4:22 in the 4A East Regional doesn't make states?
05/12/2012 7:08:09 PM
User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 69
Can the state please fix what athletes, coaches, and fans can see is wrong with state qualifying procedures? The best runners in the state should be at the state meet. A 4:22 in any regional meet should qualify an athlete for the state meet. By the way this is not my son, I am not even affiliated with the school. I just witnessed a hell of an effort and it should be rewarded with a spot at the state meet.
Can the state please fix what athletes, coaches, and fans can see is wrong with state qualifying procedures? The best runners in the state should be at the state meet. A 4:22 in any regional meet should qualify an athlete for the state meet. By the way this is not my son, I am not even affiliated with the school. I just witnessed a hell of an effort and it should be rewarded with a spot at the state meet.
05/12/2012 8:41:57 PM
User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 69
Correction- Mideast Regional
Correction- Mideast Regional
05/13/2012 8:42:12 AM
User
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 77
@Kevinpsu160 The State Meet is each region being allowed to bring their best 4 athletes for each event. Unfortunately, that means other athletes are left out of this meet who actually have better performance than other athletes from other regions who do compete. The "best 4" are determined by the athletes' performances on that one day - not their season best or their best 2-out-of-3 or some other averaging formula. We've all seen where a favored athlete in an event has an off day at Regional and doesn't make the top 4 - hence not making it to the State Meet. While you might want to think of the State Meet as "The Best in the State", it's really "The Best 4 of Each Region of Each Event" as determined by their performance at their Regional Meet.
@Kevinpsu160 The State Meet is each region being allowed to bring their best 4 athletes for each event. Unfortunately, that means other athletes are left out of this meet who actually have better performance than other athletes from other regions who do compete. The "best 4" are determined by the athletes' performances on that one day - not their season best or their best 2-out-of-3 or some other averaging formula. We've all seen where a favored athlete in an event has an off day at Regional and doesn't make the top 4 - hence not making it to the State Meet.

While you might want to think of the State Meet as "The Best in the State", it's really "The Best 4 of Each Region of Each Event" as determined by their performance at their Regional Meet.
05/13/2012 9:43:28 AM
User
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 4
@Ready2Throw Also consider that the regions are 4 different races with different conditions,tactics, etc. which makes it virtually impossible in some circumstances to compare a fast time or jump in an event in one region to a slower time in another. It is a race - not a time trial. Competitors know that top 4 advance. At the same time I feel badly for kids who work and compete so hard and come up a little short.
@Ready2Throw
Also consider that the regions are 4 different races with different conditions,tactics, etc. which makes it virtually impossible in some circumstances to compare a fast time or jump in an event in one region to a slower time in another. It is a race - not a time trial. Competitors know that top 4 advance. At the same time I feel badly for kids who work and compete so hard and come up a little short.
05/13/2012 10:00:56 AM
User
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 82
This is the same situation that exists in every sport. When they have 16 teams left in the football playoffs, they don't advance the eight best remaining teams; they take the eight teams that win on a particular Friday night against one specific opponent. It very often happens that two of the best teams play well before the finals, or that odd seeding results in two relatively weak teams playing each other with one guaranteed to advance. You NEVER get the two best teams playing in the final of a sport unless (a) one is in the East and one in the West, and (b) neither gets upset in the first four or five rounds of the playoffs. Track actually has it much better than most sports. There is only one round to get through before state. You don't have to win to advance. Four people make it out of each region - you can have the three best people in state history in your region and still have a chance. Running 4:22 is probably the fastest anyone has ever gone and not qualified. But it was also four seconds behind the top four, so it was pretty clear who the qualifiers were. It's almost certain that the athlete in question would not have run that fast had it not been for the race that was made by the people who finished in front of him. It's also certain that numerous kids in other regions could have run much faster than they did had they been in that race. In every race conditions and tactics matter. That is why you compete to make the state meet, instead of just taking the top 16 from the seasonal list. (It's also true the NCHSAA has an affirmative interest in having competitors at the state meet from every part of the state, and has not shown any interest in changing the qualifying process.)
This is the same situation that exists in every sport. When they have 16 teams left in the football playoffs, they don't advance the eight best remaining teams; they take the eight teams that win on a particular Friday night against one specific opponent. It very often happens that two of the best teams play well before the finals, or that odd seeding results in two relatively weak teams playing each other with one guaranteed to advance. You NEVER get the two best teams playing in the final of a sport unless (a) one is in the East and one in the West, and (b) neither gets upset in the first four or five rounds of the playoffs.

