From what course? Time usually not relevant comparing different courses.
Tully from her own State has her ranked #50 nationally.
You're right: a 2 x USA U20 XC Champion; 4:41/10:06/16:13 Top 7 Foot Locker Finalist (and 4 x Qualifier) and the NXR NE Champion just last week will struggle to run with these girls. Thanks for playing.
Tonight A 30 percent chance of rain, mainly after 5am. Mostly cloudy, with a temperature falling to near 32 by 9pm, then rising to around 39 during the remainder of the night. South southeast wind around 6 mph. New precipitation amounts of less than a tenth of an inch possible.
Saturday Rain. High near 48. Calm wind becoming southwest around 6 mph in the afternoon. Chance of precipitation is 100%. New precipitation amounts between a half and three quarters of an inch possible.
The original claim was that speed ratings have not kept up with historical precedent. My point is that speed ratings are an independent rating system that measure from the mid pack. They aren't a measure of "the fastest time", but rather how many deviations in front or behind the mid pack (the baseline) any given runner is on any course on any day.
The original claim is essentially saying that "the mid pack" (the baseline) is incorrect. But that isn't true, people just got faster as a whole.
There are some legitimate weaknesses to speed ratings like creating a baseline for a course, or having a sample size too small, or accounting for skew (the baseline of an nxn race is obviously going to be way higher than a local invite) but the original claim didnt address these items and rather claimed that the "historical precedent" was unaccounted for.
Your strawman is to reduce the conversation to "who has the fastest time". But speed ratings inherently aren't about the fastest time - rather the deviations from the mid pack. This is why I used examples that show the juxtaposition.
If you exclusively want to go off time to rank runners, fine. It makes no difference to me, but thats still not what speed ratings are.
If you want to actually engage in a good faith conversation, then we can discuss it, but I'm not arguing with someone who's just going to strawman.
Some info about my speed ratings.
I use many baselines, but I do not use baselines for courses … I use specific baselines for specific races … If the specific races occur on the same courses year-after-year (which most do) that is helpful.
For example, the baseline for the California State Meet is different than the baseline for the Clovis Invite … each baseline is specific to its particular meet (one for the boys and one for the girls).
When comparing baseline profiles from previous years to the current race being evaluated, I typically compare the fields finishing at roughly 10-15% through 65% of the entire field (the slower runners are ignored) … This typically includes the mid-pack region of interest, but I want more than just mid-point for extrapolating an adjustment from historical data because it is necessary.
Comparing baseline profiles to approximate a speed rating correction requires the quality of races being compared to be somewhat similar … Being the exact same quality is not necessary, just somewhat close in quality works OK most of the time due to the extrapolation method applied.
BUT any speed ratings determined by the method above will be modified or over-ridden by my method of taking the seasonal speed ratings of a sufficient number of individual runners and statistically fitting them to individual’s final times and time differences to determine the final speed rating correction … About 15% of all races are speed-rated solely by this method … When both methods have general agreement, which is often enough, I feel more comfortable with the speed rating certainty.
Tully from her own State has her ranked #50 nationally.
You're right: a 2 x USA U20 XC Champion; 4:41/10:06/16:13 Top 7 Foot Locker Finalist (and 4 x Qualifier) and the NXR NE Champion just last week will struggle to run with these girls. Thanks for playing.
Zariel Macchia was sick in the middle of the season and she is still trying to get back into top shape.
She will in fact struggle to keep up with the top girls tomorrow. Sorry to be the one to break the bad news to you.
If Macchia manages to finish 10th that would be very impressive. More likely she'll be around 15th or 20th.
This is now pretty complete, but probably not perfect. I still have to double check the Efraimson year.
Rough all time list at Glendoveer, we'll see how they do tomorrow.
Sorry for the double post.
