Yikes. I feel bad for AJ missing the qualifer to get into the final by .003 secs.
2 Heats. Advance top 4 from each heat plus next best 4 times.
American: 3:29.30 8/28/2005 Bernard Lagat, Nike
College Best: 3:30.56 8/11/1999 Bernard Lagat, Washington S
NCAA Meet: 3:35.30 6/6/1981 Sydney Maree, Villanova
Drake Stad.: 3:38.27 1984 Steve Scott, Sub Four TC
Name Year School Prelims
================================================================
Preliminaries
1 Leonel Manzano SR Texas 3:41.70Q
2 Andrew Bumbalough JR Georgetown 3:42.28Q
3 Garrett Heath JR Stanford 3:42.21Q
4 Evan Jager FR Wisconsin 3:42.41Q
5 Jack Bolas SO Wisconsin 3:42.43Q
6 Craig Miller SO Wisconsin 3:42.47Q 3:42.462
7 David Torrence SR California 3:42.47Q 3:42.461
8 Dorian Ulrey SO Northern Iowa 3:43.10Q
9 Jeff See JR Ohio State 3:42.51q
10 Mark Davidson FR Tulsa 3:43.32q
11 Andrew Jesien JR Virginia 3:43.66q
12 Kurt Benninger SR Notre Dame 3:43.86q 3:43.856
13 Andrew Acosta SO Oregon 3:43.86 3:43.859
14 Kyle Miller JR Texas 3:43.88
15 John Richardson SR Kentucky 3:44.27
16 Lee Emanuel JR New Mexico 3:44.58
17 Peter VanderWesthuizen SR Nebraska 3:45.53
18 John Kosgei SO LSU 3:46.05
19 Russell Brown SR Stanford 3:46.48
20 Laef Barnes JR UCLA 3:48.58
21 Mark Matusak SO California 3:51.58
22 Matthew Elliott SR Winthrop 3:52.68
23 Michael Kerrigan SR Villanova 3:53.54
24 Matt Debole SR Georgetown 3:54.25
25 John Mickowski SR Army 4:03.68
26 Darren Brown SR Texas 4:08.32
Mens 1500 heat NCAA
Report Thread
-
-
Howya 'bout Jerry Schoe and Wisco gettin' 3 of them jawns in the Finals!?
-
But there times are too different, indicates very different levels...
-
Wisco XC 2008...ay yi yi.
-
What happened during the race? DeBole and Brown (UT) qualified but had times way back. Did they fall and petition?
Perhaps related, perhaps unrelated: what has happened to Russell Brown? Garrett Heath is running well, though. Seems like Stanford's 1500m runners take turns at being near the top. -
Matusak 3:51, he ran that in High School.
-
I swear there is a rule saying if your hundredths is the same you both advance. I guess I'm wrong but this came up at our conference meet . Its in the NCAA manual.
-
While this is true he just had a bad race. He's been running very well this year and its unfortunate that he couldn't get into the final today.
-
Rojo,
I think you are wrong on this one. But if you can find the rule, I would love to know which page of the NCAA rule book it is on. If you think logically about it any rule like this would play havoc with qualification for finals.
Giles -
what happened?in that heat to let debole and brown in to the final? It is gonna be crowded with 14 on the track
-
If I was one of the 12 that made it into the final, I would be pissed.
OK, Debole and Brown were involved in a fall. BUT, there was no DQ of any one runner that would indicate that there was some sort of unfair tactics being used and that those two athletes were at a disadvantage.
So it seems with the information currently available to us, that the fall was just a tangle of runners and nothing more. Something that all runners are apart of and deal with.
But for some unknown reason, Debole and Brown get in. WHY?
Were they the only two that fell? If not, then how come the other fallen runners did not get in? Also, if it WAS just the two that fell, then how come the fact that they took each other out grant them passage into the final? If it WASN'T their fault, then how come there was no DQ of another runner?
If there was a DQ of somebody, I would understand. But this just makes no sense.
Now there's two guys that ran 13 and 25 seconds slower than those that qualified in the final. Even with a fall, that's considerably less effort. I'll let it slide that Debole might have exerted as much energy to run 356, but Brown will certainly be fresher than a lot of the other runners.
Is this fair?
I mean, I'm happy for those guys to have gotten in. It takes a lot of talent and hard work to make it to NCAA's, and Brown's story is a great one.
But then again, I'm not in the race... and I think that this might need some more explaining. -
Giles Norton wrote:
Rojo,
I think you are wrong on this one. But if you can find the rule, I would love to know which page of the NCAA rule book it is on. If you think logically about it any rule like this would play havoc with qualification for finals.
Giles
Giles,
I think I showed this to you at Heps. Maybe I'm wrong and maybe there is another page but if you look at page 81, you will see the following. It seems to imply that if there is a tie to the hundredthsm, then both advance. I only say that as it talks about going to the 1000ths only if there aren't lanes avaialbe. I think a more recent rule book may have even more.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&ct=res&cd=2&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ncaa.org%2Flibrary%2Frules%2F2007%2F2007_m_w_track_cc_rules.pdf&ei=MidSSIamOofCedb1jJkP&usg=AFQjCNErDr4hd5o9QSTItcXLA2nDVtkywQ&sig2=FwNxWFFkwlq7tmIqHN8NzA
"Tie for Last Qualifying Position
ARTICLE 8. In the event of a tie for the last qualifying place for a
subsequent race, and assuming positions on the track are available, the tying
runners all shall qualify. If enough lanes are not available, the position(s)
shall be determined by reading the phototiming devices to the 1/1,000th of a
second or lesser fraction, whenever possible, and then by a runoff or drawn
by lot, based on a decision before the meet by the games committee. -
Well, I guess I'll give you that one! I agree it really does read as if the 1500, 3k SC, and 5k would take the extra runners to the final with a tie to 1/100th.
(I searched the rulebook for ADVANCE not QUALIFY...)
Giles -
So do we know anything else after a day?
-
Yup. Good analysis by RoJo.
A.J. Acosta will be in the finals of the 1500 meters.
All the best,
Giles -
Ok, the Acosta thing is settled...but what about Darren Brown and Debole?
Especially with Acosta in, this makes it a very crowded field. Is there some sort of explanation as to why those two got in from the first heat? Refer to the previous post's questions. -
Rojo...your the man.
-
Not sure about this, the difference is 3 thousandths
12 Kurt Benninger SR Notre Dame 3:43.86q 3:43.856
13 Andrew Acosta SO Oregon 3:43.86 3:43.859
"Tie for Last Qualifying Position
ARTICLE 8. In the event of a tie for the last qualifying place for a subsequent race, and assuming positions on the track are available, the tying runners all shall qualify. If enough lanes are not available, the position(s) shall be determined by reading the phototiming devices to the 1/1,000th of a second or lesser fraction, whenever possible, and then by a runoff or drawn by lot, based on a decision before the meet by the games committee. -
26mi235 wrote:
Not sure about this, the difference is 3 thousandths
12 Kurt Benninger SR Notre Dame 3:43.86q 3:43.856
13 Andrew Acosta SO Oregon 3:43.86 3:43.859
" If enough lanes are not available, the position(s) shall be determined by reading the phototiming devices to the 1/1,000th of a second or lesser fraction, whenever possible, and then by a runoff or drawn by lot, based on a decision before the meet by the games committee.
lets see a runoff!