Track actually has it much better than most sports. There is only one round to get through before state. You don't have to win to advance. Four people make it out of each region - you can have the three best people in state history in your region and still have a chance.

Running 4:22 is probably the fastest anyone has ever gone and not qualified. But it was also four seconds behind the top four, so it was pretty clear who the qualifiers were. It's almost certain that the athlete in question would not have run that fast had it not been for the race that was made by the people who finished in front of him. It's also certain that numerous kids in other regions could have run much faster than they did had they been in that race. In every race conditions and tactics matter. That is why you compete to make the state meet, instead of just taking the top 16 from the seasonal list. (It's also true the NCHSAA has an affirmative interest in having competitors at the state meet from every part of the state, and has not shown any interest in changing the qualifying process.)
05/13/2012 10:15:55 AM
User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 69
@jlpads Yes, I agree that conditions in each race could play a factor in slower times in other regionals. However, the athletes in a slower region have an advantage because they don't have to give their best efforts to qualify. Here is my proposed solution- There should be a wild card entry in each event to the state meet for a performer that finishes fifth in their regional but out performers all other regional competitors. For example, the young men that ran a 4:22 would get a wild card spot because he ran the fifth fastest time overall yesterday. There has to be a way to fix it so that athletes that shine and outperform 90% of the other regional competitors can make the state meet. Can the NCHSAA work on a solution to this problem so that these young men and women can see that the competition is fair and make the state meet more competitive?
@jlpads
Yes, I agree that conditions in each race could play a factor in slower times in other regionals. However, the athletes in a slower region have an advantage because they don't have to give their best efforts to qualify.

Here is my proposed solution- There should be a wild card entry in each event to the state meet for a performer that finishes fifth in their regional but out performers all other regional competitors. For example, the young men that ran a 4:22 would get a wild card spot because he ran the fifth fastest time overall yesterday.

There has to be a way to fix it so that athletes that shine and outperform 90% of the other regional competitors can make the state meet. Can the NCHSAA work on a solution to this problem so that these young men and women can see that the competition is fair and make the state meet more competitive?
05/13/2012 10:41:09 AM
User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 69
@marathondave I understand that football, basketball, wrestling, etc. you can have top teams eliminated early in the competition. However, track and field is a different sport. Athletes in other states compete against a clock to run a qualifying standard to make the state meet. These athletes have to make the standard at the regional/district meet. This creates and atmosphere of healthily competition and not cut throat top four or nothing competition. You have teammates that train together for years eliminating their buddy because of the current cut throat top four process. You have coaches strategically placing athletes in races so that they don't eliminate another teammate. If the goal of the NCHSAA is to have athletes from all parts of the state than the NCHSAA can take the top four individuals from each region and anyone else that meets the qualifying standard set by the NCHSAA. By the way the boy that ran a 4:22 is a sophomore and only one athlete that finished in front of him is a senior. So this problem is not just a this year problem. In addition five runners that broke 9:45 in the 3200 are four sophomores and one freshmen. Over the next two years it will take an national elite time to qualify for the 4A mideast region in the 1600 and 3200. Although it is a good problem to have as running is improving in the Raleigh/Durham it seems silly that a national elite time might not grant you acceptance into the NC state meet.
@marathondave I understand that football, basketball, wrestling, etc. you can have top teams eliminated early in the competition. However, track and field is a different sport. Athletes in other states compete against a clock to run a qualifying standard to make the state meet. These athletes have to make the standard at the regional/district meet. This creates and atmosphere of healthily competition and not cut throat top four or nothing competition. You have teammates that train together for years eliminating their buddy because of the current cut throat top four process. You have coaches strategically placing athletes in races so that they don't eliminate another teammate. If the goal of the NCHSAA is to have athletes from all parts of the state than the NCHSAA can take the top four individuals from each region and anyone else that meets the qualifying standard set by the NCHSAA.

