Something to keep in mind, Chantilly (VA) placed 3rd in the SE region due to a 6th place runner tiebreaker (they only ran 5 guys). They did this without running Sean McGorty who ran at the FL regionals today instead. McGorty could win NXN if his team qualified so I would be surprised if they were not given an at-large bid.
Apples wrote:
Key considerations that NXN uses for at large spots:
* Only results from this year's races (not past history)
* Regional races get weighted much more than anything. Early races are not weighed
* Individuals (baxter et al) have no role in team selections
* Rankings are not used. Thank God - Milesplit rankings blow... until they start to copy others.
Guess we'll find out tomorrow whether any of the non-factors come into play, with McGorty, Baxter and Saugus being prime players.
An unofficial power merge of CA girls results has it going like this:
Great Oak
St. Francis
Saugus
Simi Valley
Another CA Guy wrote:
Apples wrote:Key considerations that NXN uses for at large spots:
* Only results from this year's races (not past history)
* Regional races get weighted much more than anything. Early races are not weighed
* Individuals (baxter et al) have no role in team selections
* Rankings are not used. Thank God - Milesplit rankings blow... until they start to copy others.
Guess we'll find out tomorrow whether any of the non-factors come into play, with McGorty, Baxter and Saugus being prime players.
An unofficial power merge of CA girls results has it going like this:
Great Oak
St. Francis
Saugus
Simi Valley
You nailed it. Results here:
http://rtspt.com/events/cif/xc2012/combined_g.htmFast times, but I don't know how they'll be rated...
Wow, Watchout already has the Calif ratings up (THANKS!). I've been looking at Meylan's for the other regions, but the 2 are usually pretty close I think. Wathcout's Cali ratings put Saugus behind a number of other teams, including E. Aurora from NY.
runnerd988 wrote:
Something to keep in mind, Chantilly (VA) placed 3rd in the SE region due to a 6th place runner tiebreaker (they only ran 5 guys). They did this without running Sean McGorty who ran at the FL regionals today instead. McGorty could win NXN if his team qualified so I would be surprised if they were not given an at-large bid.
Very interesting. Wow. Not sure what it means, but you're probably right. I don't see the 3rd best SE team deserving of an at-large, but Nike will likely push to get McGorty. The selection criteria is vague, so I'm assuming they have some latitude even if Chantilly isn't one of the 4 best at-large teams. Or am I underestimating the strength of the SE?
another MW guy wrote:
Wow, Watchout already has the Calif ratings up (THANKS!). I've been looking at Meylan's for the other regions, but the 2 are usually pretty close I think. Wathcout's Cali ratings put Saugus behind a number of other teams, including E. Aurora from NY.
For those wondering, I was talking about girls!
BTW, not concerning at-large: Fayetville-M, wow!
another MW guy wrote:
You nailed it. Results here:
http://rtspt.com/events/cif/xc2012/combined_g.htmFast times, but I don't know how they'll be rated...
That's the overall merge. What they do next is reduce the field to the top 16-20 teams (last year it was 16 and in other years I believe it was 20) and then score the smaller field. My unofficial merge used the top 20. I don't think the results will change if they reduce to 16 (as happened last year).
My quick estimate is that the overall field was about one-to-three seconds faster this year over last year.
I take it as almost a given at this point that girls at-larges will go to:
Pine Creek (Altitude)
Saugus (Newhall)
Aurora
The big question would appear to be, "Who gets #4?"
Kingwood Girls
They beat woodlands at state for runner up but finished behind them and southlake at nxn south. They fit the criteria perfectly. They'll be #4
looking at SW wrote:
I take it as almost a given at this point that girls at-larges will go to:
Pine Creek (Altitude)
Saugus (Newhall)
Aurora
The big question would appear to be, "Who gets #4?"
I disagree; while NY is always strong, Holy Names slipped, not E Aurora moving up. Speed ratings weren't that great.
Saugus or Simi Valley? (Assuming St Francis get's AQ, along with Great Oak).
I'd peg it as:
1. Pine Creek
2-5: Xavier = New Trier, and then either Simi V or Saugus, and E Aurora.
Xavier and NT were both very close to very highly ranked teams, and both are coming back from top-8 finishes at last year's NXN.
I see your argument for New Trier, but I'm not following at all how you see a possibility for Simi Valley to leapfrog Saugus, unless I've read the wrong CA merge.
Holy Names slipping or not, East Aurora got #3 in NY. It's pretty much obligatory that NY gets an at-large, but it's a real stretch to go to four from NY this year.
In any case, I certainly hope NY gets an at-large because the caterwauling and howling for the next year will be insufferable if they don't.
Xavier gave out too many reasons late in the year to pass them over.
Kingwood girls times (Woodlands for that matter) are not better than Lake Braddock from their race at Nike South and that team didn't even beat Morgantown, West Virginia at Southeast. Would be hard to take them over Morgantown.
cant take simi over saugus, simi was CA#4
looking at SW wrote:
I see your argument for New Trier, but I'm not following at all how you see a possibility for Simi Valley to leapfrog Saugus, unless I've read the wrong CA merge.
Holy Names slipping or not, East Aurora got #3 in NY. It's pretty much obligatory that NY gets an at-large, but it's a real stretch to go to four from NY this year.
In any case, I certainly hope NY gets an at-large because the caterwauling and howling for the next year will be insufferable if they don't.
Xavier gave out too many reasons late in the year to pass them over.
Sorry, I don't know how the final merge works in CA (someone described, above), and whether they're allowed to leapfrog. Simi had faster avg times (courtesy of Baxter); but I think Nike rules are you can't take a 4th over 3rd, so you may be right, assuming the final NXN merge goes: Great Oak, St F, Saugus, Simi V
I also agree that NY as a region has been highly-deserving. But the performances today just weren't that great. Holy Names seems to have slipped last few weeks of season. Was E Aurora's performance alone enough, or does the strong region give them a boost past other teams that actually performed better at regionals? [And NY won't be the only region caterwauling if CA gets 2 at-larges!!!]
I don't know if Xavier ran themselves out of it. You could say they have the same issue as Holy Names, slipping toward the end; but they were faster and closer to 2nd (both placed 4th) than Holy Names. I do agree New Trier has the edge on Xavier, but it's slight.
Boys? Where are the opinions?!
NE and CA for sure. SE due to tie? No SO at-large, so are the remaining regions still in the running?
CA boys should get an at-large. They tied the #2 automatic team (lost at the #6 man but ran a faster team avg) and beat them previously at Mt. SAC.
Armchair analysis wrote:
Boys? Where are the opinions?!
NE and CA for sure. SE due to tie? No SO at-large, so are the remaining regions still in the running?
Tend to agree about NE and CA. It definitely gets cloudier beyond that. SE doesn't have a great record at NXN, so that could dampen their chances at an at-large. NW? SW? Seems like Stillwater going to #4 hurt the HL chances. Probably NY is out.
Seems like this would be a really bad year to go with four teams from any of the nine regions. Should be four teams from different regions.
Even with McGorty scoring a 1 Chantilly doesn't place well at nxn because of their lack of depth at the 4-5. I wouldn't take them nor Los Alamos, who are fairly average. Probably 1 from NE, 1 from NY, 1 from CA and 1 from MW.
CA#3 just got the phone call. IN!
Just a hunch, but if you're team hasn't received the call yet, it's probably time to hang it up for the season.