Post Your Comments on our Examination Of The Timing/Scoring Screw-Ups At The 2012 NCAA Cross-Country Championships Here

I have to give props to the Brojos for investigating and trying to get some answers. They do a LOT of stupid s*it, but when push comes to shove, they do a LOT to try and improve the sport, which is more than most of us can say. (Mark Block, timing issues, etc.) Also, I was especially pleased that they were actually trying to get answers to help prevent this from happening again, not just talking noise about Delta. Why won't Delta just admit their mistake and try to improve? That is a societal issue, no one is willing to admit mistakes. All things considered, if I was responsible for timing a meet, there is no way I would hire Delta at this point.

It was good to get some answers about what happened, so thanks for writing the article. Also, as a former DIII runner I appreciated that you mentioned some of the same issue in that race as well.

Nice Job on the Timing/Scoring Screw-Ups Article, Brojos

That isn't sarcasm. I know you guys get a lot of flack for typos, having opinions, etc., but it's always nice to see a good, original bit of quality reporting done every now and then.

A fascinating read!

Delta also had issues at Louisville for D2 Nationals in 2010. Up to 30 minutes after the race the results kept changing and nobody had any idea what the real results were. My team was 13th for a while then 11th and finally in the top 8 after quite some time.

Overall honestly the results at D2 Nationals have been quite horrible and unpredictable. 2011 They reposted the 1 mile split team results after the races were over and quite a few teams were celebrating and quite a few were angry.

How can we not get a timing system continuously get it wrong afte all of these years. Technology keeps improving and the same glitches and errors continue to happen? I understand track if they mislabel someone if their numbers fall off but this is xc and they are all running with a chip.

Give it a rest. Looks like some human being made a mistake. In the end, it was corrected. Nobody died.

My view is the root cause of the whole mistake is all of you who in the past have whined about how long it takes results to come out.

I am always struck by how XC is such a team sport, but is the only sport I can think of where the event can conclude and nobody watching it has any clue who won.

yeronerown wrote:

Give it a rest. Looks like some human being made a mistake. In the end, it was corrected. Nobody died.

My view is the root cause of the whole mistake is all of you who in the past have whined about how long it takes results to come out.

I am always struck by how XC is such a team sport, but is the only sport I can think of where the event can conclude and nobody watching it has any clue who won.

Imagine watching a basketball game where every player has their own ball.

When I watch olympic events of the other side of the planet. I know the results to .001 of a second in about one second after it happens, and you're telling me we can't know results until 30 minutes after the race for an NCCA championship. It's 2012. We should be able to know accurate results almost immediately at a major xc race too. That is the expectation for timers of these events. Make it happen or find a different profession.

To be honest I thought it was pointless and way too late. Would have been interesting a few days after or even a week but the races were over 2 weeks ago.

I commend LetsRun for looking into this (and keeping it in the forefront). I appreciate that you're making an effort to generate original content (do more of it).

That said, if you're looking for feedback I take issue with a few things.

"we think it’s important that Delta tell the running world what happened at this year’s meets, particularly the D1 champs (if they offer a mea cupla and offer to do next year’s meet for free, maybe they could be forgiven)."

What a timing company charges the NCAA is irrelevant. For one it's probably peanuts in the whole scheme of things. Two, it's not our money.

I'm sure (like most things) there's a bid process for this and the NCAA determines that the lowest price bid (that is proficient enough to meet their requirements) is selected. The only thing that should determine whether a timing company is allowed to work in the future should be whether the meet organizers think they are competent. We (public) don't need an explanation (it would be good PR though), but the NCAA better get one.

"When I heard Delta was going to time the championships back in August, I knew there was going to be problems. In fact, I was talking to *Name Removed* on Monday morning Nov. 12, because he was asking me what I knew about the problems Delta had at the Regionals. I didn’t know anything about those issues, but I said something to *Name Removed* like, “Thank God I’m going to be *Distance Removed* miles away from Louisville this weekend because its going to be a mess.” "

Printing something like this is pretty shady IMO. There are no real facts here. You're basically allowing a competitor to have an anonymous voice to discredit a competitor. I have no stake in this, but I know from business experience that it's easy to point out flaws in others work. That in itself isn't bad (if they're justified), but there's a right way to do it.

Timing meets is not easy. There are a million things that can and do go wrong every meet. Mistakes happen, and as a timer you're always hoping it doesn't occur at a big meet. In the end it was all corrected and no lives were lost.

Has LetsRun any idea where the rumor that an Oregon girl and a Florida girl came to blows? I wonder how that even got put on the board? It made both schools look bad.

