(For more info on the rationale of these LEADERBOARDS, check out the All-Class Boys or Girls posts)
Note: For the team
rankings, I didn’t limit it to what teams look to qualify; the
information next to the team scores represent the teams’ position within
their qualifying region/district compared to how many spots to state are
available; times for individuals are included to better express what the
ratings mean. Projected times are set to the Sun Willows 2008-2011
course average.
Notes#2: Cleaned out a
few duplicate runners and corrected cases where two runners with the same name
caused glitches in scoring. Also changed the script to represent where a team
sits in its district, rather than rank district teams by their state score.
Lastly, I also removed meets from before September 22 to keep these
performances all within the last month while including all 2A-4A
League/Conference meets from the last week that had full results on
Athletic.net.
3A Boys Top 25 Individuals –
1. 14:41.28 - Joe Hardy - 11 - Seattle Prep - 202.3
2. 14:43.93 - Taylor (Kai) Wilmot - 11 - North Central - 201.4
3. 15:05.33 - John Dressel - 10 - Mt Spokane - 194.1
4. 15:09.67 - Tanner Anderson - 10 - North Central - 192.7
5. 15:22.35 - Keith Williams - 12 - North Central - 188.4
6. 15:22.83 - Andrew Foerder - 11 - Nathan Hale - 188.2
7. 15:32.52 - Nicholas Hauger - 11 - Shadle Park - 185.0
8. 15:42.29 - Spike Sievert - 12 - Bellevue - 181.7
9. 15:43.19 - Max Leach - 11 - Nathan Hale - 181.4
10. 15:43.38 - Oliver Reed - 11 - North Central - 181.3
11. 15:43.40 - Keenan Piper - 12 - Seattle Prep - 181.3
12. 15:44.97 - Austin Oser - 12 - Kamiakin - 180.8
13. 15:45.38 - Austen Frostad - 12 - North Central - 180.6
14. 15:50.00 - Ahmed Ibrahim - 11 - Kamiakin - 179.1
15. 15:50.39 - Nik Taylor - 12 - North Central - 178.9
16. 15:51.10 - Sam Giner - 12 - Interlake - 178.7
17. 15:54.53 - Keegan McCormick - 11 - Kamiakin - 177.5
18. 15:55.40 - Isaac Kitzan - 12 - North Central - 177.2
19. 15:56.66 - Garrett Kraal - 11 - Kamiakin - 176.8
20. 15:57.47 - Connor Jungkuntz - 12 - Ferndale - 176.5
21. 15:59.35 - Kees von Michalofski - 11 - Mt Spokane - 175.9
22. 16:00.84 - Daniel Brunner - 12 - University - 175.4
23. 16:01.42 - Jack Pearce - 11 - Mountlake Terrace - 175.2
24. 16:01.58 - Henry Morris - 12 - Bishop Blanchet - 175.1
25. 16:01.89 - Stuart Smith - 10 - Nathan Hale - 175.0
3A Boys Top 16 Teams –
1. 34 - North Central - D5-8 #1/3 - 15:20.94
2. 93 - Kamiakin - D5-8 #2/3 - 15:55.81
3. 101 - Nathan Hale - D2 #1/5 - 15:54.21
4. 131 - Seattle Prep - D2 #2/5 - 15:52.66
5. 136 - Mt Spokane - D5-8 #3/3 - 15:59.93
6. 211 - University - D5-8 #4/3 - 16:23.49
7. 226 - Bellevue - D2 #3/5 - 16:25.51
8. 269 - Shadle Park - D5-8 #5/3 - 16:33.04
9. 273 - Bishop Blanchet - D2 #4/5 - 16:37.72
10. 282 - Interlake - D2 #5/5 - 16:37.30
11. 302 - Bainbridge - D2 #6/5 - 16:42.58
12. 309 - Columbia River - D3/4 #1/5 - 16:45.82
13. 324 - Mercer Island - D2 #8/5 - 16:49.54
14. 328 - Liberty-Issaquah - D2 #7/5 - 16:48.84
15. 339 - Ingraham - D2 #9/5 - 16:55.47
16. 366 - Lakeside (Seattle) - D2 #10/5 - 16:55.97
3A Girls Top 25 Individuals –
1. 16:50.38 - Amy-Eloise Neale - 12 - Glacier Peak - 158.7
2. 17:15.60 - Katie Knight - 12 - North Central - 150.1
3. 17:46.52 - Katie Bianchini - 12 - Glacier Peak - 139.7
4. 18:19.76 - Nicole Goecke - 11 - Prairie - 128.5
5. 18:20.86 - Megan Beauchene - 11 - Kamiakin - 128.1
6. 18:26.59 - Andrea Masterson - 10 - Lakeside (Seattle) - 126.2
7. 18:27.91 - Haley Suarez - 12 - Meadowdale - 125.7
8. 18:41.38 - Michelle Fletcher - 12 - Kamiakin - 121.2
9. 18:44.12 - Megan Chucka - 12 - Liberty-Issaquah - 120.2
10. 18:47.80 - Rebecca Delacruz-Gunderson - 11 - Lakeside (Seattle) - 119.0
11. 18:49.35 - McKenzi Bravo - 11 - Peninsula - 118.5
12. 18:51.98 - Emily Kump - 10 - Southridge - 117.6
13. 18:56.66 - Makenna Endebrock - 9 - Mt Spokane - 116.0
14. 19:00.02 - Mikayla Ingram - 11 - Glacier Peak - 114.9
15. 19:02.94 - Moira O'Connor Lenth - 12 - Holy Names Academy - 113.9
16. 19:05.97 - Rachael Lefstad - 12 - Marysville Getchell - 112.8
17. 19:12.39 - Megan Davis - 11 - Glacier Peak - 110.7
18. 19:12.59 - Lindsay Tompkins - 12 - Prairie - 110.6
19. 19:14.18 - Christina Wicker - 12 - Oak Harbor - 110.1
20. 19:15.06 - Gigi Vujovich - 10 - Shorecrest - 109.8
21. 19:17.77 - Lily Engelbrekt - 12 - Bishop Blanchet - 108.9
22. 19:20.49 - Julia Ellings - 12 - Bellevue - 107.9
23. 19:23.40 - Allie Wood - 12 - Liberty-Issaquah - 107.0
24. 19:23.56 - Hallie Whitley - 11 - North Thurston - 106.9
25. 19:23.80 - Leslie Olsen - 12 - Southridge - 106.8
3A Girls Top 16 Teams –
1. 52 - Glacier Peak - D1 #1/3 - 18:27.86
2. 149 - Liberty-Issaquah - D2 #1/5 - 19:34.09
3. 161 - Prairie - D3/4 #1/5 - 19:32.97
4. 175 - Kamiakin - D5-8 #1/3 - 19:32.84