By the way the boy that ran a 4:22 is a sophomore and only one athlete that finished in front of him is a senior. So this problem is not just a this year problem. In addition five runners that broke 9:45 in the 3200 are four sophomores and one freshmen. Over the next two years it will take an national elite time to qualify for the 4A mideast region in the 1600 and 3200. Although it is a good problem to have as running is improving in the Raleigh/Durham it seems silly that a national elite time might not grant you acceptance into the NC state meet.
05/13/2012 1:13:01 PM
User
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 2
If thats the case it will have to come down to whoever the better racer is. Tactics and stratagy will make it break it in that situation. I support the current system and I know it might not be fair but in a case like that you know you'll be getting the top 4 best all around runners from that region.
If thats the case it will have to come down to whoever the better racer is. Tactics and stratagy will make it break it in that situation. I support the current system and I know it might not be fair but in a case like that you know you'll be getting the top 4 best all around runners from that region.
05/13/2012 2:03:26 PM
User
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 82
[quote=Kevinpsu160] By the way the boy that ran a 4:22 is a sophomore and only one athlete that finished in front of him is a senior. So this problem is not just a this year problem. In addition five runners that broke 9:45 in the 3200 are four sophomores and one freshmen. Over the next two years it will take an national elite time to qualify for the 4A mideast region in the 1600 and 3200. Although it is a good problem to have as running is improving in the Raleigh/Durham it seems silly that a national elite time might not grant you acceptance into the NC state meet.[/quote] @Kevinpsu160 Or maybe the rest of the state will rise to that level, and we'll just look at it as people who aren't in the top four don't qualify. There is nothing magical about 9:35 or 4:22. The times the 4A West girls ran last year (5:09, 11:18, and 9:41 relay not qualifying) looked ridiculous for non-qualifiers, considering they would've been top five in every state meet before 2009, and every single girls' qualifier was back in all three distance events. This year the mideast was even tougher in the 4x8, and even the East (!!!) had four girls under 2:16 and 2 under 5:09 yesterday. The thing that defines something as a sport instead of a recreational activity is you are measuring yourself against others. People in virtually every other sport would be completely mystified by your contrast between "good healthy competition" and "cut throat" - most sports are by definition zero-sum, one winner and one loser. In track we have four qualifiers and every else doesn't qualify. Our team had three different events yesterday where an athlete finished fifth while a teammate qualified, in two of them the qualifier was fourth, and in one the athletes were separated by .07 in a 3200. I'm still pretty sure they all thought it was good healthy competition.
Kevinpsu160 wrote:


By the way the boy that ran a 4:22 is a sophomore and only one athlete that finished in front of him is a senior. So this problem is not just a this year problem. In addition five runners that broke 9:45 in the 3200 are four sophomores and one freshmen. Over the next two years it will take an national elite time to qualify for the 4A mideast region in the 1600 and 3200. Although it is a good problem to have as running is improving in the Raleigh/Durham it seems silly that a national elite time might not grant you acceptance into the NC state meet.


@Kevinpsu160
Or maybe the rest of the state will rise to that level, and we'll just look at it as people who aren't in the top four don't qualify. There is nothing magical about 9:35 or 4:22. The times the 4A West girls ran last year (5:09, 11:18, and 9:41 relay not qualifying) looked ridiculous for non-qualifiers, considering they would've been top five in every state meet before 2009, and every single girls' qualifier was back in all three distance events. This year the mideast was even tougher in the 4x8, and even the East (!!!) had four girls under 2:16 and 2 under 5:09 yesterday.

