{"comments":{"1175648":{"pb_id":"43675","pb_type":"members","likes":"0","parent_id":"0","pid":"1175648","comment_id":"1175648","member_id":"43675","comment":"

<\/a>palimmer, on , said:<\/p>

\nSt. Anthonys ran the third fastest five man average ( 16:14 ) at the NY Fed meet demolishing the field....only FM (2012) was faster I believe....faster than any of those super CBA teams
<\/div><\/div>
\n
\nBowdoin Park<\/span> - Boys Top Team Averages
\n 16:02.4 - NXN-New York 2013 - Fayetteville-Manlius
\n 16:10.0 - NXN-New York 2013 - Northport
\n 16:14.5 - NY Federation 2014 - St. Anthony's
\n 16:14.64- Bowdoin Classic 2012 - CBA NJ
\n 16:15.0 - NXN-Northeast 2013 - CBA NJ
\n 16:15.2 - NY Federation 2004 - Fayetteville-Manlius
\n 16:21.5 - NXN-New York 2013 - Liverpool
\n
\nAs a side-note ... Boy Individuals - 28 of 50 fastest times ever run at Bowdoin Park have been run in 2012, 2013 or 2014 ... Just a comment (not evaluating anything).","date_added":"Nov 19th 2014, 3:14pm","nest":0,"liked":false,"member":[],"can_delete":false,"item_id":299037,"item_type":"news","pb_image":"i\/no_avatar.png","pb_title":"Bill Meylan","pb_url":"profile.php?member_id=43675","pb_url_dns":"https:\/\/Bill-Meylan.runnerspace.com\/","pb_wally_id":"1073444"},"1175624":{"pb_id":"5691","pb_type":"members","likes":"0","parent_id":"0","pid":"1175624","comment_id":"1175624","member_id":"5691","comment":"PL,
\nCBA opened up the 2012 season with a 16:14.
\nSounds like a great race by a great St. Anthony's team. Should be an awesome NXN NY Boys race next weekend!
\nCheers,
\nCB","date_added":"Nov 19th 2014, 1:02pm","nest":0,"liked":false,"member":[],"can_delete":false,"item_id":299037,"item_type":"news","pb_image":"\/\/www.runnerspace.com\/forum\/uploads\/av-5691.png","pb_title":"Coach Bennett","pb_url":"profile.php?member_id=5691","pb_url_dns":"https:\/\/bennett.runnerspace.com\/","pb_wally_id":"2546"},"1175103":{"pb_id":"3357","pb_type":"members","likes":"0","parent_id":"0","pid":"1175103","comment_id":"1175103","member_id":"3357","comment":"St. Anthonys ran the third fastest five man average ( 16:14 ) at the NY Fed meet demolishing the field....only FM (2012) was faster I believe....faster than any of those super CBA teams","date_added":"Nov 18th 2014, 8:29pm","nest":0,"liked":false,"member":[],"can_delete":false,"item_id":299037,"item_type":"news","pb_image":"i\/no_avatar.gif","pb_title":"palimmer","pb_url":"profile.php?member_id=3357","pb_url_dns":"https:\/\/palimmer.runnerspace.com\/","pb_wally_id":"4758"},"1175102":{"pb_id":"3357","pb_type":"members","likes":"0","parent_id":"0","pid":"1175102","comment_id":"1175102","member_id":"3357","comment":"St. Anthonys ran the third fastest five man average ( 16:14 ) at the NY Fed meet demolishing the field....only FM (2012) was faster I believe....faster than any of those super CBA teams","date_added":"Nov 18th 2014, 8:28pm","nest":0,"liked":false,"member":[],"can_delete":false,"item_id":299037,"item_type":"news","pb_image":"i\/no_avatar.gif","pb_title":"palimmer","pb_url":"profile.php?member_id=3357","pb_url_dns":"https:\/\/palimmer.runnerspace.com\/","pb_wally_id":"4758"},"1174429":{"pb_id":"9184","pb_type":"members","likes":"0","parent_id":"0","pid":"1174429","comment_id":"1174429","member_id":"9184","comment":"

<\/a>Doug Soles, on , said:<\/p>

Like I said I think the issue is teams that are peaked for their state meet vs. teams that are cruising meets and training hard for their peak at a later time comparatively.<\/div><\/div>
\n
\nOut of curiosity -- because I, like watchout (but to a much lesser extent), try to rank local teams based on how they've performed across different courses and at different times -- how would you propose accounting for that? On the one hand, you can rely on the data and rank teams exactly how the crunched numbers suggest. On the other, you can attempt to adjust things based on hunches that a team didn't go all out. Wouldn't the latter be exactly what several are accusing watchout of, i.e., letting personal bias sneak into the rankings?
\n
\nDan","date_added":"Nov 17th 2014, 9:32pm","nest":0,"liked":false,"member":[],"can_delete":false,"item_id":299037,"item_type":"news","pb_image":"members\/avatar\/3295.jpg","pb_title":"dkap","pb_url":"profile.php?member_id=9184","pb_url_dns":"https:\/\/dkap.runnerspace.com\/","pb_wally_id":"10044"},"1172398":{"pb_id":"10145","pb_type":"members","likes":"0","parent_id":"0","pid":"1172398","comment_id":"1172398","member_id":"10145","comment":"