5. 176 - Lakeside (Seattle) - D2 #2/5 - 19:34.97
6. 188 - Peninsula - D3/4 #2/5 - 19:46.23
7. 213 - Shadle Park - D5-8 #3/3 - 19:57.79
8. 215 - Mt Spokane - D5-8 #2/3 - 19:54.55
9. 215 - Interlake - D2 #5/5 - 19:59.02
10. 230 - Mercer Island - D2 #4/5 - 20:02.09
11. 232 - Bishop Blanchet - D2 #3/5 - 20:03.66
12. 264 - University - D5-8 #4/3 - 20:13.72
13. 268 - Oak Harbor - D1 #2/3 - 20:11.12
14. 284 - Enumclaw - D3/4 #3/5 - 20:17.48
15. 307 - Stanwood - D1 #3/3 - 20:24.35
16. 309 - North Central - D5-8 #5/3 - 20:06.47
I am curious - what do you do to convert the times that have actually been run to the Sun Willows course?
ReplyDeleteTime the time (in seconds), divide by the course adjustment for that race, multiply by the course adjustment for the Sun Willows 2008-2011 average.
DeleteSo, for example... say a runner runs a 16:00 on a course with an adjustment of 200.0 ~ 14:40. I'd divide 16:00 (960) by 14:40 (880) and then multiply by the Sun Willows average (14:48 / 888) to get 16:08.xx.
So I take it your course adjustments are in seconds, and are based on ...? Are you comparing them to Sun WIllows as the reference course? Are you using the median times reported in Athletic.net? So many questions, I know, but I have been attempting to do something similar myself for the past few years and am interested in comparing notes.
ReplyDeleteThe long explanation:
DeleteI use a variety of methods. My favored one:
It starts by being based on how runners compare from course to course post-season (State - NXR - NXN), where the real tricky part is figuring out the differences at NXN every year (it varies greatly due to the weather/course conditions). But once you get a good feel for how NXN compares, you can run a regression on how all the qualified athletes do at NXN Regionals, take out the statistical outliers until there are none remaining, and you can get an estimate of the average speed of the course. Over the course of a few years, you get enough data points to get a pretty good general idea of how the regional courses compare, and from there you can look at how the state meet courses compare (for states that use the same course each year with very little variation). You can then move backwards from the state meet using the same rationale, and once you get into the pre-qualifying season you can look (with less accuracy) at how invitational courses might compare as long as you account for week-to-week progression as teams head towards their peak.
Knowing how times stack up from the championship season (State/NXR/NXN), plus what kids run in track, give you an idea of where kids should be the following season given average progression. However, kids aren't going to always start off at the same point in their training (especially due to different teams with different training regimens), so you can't take too much from early season results. But once kids have started to run on more well-known courses, you can use the same process as mentioned before to account for differences in courses as long as races are run fairly close together (I prefer looking at the past 2-3 weeks, though sometimes I have to go beyond that).
Another method is the one favored by Bill Meylan at Tullyrunners. He has some pretty good articles on his website describing his methods of graphing races (and my way is quite similar, though not exactly so).
Some examples of his most applicable excellent articles:
http://tullyrunners.com/Data/Articles/XcSpeedStuff.htm
http://tullyrunners.com/Data/Articles/Misconcept.htm
http://tullyrunners.com/Data/Articles/refrunner.htm
http://tullyrunners.com/Data/Articles/artgraph.htm
Or, the shorter answer:
DeleteI do not use Sun Willows as a reference course. I did at one point, but that was before the NXN regionals (and especially once there had been multiple years of regionals, so that there was enough data to give a very solid idea of how those regional courses compare). The NXN system 2007+ drastically helps gauge how fast/slow courses run due to the volume of runners running on those courses plus their state meet courses (and from state qualifying courses before that, though I understand that the top few teams don't always run hard and instead just run to qualify knowing they should by all means move on -- but that isn't the majority of teams, and that leaves those marks mostly being removed during the statistical outliers process).
What I do is look at how runners A, B, C, etc. run at race #1 and race #2.
And I also check with how the course for race #1 has seemed to run in the past.
And I also, when I have time (or when I can't use the first method) graph races to see how they compare to similar races I have a good feel for already (through both processes #1 and 2).
Thanks for the explanation and references!
Delete