit had LCC #2 in the country forever. They have to be good!!!

I'm not liking the looks of Xavier as a girls at-large candidate. Cracks started to show in the foundation at Mt. SAC. Their state meet was off, and their NXR-SW meet was badly off. I don't know who would look at them as a team that is trending well at this point.

A factor that should probably be considered in the case of the Los Alamos boys is coming off state one Saturday and racing reasonably well the next Saturday at NXR-SW. It would have helped if they showed better, but it's hard to ignore what they did do.

American Fork was so over-the-top at the Southwest regional that the other teams might not get the look they deserve.

looking at SW wrote:

I'm not liking the looks of Xavier as a girls at-large candidate. Cracks started to show in the foundation at Mt. SAC. Their state meet was off, and their NXR-SW meet was badly off. I don't know who would look at them as a team that is trending well at this point.

A factor that should probably be considered in the case of the Los Alamos boys is coming off state one Saturday and racing reasonably well the next Saturday at NXR-SW. It would have helped if they showed better, but it's hard to ignore what they did do.

American Fork was so over-the-top at the Southwest regional that the other teams might not get the look they deserve.

Agreed that Xavier Prep doesn't look to be trending well, but they still ran what they ran and until someone else runs better...

I'm not sure that should be considered much of a factor if a team runs off just because they ran the regional the week after they ran state -- most of the teams in the nation are in that situation, including the states that include most of the at-large candidates (OR and WA, NM, OH and IL, TX, FL, NJ, MA, New England states, and most of the California sectionals are the week before their region meets).

Agree to an extent regarding the gap between American Fork and the rest of the region. Then again, the committee managed to overlook that in the case of Westfield NJ last year... so that might not necessarily be the nail in the coffin.

Another CA Guy wrote:

LCC ran at Mt. Carmel not at Woodbridge. SD Sectional was by far their best race of the season and I think the first time their top five appeared more or less healthy (not sure if something's up with Bosler, though).

Don't forget - MileSplit had LCC #2 in the country forever. They have to be good!!!

For what it's worth, I've got my preliminary look at the SDS results done now, and this is what I'd put LCC at for Woodward (projected times at the right):

Emma Abrahamson 15:56 La Costa Canyon = 18:02

Kelly Lawson 16:17 La Costa Canyon = 18:25

Ellie Abrahamson 16:27 La Costa Canyon = 18:37

Sarah Abrahamson 16:56 La Costa Canyon = 19:09

Rebekah Bosler 17:19 La Costa Canyon = 19:35

Alex Fromme 17:30 La Costa Canyon = 19:48

Savannah Gual 18:31 La Costa Canyon = 20:57

McGorty is doing Footlocker.

His team (Chantilly) is going to try to qualify for NXN. If they do not get an automatic spot, they will say McGorty is running with them at NXN (he will) to get an at-large berth.

HI Watchout what did you rate the southern section teams so far? What were the speed ratings for La Costa?

Preliminary estimates for CIF-SS -

(200.0 ~ 13:27)