The thing that defines something as a sport instead of a recreational activity is you are measuring yourself against others. People in virtually every other sport would be completely mystified by your contrast between "good healthy competition" and "cut throat" - most sports are by definition zero-sum, one winner and one loser. In track we have four qualifiers and every else doesn't qualify. Our team had three different events yesterday where an athlete finished fifth while a teammate qualified, in two of them the qualifier was fourth, and in one the athletes were separated by .07 in a 3200. I'm still pretty sure they all thought it was good healthy competition.
05/13/2012 2:05:35 PM
User
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 37
Rather than complaining about 4:22 not making states (tough break, for sure), how about celebrating having 4 guys at 4:18 or better in the 4A Mideast -- that is awesome! Good weather, good competition, ... I am hoping for more of the same next weekend!
Rather than complaining about 4:22 not making states (tough break, for sure), how about celebrating having 4 guys at 4:18 or better in the 4A Mideast -- that is awesome! Good weather, good competition, ... I am hoping for more of the same next weekend!
05/13/2012 2:22:20 PM
User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 69
@a9b8 I see that your event is the 800m. So I will direct my argument around the 800m. How is the system fair when you have athletes 10 miles to the west of the 4A east region having to run 3 seconds faster to qualify. You and I both know that there is a big difference in an athlete that runs a 1:58 and one that runs a 2:01. My suggestions is not exclude any athlete from the state meet. I have proposed to keep the four automatic qualifiers from each region but also include some at-large qualifiers. How is this wrong for the spirt of competition? I have yet to hear a sound argument for the current system other than it is the way it has always been.
@a9b8 I see that your event is the 800m. So I will direct my argument around the 800m. How is the system fair when you have athletes 10 miles to the west of the 4A east region having to run 3 seconds faster to qualify. You and I both know that there is a big difference in an athlete that runs a 1:58 and one that runs a 2:01. My suggestions is not exclude any athlete from the state meet. I have proposed to keep the four automatic qualifiers from each region but also include some at-large qualifiers. How is this wrong for the spirt of competition? I have yet to hear a sound argument for the current system other than it is the way it has always been.
05/13/2012 3:09:11 PM
User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 69
@marathondave "Or maybe the rest of the state will rise to that level, and we'll just look at it as people who aren't in the top four don't qualify. There is nothing magical about 9:35 or 4:22. The times the 4A West girls ran last year (5:09, 11:18, and 9:41 relay not qualifying) looked ridiculous for non-qualifiers, considering they would've been top five in every state meet before 2009, and every single girls' qualifier was back in all three distance events. This year the mideast was even tougher in the 4x8, and even the East (!!!) had four girls under 2:16 and 2 under 5:09 yesterday." This is the reason there needs to be a qualifying standard along with the top four spots. "The thing that defines something as a sport instead of a recreational activity is you are measuring yourself against others. People in virtually every other sport would be completely mystified by your contrast between "good healthy competition" and "cut throat" - most sports are by definition zero-sum, one winner and one loser. In track we have four qualifiers and every else doesn't qualify. Our team had three different events yesterday where an athlete finished fifth while a teammate qualified, in two of them the qualifier was fourth, and in one the athletes were separated by .07 in a 3200. I'm still pretty sure they all thought it was good healthy competition." How is it fair for an athlete to put up a better time in the regional meet, beat a state qualifying athlete two times during invitational, and not be able to compete at states? The answer geography- Do we want geography determining who represents our state at the state meet? Or do we want the best athletes competing for state titles? I don't want to exclude anyone from the state meet. I just want to make sure the girls you talk about and the runner (4:22) I saw lying in the infield for ten minutes make the state meet. How is this wrong for healthy competition?
@marathondave
"Or maybe the rest of the state will rise to that level, and we'll just look at it as people who aren't in the top four don't qualify. There is nothing magical about 9:35 or 4:22. The times the 4A West girls ran last year (5:09, 11:18, and 9:41 relay not qualifying) looked ridiculous for non-qualifiers, considering they would've been top five in every state meet before 2009, and every single girls' qualifier was back in all three distance events. This year the mideast was even tougher in the 4x8, and even the East (!!!) had four girls under 2:16 and 2 under 5:09 yesterday."

This is the reason there needs to be a qualifying standard along with the top four spots.

