Like come on, we all know nike was the better meet, where he finished 4th. The 3 guys all ahead of him are in the FL west region and could only run NXN with their teams due to the overlap. Milesplit took their beef with Nike to a new level. They have been calling it "team nationals" all year to avoid saying Nike, but have said other brands for meets.
Wow those rankings are bad. Completely over ranked those that raced well at "Champs" and completely disregarded those that raced well at "Team Nationals" AKA NXN.
I went through both the Dyestat and Milesplit rankings. They seem overall in the right ballpark, through like any rankings you can make arguments that some were underrated or vice versa. I don’t see any evidence that one meet seemed to be favored over another, unless you want to first make the argument that the speed ratings for one of the meets was way off.
If he’s the number one, he should be able to heat any other runner in a 1v1 race. But that won’t happen: for any of the top 3 Newbury Park runners, they could all just sit and kick
Kole's a great kid but Milesplit's rankings are bogus and their refusal to use the correct name for NXN is so childish. They don't even have the Nike Indoor Nationals their meet schedule, as I recall.
If he’s the number one, he should be able to heat any other runner in a 1v1 race. But that won’t happen: for any of the top 3 Newbury Park runners, they could all just sit and kick
Id rank it as follows:
1. sahlman
2. L, Young
3. L. Young
4. Mathison
Rankings should be done based on performances, not what ifs
Imo if we're going by overall most impressive performances, rather than hypothetical matchups or more holistic looks at overall season performances, I think it should go
1 - Aaron Sahlman @ NXN
2 - Leo Young @ Clovis
3 - Lex Young @ CIF or Kole Mathison @ Kinney/Foot Locker/Eastbay/Champs Sports
3rd is hard for me because on one hand Mathison has the better speed rating, and much larger margin of victory over a NATIONAL field. But then again Lex ran 3 seconds off a course record equally impressive to a course record Mathison was 17 seconds off.
5 - Hunter Jones @ NXR Midwest
On paper demolishing the course record at a course as ran-on and historic as La Verne Gibson by 25 WHOLE SECONDS should rank much higher, but when you look at how close Burns, Ackley, and Anderson were, guys who finished relatively low at NXN, and then you look at how fast the whole race was and what the speed ratings were you start to realize that maybe this was not quite as impressive was the previous 4 performances. At least imo.
I would say the ranking is defensible. You cannot put the Youngs number 1 in a season ending ranking given how they finished at NXN. Salhman would be a logical number 1 given the head to head win at NXN, but he also has races where he placed 4th and 7th in addition to the races he placed behind the Youngs. Assuming Mathison's Champs performance was weighted pretty high, you can certainly argue that on the whole Mathison deserved the top ranking for the season.
This is the first year in a while where there is no definite #1 xc runner. When a guy who gets 7th at Woodbridge, then 3rd at Clovis and State wins nationals it screws up the rankings. The best method may be taking the top 10 athletes by speed ratings, then averaging the speed rating of their top 3 performances.
I went through both the Dyestat and Milesplit rankings. They seem overall in the right ballpark, through like any rankings you can make arguments that some were underrated or vice versa. I don’t see any evidence that one meet seemed to be favored over another, unless you want to first make the argument that the speed ratings for one of the meets was way off.
The issue is that they take a 5k time of 14:55 from Indiana, Alabama or Iowa at face value and then tell the kids who ran 15:25 at the state championship course in Wisconsin that he isnt worth their consideration for national rankings.
On the team side you get the same thing. How can you definitively say a team running a 15:37 average in one of the above listed states is then better than a team running an average of 15:53 on a harder course? You can chart the numbers perfectly but that won't give you a representation of reality until they race.
This is the first year in a while where there is no definite #1 xc runner. When a guy who gets 7th at Woodbridge, then 3rd at Clovis and State wins nationals it screws up the rankings. The best method may be taking the top 10 athletes by speed ratings, then averaging the speed rating of their top 3 performances.
Or, just give it to the guy who won the most prestigious meet of the year and beat milesplits #1 by 11 seconds in that meet.
Petty Milesplit/Nike grievances aside, Mathison is the only runner in the conversation that ran both NXN and "Champs". He raced extremely well against national fields two weeks in a row and won the race. He won his state meet and led his team to the win. Consistency matters and winning matters. Most likely the NP runners would beat him heads up, but a ranking considers the body of work for the entire season. So I think he deserves ranking.
It's subjective - just like college football, right? Besides, they're also interested in generating traffic and getting people to subscribe, so that's part of the equation too.
Petty Milesplit/Nike grievances aside, Mathison is the only runner in the conversation that ran both NXN and "Champs". He raced extremely well against national fields two weeks in a row and won the race. He won his state meet and led his team to the win. Consistency matters and winning matters. Most likely the NP runners would beat him heads up, but a ranking considers the body of work for the entire season. So I think he deserves ranking.
It's subjective - just like college football, right? Besides, they're also interested in generating traffic and getting people to subscribe, so that's part of the equation too.
Hard to reward guys for doing both nxn and champs, as that opportunity is only there for the Midwest. All the other regions have conflicts forcing runners to choose one.
Mathison's performance at FL was spectacular. He and Hansen battled deep into the pain zone, before Hansen cracked and Mathison used the resulting adrenaline surge to storm to the finish. For Mathison I think this was a breakout performance that will serve him well for track and cu. Much respect to Hansen for going for the win, he had been undefeated.
At NXN I was not only impressed with Sahlman's close, but equally with the close of the whole pack of 9-10 guys, who got in between Sahlman and Young.
Hard year to pick best runner. If the winner is Sahlman, he'd be the first to have not won at states, to have only 1xc meet victory on his resume, and who might not even get 'runner of the year' at his own team banquet. On the other hand, he was ranked pre season #3, so although unusual, it wasn't like he came out of nowhere.
Your statements are literally the opposite of what happened. They placed most emphasis on the national championships. That is why the Youngs arent on top while Sahlman is. That is why Hunter Jones is not on top while Mathison is. Iowa and Wisconsin? Heidesch from Iowa finished 5th at NXN in 14:55 while no individual Wisconsin runner even qualified. Washburn from Iowa beat the top Wisconsin runner by 21 seconds at NXR and Washburn didn't end up ranked by Milesplit.
Like come on, we all know nike was the better meet, where he finished 4th. The 3 guys all ahead of him are in the FL west region and could only run NXN with their teams due to the overlap. Milesplit took their beef with Nike to a new level. They have been calling it "team nationals" all year to avoid saying Nike, but have said other brands for meets.
If he’s the number one, he should be able to heat any other runner in a 1v1 race. But that won’t happen: for any of the top 3 Newbury Park runners, they could all just sit and kick
Id rank it as follows:
1. sahlman
2. L, Young
3. L. Young
4. Mathison
Lex and Leo couldn't even be top 10 at team nationals what makes you think they'd beat Mathison?
Like come on, we all know nike was the better meet, where he finished 4th. The 3 guys all ahead of him are in the FL west region and could only run NXN with their teams due to the overlap. Milesplit took their beef with Nike to a new level. They have been calling it "team nationals" all year to avoid saying Nike, but have said other brands for meets.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.