From the sidelines wrote:

Has LetsRun any idea where the rumor that an Oregon girl and a Florida girl came to blows? I wonder how that even got put on the board? It made both schools look bad.

When two people didn't show up in the results, I think it was natural for many people to assume there was a DQ - that rumor was all over the place.

I guess from there someone just assumed there had to be a fight as what else would get you DQd. Then some jerk kept posting the same thing over and over until we banned him or her.

I am pretty sure there was a technical malfunction that started a lot of what happened. I was right at the finish line but couldn't tell who crossed first between Hasay and and D'Agostino so I was watching the scoreboard for individual results. When they first came up Pappas was listed as being the winner of the race in 19 something. At around 7th place, I believe Saina was listed and I remember seeing Hasay listed as well but their times along with 3 or 4 other girls started at 18:47. This was only up for 2 or 3 seconds at most so it was hard to remember anything else but I knew right then that something was going to be screwed up.

Since Pappas was listed as the winner, that might have something to do with why she was left off of the later results.

Actually, when it comes to timing in general, timing an XC meet IS easy. There are enough timing companies out there that time XC meets consistently with no issue what so ever. And the reality is that even though the importance of the meet is bigger, meets like this are easier to time for many reasons than invitationals. The only reason I could see for the NCAA to stick to Delta is that they have a connection at the NCAA that is defending their failures. These meets are too important not to get a company with a better reputation.

Delta Timing handled the timing of my high school regional meet in 2010. I believe it was their first and last year. I seem to remember some weird things with the results and there are still 2 sets of results out there for each of the 6 races run that day. They only took results to the tenth of a second and have people with the same time in different places in results. Here is the small school girls race from that day:

http://www.deltatiming.com/results/xcresults.aspx?yf=2010&mf=ohsaa-xc-troy-regional&ev=5&sp=False

http://www.baumspage.com/cc/reg/troy/2010/g3.htm

I don't remember experiencing Delta Timing before that day. I knew they did timing for a lot of big college races so I thought they were really good professional timers. Oh how my assumption was wrong.

leaping lanny wrote:

Delta Timing handled the timing of my high school regional meet in 2010. I believe it was their first and last year. I seem to remember some weird things with the results and there are still 2 sets of results out there for each of the 6 races run that day. They only took results to the tenth of a second and have people with the same time in different places in results. Here is the small school girls race from that day:

http://www.deltatiming.com/results/xcresults.aspx?yf=2010&mf=ohsaa-xc-troy-regional&ev=5&sp=Falsehttp://www.baumspage.com/cc/reg/troy/2010/g3.htm

I don't remember experiencing Delta Timing before that day. I knew they did timing for a lot of big college races so I thought they were really good professional timers. Oh how my assumption was wrong.

Although I do NOT think very highly of Delta, reporting times to the tenth in XC is the correct way. It is not FAT and it is NOT a road race. Many people do not understand this.

USATF Rules wrote:

Although I do NOT think very highly of Delta, reporting times to the tenth in XC is the correct way. It is not FAT and it is NOT a road race. Many people do not understand this.

I have no problem with only going to the tenth of a second, but there should not be 2 sets of results with different places and as a result different team scores.

leaping lanny wrote:

USATF Rules wrote:

Although I do NOT think very highly of Delta, reporting times to the tenth in XC is the correct way. It is not FAT and it is NOT a road race. Many people do not understand this.

I have no problem with only going to the tenth of a second, but there should not be 2 sets of results with different places and as a result different team scores.

Yes there should be. It's not a Delta event unless there are multiple copies of results :)

For years I sat in the booth at Indiana State and worked with the Gaults (Gaults Timing Company) and there was not one problem. I reviewed the pictures and matched them to the official results. As anyone who was there would know, it was well done and there was no screw-up like at Louisville. The Gaults relied on chips on the shoes and double checked that with video. No problems.

But a bigger question is why did it happen. Lets digress. The former Senior Woman Administrator from U of Louisville Holly Sheilley was on the NCAA Track & Field Committee. She tried to get the committee to award Louisville the championship, but those folks on the committee who knew about cross country made sure the rest of the committee knew about the potential problems. Once those experts were off the committee Sheilley used her position as chair of the committee to railroad Louisville into getting the meet. She is now the NCAA Assistant Director who oversees cc/track. It was felt many years before that there would be problem in Louisville. Everyone thinks its easy to put on a championship. It is not and the people at Indiana State have worked hard to become experts at it. If you are upset about the events at the championship e-mail Ms. Sheilley at the NCAA Office. Delta Timing has had a long history of problems. I used them once and would never use them again. I think arrogance would be the term I would use. They should never be used for any major meet and if anyone does then they are just asking for problems.