"The thing that defines something as a sport instead of a recreational activity is you are measuring yourself against others. People in virtually every other sport would be completely mystified by your contrast between "good healthy competition" and "cut throat" - most sports are by definition zero-sum, one winner and one loser. In track we have four qualifiers and every else doesn't qualify. Our team had three different events yesterday where an athlete finished fifth while a teammate qualified, in two of them the qualifier was fourth, and in one the athletes were separated by .07 in a 3200. I'm still pretty sure they all thought it was good healthy competition."

How is it fair for an athlete to put up a better time in the regional meet, beat a state qualifying athlete two times during invitational, and not be able to compete at states? The answer geography- Do we want geography determining who represents our state at the state meet? Or do we want the best athletes competing for state titles?

I don't want to exclude anyone from the state meet. I just want to make sure the girls you talk about and the runner (4:22) I saw lying in the infield for ten minutes make the state meet. How is this wrong for healthy competition?
05/13/2012 3:16:33 PM
User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 69
@run_on Tell that to the boy that puked out his guts for three months running 400 repeats to run a 4:22 and not qualify for states, "only in NC."
@run_on Tell that to the boy that puked out his guts for three months running 400 repeats to run a 4:22 and not qualify for states, "only in NC."
05/13/2012 3:36:18 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 118
The word "fair" has been used over and over in this thread. Fair is not quantifiable. The system was never set up to be fair, nor can it be in my opinion. There are multiple factors that go into a state qualifying procedure, and fair is not one of them. For some perspective, take a look at what happens in the Texas State meet series.
The word "fair" has been used over and over in this thread. Fair is not quantifiable. The system was never set up to be fair, nor can it be in my opinion. There are multiple factors that go into a state qualifying procedure, and fair is not one of them. For some perspective, take a look at what happens in the Texas State meet series.
05/13/2012 4:07:15 PM
Admin
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 2414
@Kevinpsu160 What about the kid that puked his guts out to run a 4:24? Or a 4:26? Where does the line get drawn? Whether you like it or not, part of the decision regarding the total number of qualifiers to the state meet is based on the amount of available space on the track. Our state meet is held on an 8-lane track, and that is part of the reason why 16 is the number chosen. Logistical concerns might seem small compared to the success of a student-athlete, but I can assure you that they are important to those who operate the meet, and they are critical to consistency in that endeavor. 16 athletes makes one heat of a distance race or two heats of a sprint, and 4 from each region ensures that there is even representation across the state. That IS fair, just not fair in the way you want it to be, or for the kid in question. Some states do have automatic qualifying times to get to the state meet, but many more do not. In Texas, only 8 in each classification get to the state meet! When you have a regional system, as we do, then the regional is the end of the line for most athletes. As someone said earlier, there is nothing magical about 4:22 that makes it more deserving than any other time. Please keep in mind that your perspective is shaped by what you have seen in this sport. 4:22 is fast this season in NC, but it is not among the top 500 times in the country this season, so why is that time so special that it automatically qualifies to the state meet? If the state were to adopt an automatic qualifier, personally I would have it set faster than 4:22.
@Kevinpsu160 What about the kid that puked his guts out to run a 4:24? Or a 4:26? Where does the line get drawn?

Whether you like it or not, part of the decision regarding the total number of qualifiers to the state meet is based on the amount of available space on the track. Our state meet is held on an 8-lane track, and that is part of the reason why 16 is the number chosen. Logistical concerns might seem small compared to the success of a student-athlete, but I can assure you that they are important to those who operate the meet, and they are critical to consistency in that endeavor. 16 athletes makes one heat of a distance race or two heats of a sprint, and 4 from each region ensures that there is even representation across the state. That IS fair, just not fair in the way you want it to be, or for the kid in question.

Some states do have automatic qualifying times to get to the state meet, but many more do not. In Texas, only 8 in each classification get to the state meet! When you have a regional system, as we do, then the regional is the end of the line for most athletes.