Boys -

1 Juan Gonzalez 14:00 El Toro 187.8

2 Estevan De La Rosa 14:01 Arcadia 187.5

3 Porter Reddish 14:04 Vista Murrieta 186.4

1 Bryan Fernandez 14:06 Dos Pueblos 185.6

2 Austin Goins 14:08 Canyon (Anaheim) 184.9

3 Garrett Corcoran 14:08 Villa Park 184.9

4 AJ Yarnall 14:12 Saugus 183.4

1 Myles Smith 14:13 St. John Bosco 183.0

4 Naoki Omatsu 14:13 Trabuco Hills 183.0

5 Mitchell Pratt 14:14 Arcadia 182.6

2 Estevan De La Rosa 14:01 Arcadia 187.5

5 Mitchell Pratt 14:14 Arcadia 182.6

10 Phillip Rocha 14:19 Arcadia 180.8

33 Mahmoud Moussa 14:41 Arcadia 172.6

43 Bryan Ngo 14:45 Arcadia 171.1

65 Jarrick Wenslow 14:57 Arcadia 166.7

104 Thomas Tran2 15:33 Arcadia 153.3

3 Porter Reddish 14:04 Vista Murrieta 186.4

11 Omar Solis 14:19 Vista Murrieta 180.8

22 Garrett Mullennix 14:35 Vista Murrieta 174.8

55 John Hernandez 14:52 Vista Murrieta 168.5

57 Maurilio Sanchez 14:53 Vista Murrieta 168.2

83 Matt Smith 15:11 Vista Murrieta 161.5

91 Davey Wong 15:19 Vista Murrieta 158.5

4 Naoki Omatsu 14:13 Trabuco Hills 183.0

23 Max Moncur 14:36 Trabuco Hills 174.5

36 Lucas Dorman 14:43 Trabuco Hills 171.9

41 Brendan Mccabe 14:44 Trabuco Hills 171.5

52 Evan DeFraine 14:51 Trabuco Hills 168.9

97 Christopher Ceja 15:28 Trabuco Hills 155.1

108 Jake Schmitz 15:39 Trabuco Hills 151.1

Girls -

1 Sarah Baxter 15:53 Simi Valley 145.9

1 Paige Tennison 16:13 Newport Harbor 138.4

1 Sydney Segal 16:18 Beverly Hills 136.6

2 Bethan Knights 16:26 Northwood 133.6

2 Ortega Samantha 16:26 Saugus 133.6

2 Kiara Mcintosh 16:28 Paloma Valley 132.9

3 Veronica Yamane 16:29 Arcadia 132.5

4 Hannah Kirkegaard 16:29 Ventura 132.5

5 Megan Huebner 16:29 La Quinta (La Quinta) 132.5

3 Adeline Zerrenner 16:30 Dos Pueblos 132.1

7 Ashley Helbig 16:35 Great Oak 130.2

8 Haley Dorris 16:35 Great Oak 130.2

10 Miranda Kewley 16:39 Great Oak 128.8

15 Christian Calain 16:50 Great Oak 124.7

16 Maiya Larsen 16:52 Great Oak 123.9

22 Kim Mcnamee 17:02 Great Oak 120.2

61 Alexis Messerly 17:42 Great Oak 105.4

1 Sarah Baxter 15:53 Simi Valley 145.9

12 Desirae Jones 16:47 Simi Valley 125.8

17 Olivia Roselini 16:52 Simi Valley 123.9

18 Charlotte Utash 16:54 Simi Valley 123.2

35 Samantha Tetef 17:17 Simi Valley 114.6

36 Sarah Riggs 17:18 Simi Valley 114.3

46 Courtney Korven 17:23 Simi Valley 112.4

2 Ortega Samantha 16:26 Saugus 133.6

16 Abigail Frankian 16:53 Saugus 123.6

26 Heidi Hoslet 17:17 Saugus 114.6

33 Katie Huntington 17:24 Saugus 112.0

37 Olivia Altieri 17:29 Saugus 110.2

51 Nina Sassano 17:47 Saugus 103.5

59 Darby Laplant 17:54 Saugus 100.9

Preliminary estimates for CIF-SDS Girls -

(200.0 ~ 12:57.5)

1 Emma Abrahamson 15:56 La Costa Canyon 131.1

2 Kelly Lawson 16:17 La Costa Canyon 123.0

3 Ellie Abrahamson 16:27 La Costa Canyon 119.2

9 Sarah Abrahamson 16:56 La Costa Canyon 108.0

15 Rebekah Bosler 17:19 La Costa Canyon 99.1

20 Alex Fromme 17:30 La Costa Canyon 94.9

53 Savannah Gual 18:31 La Costa Canyon 71.3

VHSL wrote:

McGorty is doing Footlocker.

His team (Chantilly) is going to try to qualify for NXN. If they do not get an automatic spot, they will say McGorty is running with them at NXN (he will) to get an at-large berth.

Well, all I can say is... good luck on that.

Even with McGorty, they would have had their hands full with St. Xavier KY + Blacksburg VA. Throw in Belen Jesuit FL who might not have been all too far behind to begin with...

watchout wrote:

For what it's worth, I've got my preliminary look at the SDS results done now, and this is what I'd put LCC at for Woodward (projected times at the right):

Emma Abrahamson 15:56 La Costa Canyon = 18:02

Kelly Lawson 16:17 La Costa Canyon = 18:25

Ellie Abrahamson 16:27 La Costa Canyon = 18:37

Sarah Abrahamson 16:56 La Costa Canyon = 19:09

Rebekah Bosler 17:19 La Costa Canyon = 19:35

Alex Fromme 17:30 La Costa Canyon = 19:48

Savannah Gual 18:31 La Costa Canyon = 20:57

Rooting for SS teams, I hope this is on target. Unfortunately, I think you're way off. You really think Lawson is now 20 seconds slower than the 17:40 she ran at Mt. Sac?

Sstoz Tez, a CA XC stat guy, uses 1.112 as his conversion from SDS Girls at Balboa Park to Woodward. That puts Emma A. at 17:43 and Bosler at 19:15 and reduces the projected team time from 93:48 to about 92:10. LCC also improves when seasonal times are taken into account.

Another CA Guy wrote:

watchout wrote:

For what it's worth, I've got my preliminary look at the SDS results done now, and this is what I'd put LCC at for Woodward (projected times at the right):

Emma Abrahamson 15:56 La Costa Canyon = 18:02

Kelly Lawson 16:17 La Costa Canyon = 18:25

Ellie Abrahamson 16:27 La Costa Canyon = 18:37

Sarah Abrahamson 16:56 La Costa Canyon = 19:09

Rebekah Bosler 17:19 La Costa Canyon = 19:35

Alex Fromme 17:30 La Costa Canyon = 19:48

Savannah Gual 18:31 La Costa Canyon = 20:57

Rooting for SS teams, I hope this is on target. Unfortunately, I think you're way off. You really think Lawson is now 20 seconds slower than the 17:40 she ran at Mt. Sac?

Sstoz Tez, a CA XC stat guy, uses 1.112 as his conversion from SDS Girls at Balboa Park to Woodward. That puts Emma A. at 17:43 and Bosler at 19:15 and reduces the projected team time from 93:48 to about 92:10. LCC also improves when seasonal times are taken into account.

The last few years' retroactive adjustments for the SDS girls has been between 778-783. This year I had it at 777.5, I'd say that's pretty close. (by the way, that's ~ 1.132 for this year by my calculations)

As for Lawson (et al)... remember, that was just based on what they ran at CIF-SDS Finals. Not everyone is going to run all out (or their best race) every race.

Also keep in mind Saugus always runs their best at CA State and La Costa Canyon does not. Great Oak also bombed last year as well.

Where is NXN this year ? Houson ? Orlando ?

watchout wrote:

VHSL wrote:

McGorty is doing Footlocker.

His team (Chantilly) is going to try to qualify for NXN. If they do not get an automatic spot, they will say McGorty is running with them at NXN (he will) to get an at-large berth.

Well, all I can say is... good luck on that.

Even with McGorty, they would have had their hands full with St. Xavier KY + Blacksburg VA. Throw in Belen Jesuit FL who might not have been all too far behind to begin with...

Watchout, don't you think it is appealing to Nike to have Sean McGorty at NXN? Isn't that a good reason for an At-Large bid?