1. Tuohy jr 16:37 2. Riggs sr 16:40 3. Tuohy soph 16:44 4. Efraimson sr 16:50 5. Cranny sr 16:53 6. Chmiel sr 16:54 7. Wilson sr 16:54 8. Michalak jr 16:55 9. Rainsberger sr 16:56 10. Baxter sr 16:58 11. Nechanicky sr 16:59 12. Ewert jr 17:06 13. Ritzenhein soph 17:10 cold&wet 14. Oakley sr 17:10 15. Covert jr 17:106
16. Donaghu sr 17:10
17. Walters jr 17:13
18. Logue sr 17:14
19. Chmiel fr 17:15 20. Michalak sr 17:16 cold&wet 21. Schrager sr 17:16 22. Conde De Frankenburg sr 17:17
23. Hasz sr 17:17 24. Tuohy sr 17:18 cold&wet 25. Kennedy sr 17:18 26. Ostrander sr 17:19 27. Rauber soph 17:19
28. Endsley sr 17:19 29. Ewert sr 17:19 cold&wet 30. Thorvaldson jr 17:19 cold&wet
This is now pretty complete, but probably not perfect. I still have to double check the Efraimson year. Rough all time list at Glendoveer, we'll see how they do tomorrow. Sorry for the double post. 1. Tuohy jr 16:37 good conditions 2. Riggs sr 16:40 good conditions 3. Tuohy soph 16:44 cold and wet 4. Efraimson sr 16:50 no 5. Cranny sr 16:53 no 6. Chmiel sr 16:54 good conditions 7. Wilson sr 16:54 good conditions 8. Michalak jr 16:55 good conditions 9. Rainsberger sr 16:56 a little wet but not terrible 10. Baxter sr 16:58 no 11. Nechanicky sr 16:59 12. Ewert jr 17:06 good conditions 13. Ritzenhein soph 17:10 cold&very wet 14. Oakley sr 17:10 wet 15. Covert jr 17:106 good conditions 16. Donaghu sr 17:10 17. Walters jr 17:13 good conditions 18. Logue sr 17:14 19. Chmiel fr 17:15 20. Michalak sr 17:16 cold&very wet 21. Schrager sr 17:16 22. Conde De Frankenburg sr 17:17 23. Hasz sr 17:17 24. Tuohy sr 17:18 cold&wet 25. Kennedy sr 17:18 26. Ostrander sr 17:19 27. Rauber soph 17:19 28. Endsley sr 17:19 29. Ewert sr 17:19 cold&wet 30. Thorvaldson jr 17:19 cold&wet
From my experience running around Glendoveer trying to follow the race, the top grass layer is on top of clay-ish soil and the grass tends to slip right off the soil. I remember one of the commentators from last year saying that the weather can be the great "leveler", meaning nobody is a "sure thing" in this race. It's going to be fascinating watching the runners make their decisions during the race. I can"t wait.
From my experience running around Glendoveer trying to follow the race, the top grass layer is on top of clay-ish soil and the grass tends to slip right off the soil. I remember one of the commentators from last year saying that the weather can be the great "leveler", meaning nobody is a "sure thing" in this race. It's going to be fascinating watching the runners make their decisions during the race. I can"t wait.
Is this the best weather NXN has had in the days leading up to the race?
Love it. Heard some of the California girls complaining about the conditions from last year in some interviews. It’s not about who can run the fastest at Woodward Park or on soccer complexes, it’s about who’s tough as nails and can grit it out when the conditions suck and aren’t favorable. The more variables, the better. This is no Woodbridge, we’ve had that already! NXN brings out the toughest in people, and that’s why it’s fun to watch.
Problem is that when it rains significantly(like last year) the course becomes gelatinous and quivery. Muddy is not an accurate description. It changes everyone's stride and tires the runners with some fast twitch out, resulting in outlying results which is what should not happen in in national championship meet. It becomes an interesting event, but not totally indicative of who is the fastest over 5k at this time of year. Fingers crossed the rain holds off a bit.
Problem is that when it rains significantly(like last year) the course becomes gelatinous and quivery. Muddy is not an accurate description. It changes everyone's stride and tires the runners with some fast twitch out, resulting in outlying results which is what should not happen in in national championship meet. It becomes an interesting event, but not totally indicative of who is the fastest over 5k at this time of year. Fingers crossed the rain holds off a bit.
Yeah but I don’t think NXN is about who’s the “fastest.” It’s about who’s smart and strategic, it’s not about who can time trial the fastest. I just feel like people think it should be a direct reflection of who has the fastest PR and that’s not just how it works IMO
A lot of athletes that previewed the course this morning under good conditions will be in for a rude awakening tomorrow. The poster who described it as “gelatinous” is spot on. Tonight and tomorrow morning’s rain will pool on top of the ground in many spots and the soil will turn to goo. The boys will have much tougher footing to deal with.
Most of the favorites will still place high but, expect the athletes from dry places to suffer more. Altitude kids won’t lose many places but California athletes will drop 8-10 places off of projections.
A lot of athletes that previewed the course this morning under good conditions will be in for a rude awakening tomorrow. The poster who described it as “gelatinous” is spot on. Tonight and tomorrow morning’s rain will pool on top of the ground in many spots and the soil will turn to goo. The boys will have much tougher footing to deal with.
Most of the favorites will still place high but, expect the athletes from dry places to suffer more. Altitude kids won’t lose many places but California athletes will drop 8-10 places off of projections.
oh please. California runners are tough just like anywhere else. It won't effect them. Jason Parra and Josh Bell were 8th and 9th last year.