As someone said earlier, there is nothing magical about 4:22 that makes it more deserving than any other time. Please keep in mind that your perspective is shaped by what you have seen in this sport. 4:22 is fast this season in NC, but it is not among the top 500 times in the country this season, so why is that time so special that it automatically qualifies to the state meet? If the state were to adopt an automatic qualifier, personally I would have it set faster than 4:22.
05/13/2012 5:43:40 PM
User
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 69
@CoachGeorgeRJR Thank you Coach George for taking the time to explain the justification behind the qualifying procedures. If these prodedures are good enough for you than they are good enough for me. As you have a more vested interest in NC track and field than I do. I appreciate all that you do in keeping us informed.
@CoachGeorgeRJR Thank you Coach George for taking the time to explain the justification behind the qualifying procedures. If these prodedures are good enough for you than they are good enough for me. As you have a more vested interest in NC track and field than I do. I appreciate all that you do in keeping us informed.
05/13/2012 6:11:17 PM
Coach
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 6
Jeff Hartwig was the #1 vaulter in the US in 2000. #1 vaulter in the world in 2000. At the 2000 Olympics Trials he no-heighted (due to issues with his contacts) and didn't make the US team. Part of track and field world wide is the qualification process. Track and field is the ultimate what have you done for me lately sport. That is part of what make sit so great.
Jeff Hartwig was the #1 vaulter in the US in 2000. #1 vaulter in the world in 2000. At the 2000 Olympics Trials he no-heighted (due to issues with his contacts) and didn't make the US team. Part of track and field world wide is the qualification process. Track and field is the ultimate what have you done for me lately sport. That is part of what make sit so great.
05/13/2012 6:49:19 PM
Admin
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 2414
@Kevinpsu160 Well, thanks for the compliment! I actually wouldn't be opposed to adding an auto-qualifier, but it would force a format change at the state meet. I should also point out that in Olympic and World Championship competition, sprinters advance from round to round almost exclusively by place, with only the "extra" runners filled on time. So in those competitions, it is entirely possible for someone with a slower time to advance over someone with a faster time.
@Kevinpsu160 Well, thanks for the compliment! I actually wouldn't be opposed to adding an auto-qualifier, but it would force a format change at the state meet. I should also point out that in Olympic and World Championship competition, sprinters advance from round to round almost exclusively by place, with only the "extra" runners filled on time. So in those competitions, it is entirely possible for someone with a slower time to advance over someone with a faster time.
05/14/2012 10:16:31 AM
User
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2
@CoachGeorgeRJR Very good idea about looking into a different qualifying procedure for the state meet if indeed the state meet is about putting the top 16 atheletes in each event against eachother, versus having the top 4 atheltes per region making it to the state meet. If you start with the question about what the state meet is meant to achieve, then the right answers will come thru, they always do. This discussion topic should not be about qulaifying times per se, but more about what the goal of the state meet is intended to achieve. For the record, it was my son, John Dalton Rohr, sophomore at Broughton HS, that ran the 4:22 last weekend, finishing 5th OV and who will be proudly watching the 1600 next weekend from the stands, dissapointed that he's not running, sure, but very satisfied knowing that he laid it all out there on the track, helping to push 4 other kids under 4:20 in order for them to make it thru to the state meet...it was an honest hard fought race with the 4 best runners in that race and on that day, making it thru to the state meet, he knew the deal when he toed the starting line....top 4 advance, finsh 5th, and you watch the state finals from the stands...end of story per the current qualifying state meet process. Here's where the travesty begins thou and why the state qulifying procedure needs reviewed....John Dalton's 5th place finish would have won every other regional 1600 qualifier by nearly 5 seconds, so 7 kids who ran anywhere from 5 seconds to 15 seconds slower (4th place in the East was 4:37) will make it to the state meet having run far slower times so the top 16 times run last weeekend for the 1600 will not be represented next weekend in Greensboro, in fact, the next 4 fastest times run at the East Regional were all well under that 4th place 4:37 run in the West Regional. That's the travesty here, that the state meet really isn't about the top 16 fastest times run at the regionals making to the state meet thus making the state meet a true state chmapionship where the best race against the best, it's a state meet where the top 4 places at the regionals run against eachother, that is what the state track meet is today. So, what is the state meet intended to be? That's the questions that needs debated. As far as my son goes, while his sophomore running season came to an end last Saturday in Cary at the East Regional Track Meet, his running career has only just begun and with the great coaching that he gets at Broughton HS under Coach DC and DC's fantastic crew of coaches, training along side some of the best high school runners in the country, great things will continue to happen for my son and all the rest of the super runners over there at Broughton HS....the future looks very bright for these runenrs over at Broughton HS....see ya next year at the 4A East Regional!
@CoachGeorgeRJR Very good idea about looking into a different qualifying procedure for the state meet if indeed the state meet is about putting the top 16 atheletes in each event against eachother, versus having the top 4 atheltes per region making it to the state meet. If you start with the question about what the state meet is meant to achieve, then the right answers will come thru, they always do. This discussion topic should not be about qulaifying times per se, but more about what the goal of the state meet is intended to achieve.

