Bogus qualifying system in NCAA 5K's

This is nothing new. They stack both heats equally. The first heat is usually "tactical" & the second heat is usually faster. It's up to the guys with the weaker kicks to dictate the pace of the first heat. Decisions, decisions.

Of course an argument could be made that it is unfair that the qualifiers in the second heat had to run 30 seconds faster to qualify than those in the first. Each heat has advantages and disadvantages. As as far as the first heat goes, any 14:00 guy who didn't qualify in 14:30+ has no one but himself to blame.

If you decide run easier and leave it to a kick, and then outkicked by SIX people, then you have no one to blame but yourself. If you can't get into the top six in a heat, then you weren't going to score in the finals anyway.

I'm guessing this thread was started by someone in the slower heat that didn't make the finals. Stop whining.

suspicious wrote:

I'm guessing this thread was started by someone in the slower heat that didn't make the finals. Stop whining.

thats just how it is.

There's only one way to look at this - control your own destiny by being one of the automatic place qualifiers. Anything else involves luck and circumstance - nice if it falls your way but certainly not an objective to aspire to.

From the heat sheets:

"2 Heats. Advance top 6 from each heat plus next best 4 times. One waterfall line."

The coaches and athletes are also privy to this information, and should plan accordingly.

I think in most events above the 400, time qualifiers should be tossed out the window. The races above 400 are not time trials and the later heats have a huge advantage (more information) over the first heats.

So if the heats are evenly drawn do top 8 advance in each heat. I think this is fairer.

Evenly drawn on what? Fastest time from the season, time from the regional meet, or place from the regional meet? The regional meet is the "prelim" to the NCAA meet.

wejo wrote:

I think in most events above the 400, time qualifiers should be tossed out the window. The races above 400 are not time trials and the later heats have a huge advantage (more information) over the first heats.

So if the heats are evenly drawn do top 8 advance in each heat. I think this is fairer.

Fairer?

Subsequent heats do not have "more" information. Anyone with more than a year in the sport knew that 14:31 was NOT going to advance on time. The first heat runners knew this just as well as the second heat runners.

If you look at the steeplchase qualifiers, you'll see that the faster heat was the first one and three of the four time qualifiers came from the first heat, for both men and women, so it looks like the second heat didn't have an advantage there. That pretty much blows your arguement out of the water.

How is it that sub 14 5K runners ran so slowly in the first heat? I mean, there were a ton of 1440s and 1450s from guys that have run over a minute faster. What could they have been thinking? Did they not know they were going to get outkicked?

Do you think it could be because alot of these guys peaked well earlier in the season, and simply werent as fast now?

Most runners have a big ego and they all think that their kick is the best. Most can't accept that others' kicks are better.

realfan144 wrote:

Most runners have a big ego and they all think that their kick is the best. Most can't accept that others' kicks are better.

I don't buy that. Everyone racing at that level is well aware of their own capabilities.

wejo wrote:

I think in most events above the 400, time qualifiers should be tossed out the window. The races above 400 are not time trials and the later heats have a huge advantage (more information) over the first heats.

So if the heats are evenly drawn do top 8 advance in each heat. I think this is fairer.

Wouldn't this just lead to two sit and kick races instead of one? Fast times in this situation do nothing. They may as well walk for 11 laps. Obviously I'm exaggerating, but this general idea will happen. I'm all for close races, but not when they are ridiculously slow.

I like the 4 qualifiers on time. It's there to keep people honest. The first heat can run a fast time to force the second heat to have to do the same, which does happen from time to time (and should happen more often). This system forces at least one of the races to be decent and also gives the fans something to watch.

McD wrote:

realfan144 wrote:

Most runners have a big ego and they all think that their kick is the best. Most can't accept that others' kicks are better.

I don't buy that. Everyone racing at that level is well aware of their own capabilities.

I disagree. The upper levels of NCAA runners can have delusions of grandeur as well as kids in high school.

one problem is a lot of these guys have never raced one another over 5K outdoors - certainly not recently. you may think you've got a good enough kick based on x, y, and z but you have very incomplete information about probably 70% of the field.

Don't forget the fact that anyone finishing lower than 6th in their heat has absolutely no gripe that they didn't move to the final.

Valid point about the system possibly being unfair to second heat. The alternative is to only give the winner of the slow heat an auto qualifier, and after that go strictly on time. Then the big-name slowpokes have no one but themselves to blame. Why isn't that system used?