stanford entries up!

At least they have all the races in the evening now. Our coach refuses to fib at all so I have no idea why we continue to go there?

DAVS - UC Davis

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Chris Ferren-Cirino - Male SR

#14 Men 5000 Meter Run - 14:05.00

2. Jorge Murillo - Male SR

#18 Men 10000 Meter Run - 29:45.00

3. Patrick Parsel - Male SO

#18 Men 10000 Meter Run - 29:45.00

I know Chris has run some good times, but those other two look fishy to me.

Those schools are allowed to 'fudge' their times because they host meets and allow stanford runners to compete in the fast heats when maybee they dont have the 'times' they they should have to belong there. Its a give and give situation. UW has the dempsey meets every other weekend that Stanford likes to compete in, and UO has plenty of great meets that Stanford guys might want to compete in I would imagine.

The way it works is that unattached athletes have their times verified but college/HS coaches get to put in any BS time they want. Mt. Sac is the same way. But if you're a coach and you want your athletes to be able to get qualifiers/scholarchips, they have to get into the right heat, so you have to play the game by the "rules."

It's the liars club. In order to get your athlete into the right heat, you have to go back to last year's results to figure out what the "fudge factor" is.

Ferrin-C has run 14:21ishThe other two haven't broken 30min. Officials seem to have skipped from team to team w/ these checks. Our team was hit pretty hard during the sweep.

CCAA wrote:

DAVS - UC Davis

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Chris Ferren-Cirino - Male SR

#14 Men 5000 Meter Run - 14:05.00

2. Jorge Murillo - Male SR

#18 Men 10000 Meter Run - 29:45.00

3. Patrick Parsel - Male SO

#18 Men 10000 Meter Run - 29:45.00

I know Chris has run some good times, but those other two look fishy to me.

Coach D wrote:

The way it works is that unattached athletes have their times verified but college/HS coaches get to put in any BS time they want."

Not true this year in the HS portion. I have personally gone through every mark entered. Discrepancies were corrected and the entry lists reordered. In cases where the entry marks were similar, preference was given to verified marks (results on the web, confirmation from meet directors, etc.).

-ernie lee.

Gunn Track and Field.

Idiots wrote:

Those schools are allowed to 'fudge' their times because they host meets and allow stanford runners to compete in the fast heats when maybee they dont have the 'times' they they should have to belong there. Its a give and give situation. UW has the dempsey meets every other weekend that Stanford likes to compete in, and UO has plenty of great meets that Stanford guys might want to compete in I would imagine.

Ha. Makes a lot of sense. That's pretty low, Stanford.

But what about the other possible fudgings made by athletes apparently not connected to these schools, or any school with some sense of influence or clout?

Any examples of time being adjusted? I understand coaches giving slightly faster seed times because of how an athletes fitness is, however, some of these times are a bit crazy. It will be fun to look at seed times compared to actuall results after the meet.

Many times, meet directors allow teams to enter athletes at times that the athletes are capable of running, not necessarily what they have run. Seems to be the case with many of these athletes.

Even in high school, the 2-mile times entered in the regional meets every year were such BS, that I was seeded around 40+ out of roughly 50 runners. I never finished worse than 15th.

well wrote:

Many times, meet directors allow teams to enter athletes at times that the athletes are capable of running, not necessarily what they have run. Seems to be the case with many of these athletes.

Really.

Of course we recognize this. If you read any of the posts above you, you'd realize that pretty much 99% of coaches do this, and that a select few programs are being allowed to do this while the others are having their athletes googled.

Or did you honestly think that many coaches were choosing to enter their athletes at their previous PRs?

That is one smokin' list of competitors!

On the meet schedule it says there's only going to be 2 heats of the 10k, but there are about 100 people entered. Do you think they'll add another section on Friday night?

I know many of the coaches last year were really updet because some people couldn't even run and the heats weren't posted until Thursday. I am fairly sure that the heats are supposed to be confirmed this Saturday so coaches, athletes, travel can be organized?

the problem is, when u have top teams like oregon and stanford setting that example up front, many of the smaller schools are forced to follow suit to stay competitive. it will be quite interesting to see how many people come within even 10 seconds of their seed times. however, i think its stupid to call out teams one by one on here. everyone is bullshitting times, so just wait until after the meet before you pass judgment on who the biggest bullshitters are cause you may be suprised.....

It sucks, but the truth is--coaches have to lie to get their kids into fast races. I have been on three different sides of this. As an athlete--I almost did not get into Penn Relays with my 14:44, my coach lied to get me into the fast race and I ended up running my PR 14:12--Without the lie, I don't get my PR. As a coach, my athletes were routinely getting screwed out of top heats and preferred lanes. As a meet director--It is hard enough to organize the whole event. No one has time to go through and verify every entry.

There has to be a solution.

so cal wrote:

Any examples of time being adjusted? I understand coaches giving slightly faster seed times because of how an athletes fitness is, however, some of these times are a bit crazy. It will be fun to look at seed times compared to actuall results after the meet.

Please note that I'm referring to the high school entries only. Coaches were asked to supply the name and date of the meet where the mark was achieved. Sometimes the mark I found was off (one example, 11.52 at the actual meet listed instead of 11.32 that was entered for the 100m). Those marks were seeded according to the actual result found. More significantly, in the 3K we had to sort out who entered 3K times and who entered 3200m or 2 mile times to make sure the heats would be seeded correctly.

Since we accepted marks from 2006 and 2007, most results from large invitationals, league, section, and state meets are readily available on the web. There are also several top marks lists (DyeStat, LynbrookSports.com, Keith Conning's lists, Santa Rosa Press Democrat, etc.) that were very helpful for quickly identifying top tier athletes. Athletic.net is a great database for Oregon marks. Google was a last resort.

Oftentimes, when coaches entered unverifiable marks (dual meets, relay splits, etc.), I made the effort to try to locate actual marks from end of season meets last year or some early invitationals this year and then seeded the athletes according to the best mark I could find. Around the cutoffs for each event, verified marks were given preference over unverifiable marks for acceptance.

This is the first time we've gone over the entries in such detail (in the past we would focus on the distance races since those had the most rejected entries). Hopefully this year it will be worth all the effort.

Jon Thomas has run 14:10. He can, and WILL, run sub 29:00 at Stanford. Get over yourselves.