For the record, it was my son, John Dalton Rohr, sophomore at Broughton HS, that ran the 4:22 last weekend, finishing 5th OV and who will be proudly watching the 1600 next weekend from the stands, dissapointed that he's not running, sure, but very satisfied knowing that he laid it all out there on the track, helping to push 4 other kids under 4:20 in order for them to make it thru to the state meet...it was an honest hard fought race with the 4 best runners in that race and on that day, making it thru to the state meet, he knew the deal when he toed the starting line....top 4 advance, finsh 5th, and you watch the state finals from the stands...end of story per the current qualifying state meet process.

Here's where the travesty begins thou and why the state qulifying procedure needs reviewed....John Dalton's 5th place finish would have won every other regional 1600 qualifier by nearly 5 seconds, so 7 kids who ran anywhere from 5 seconds to 15 seconds slower (4th place in the East was 4:37) will make it to the state meet having run far slower times so the top 16 times run last weeekend for the 1600 will not be represented next weekend in Greensboro, in fact, the next 4 fastest times run at the East Regional were all well under that 4th place 4:37 run in the West Regional. That's the travesty here, that the state meet really isn't about the top 16 fastest times run at the regionals making to the state meet thus making the state meet a true state chmapionship where the best race against the best, it's a state meet where the top 4 places at the regionals run against eachother, that is what the state track meet is today.

So, what is the state meet intended to be? That's the questions that needs debated.

As far as my son goes, while his sophomore running season came to an end last Saturday in Cary at the East Regional Track Meet, his running career has only just begun and with the great coaching that he gets at Broughton HS under Coach DC and DC's fantastic crew of coaches, training along side some of the best high school runners in the country, great things will continue to happen for my son and all the rest of the super runners over there at Broughton HS....the future looks very bright for these runenrs over at Broughton HS....see ya next year at the 4A East Regional!
05/14/2012 11:05:51 AM
User
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 8
I agree with @Elgin – let’s leave the word fair out of the discussion. Every year in nearly every event, there’s a potential state qualifier that does not make it past the regionals. There’s a 3200 runner who is battling the flu; a hurdler whose coach scratches them for disciplinary reasons; a top-seeded discus thrower who gets in foul trouble and fails to qualify; a high jump who ties for fourth but had one more miss at a lower height than the other person; a 4x800 who scratches because their third leg misses the bus; a 200 meter guy who false starts and gets DQ’ed; a long jumper who had the regional qualifying mark who is staying home because they had 3 teammates jump farther that season; a winning 4x100 team DQ’ed because someone wore the wrong shorts. Someone somewhere will get a tough break and just barely miss out no matter what the system.
I agree with @Elgin -- let's leave the word fair out of the discussion. Every year in nearly every event, there's a potential state qualifier that does not make it past the regionals. There's a 3200 runner who is battling the flu; a hurdler whose coach scratches them for disciplinary reasons; a top-seeded discus thrower who gets in foul trouble and fails to qualify; a high jump who ties for fourth but had one more miss at a lower height than the other person; a 4x800 who scratches because their third leg misses the bus; a 200 meter guy who false starts and gets DQ'ed; a long jumper who had the regional qualifying mark who is staying home because they had 3 teammates jump farther that season; a winning 4x100 team DQ'ed because someone wore the wrong shorts.

Someone somewhere will get a tough break and just barely miss out no matter what the system.

You must be logged in to comment.

Click Here to Log In.