<\/a>watchout, on , said:<\/p>

\nWouldn't I be "discounting the success that teams are having" if I DON'T reward teams for getting better during the season?
\n
\nYes, you guys beat Summit - by quite a bit - at NPN. That was 7 weeks ago, they have improved enough that they would at least (with Maton) give you a run for your money with how good you guys were back then; at the same time, you guys aren't running as well as you were back then, so why should I give you guys the benefit of doubt but not Summit?
\n
\nThese rankings are about how things look RIGHT NOW, based on how runners have run this year - most specifically, how well they've done in the last few weeks. If Summit has been running better than you guys over the last month, why shouldn't they sneak past you in the rankings - despite any team result from nearly 2 months ago?
\n
\nEDIT: For a more complete explanation of Great Oak vs. Summit... here's a look at my ratings for Great Oak @ NPN and your last 2 major meets (Clovis & Mt. SAC) compared to Summit's last 2 meets (OR State and NXN-NW).
\n
\nGO @ Pre-Nationals: 191.1-190.7-183.6-179.0-175.8
\n
\nGO @ Mt SAC Invite: 192.6-188.4-179.1-178.9-168.1
\nGO @ Clovis Invite: 187.7-180.6-179.8-179.5-173.1
\n
\n Summit @ OR State: 202.0-182.8-182.5-179.1-177.4
\nSummit @ Northwest: (DNS)-183.1-182.3-179.1-173.9 (ratings could be a couple points higher, but these look reasonable to me)
\n
\n
\nWhat that shows to me: Summit is, over the last 3 weeks, running just about as well as Great Oak did at their best race this year: the only big differences are at #1 (edge to Summit, though not huge scoring-wise) and #2 (edge to Great Oak, with a notable difference scoring wise), though Summit also has a slight edge at #5 (though not enough to make up for the deficit at #2 in elite fields like NXN). That implies to me that, if both teams ran just as well as their best team races to date, it would be a close race - Great Oak probably having the edge. But when you look at how the two teams have compared recently, it's another story: Great Oak hasn't quite run as well as they were previously, which means Summit has the edge.
\n
\nSo, what is more important: how well a team is running now\/recently, or how well a team was running back in September? My rankings favor recent results over team scores from back in September, because I think it's MUCH more telling of how good a team is right now, and because I think ranking teams based on how good they are right now is more important than lining up with how things looked on a specific day 2 months ago.
<\/div><\/div>
\n
\nThanks Watchout,
\n
\nIt helps to see the breakdown. Like I said I think the issue is teams that are peaked for their state meet vs. teams that are cruising meets and training hard for their peak at a later time comparatively. Definitely hard to rank people from different parts of the country, who are focused on different types of races at different times. We will have our hands full just getting out of California so this may all be moot anyway. I appreciate your time. :)
\n
\nDoug","date_added":"Nov 17th 2014, 2:43am","nest":0,"liked":false,"member":[],"can_delete":false,"item_id":299037,"item_type":"news","pb_image":"i\/no_avatar.png","pb_title":"Doug Soles","pb_url":"profile.php?member_id=10145","pb_url_dns":"https:\/\/Doug-Soles.runnerspace.com\/","pb_wally_id":"12696"},"1172388":{"pb_id":"45158","pb_type":"members","likes":"0","parent_id":"0","pid":"1172388","comment_id":"1172388","member_id":"45158","comment":"I know enough about xc that no team runs it's best race of the season in September ... sure a team can dominate early season vs teams that build steam as the season progresses, so it looks like they've peaked too soon, but even those early peakers are still progressing, just not as much as the competition. Idk what the numbers are telling the people who do rankings. Maybe they over valued your early season races or are under valuing your recent races. Maybe you're training through recent meets. Maybe you're killing it in practices (which rankers can't rank lol). But Coach Soles, I'm sure you're going to do just fine finishing the season.
\n
\nOne thing Coach Soles did ask for which nobody gave an answer, who is his biggest competition?","date_added":"Nov 17th 2014, 2:14am","nest":0,"liked":false,"member":[],"can_delete":false,"item_id":299037,"item_type":"news","pb_image":"i\/no_avatar.png","pb_title":"DontStopPre","pb_url":"profile.php?member_id=45158","pb_url_dns":"https:\/\/www.runnerspace.com\/profile.php?member_id=45158","pb_wally_id":"1182171"},"1172338":{"pb_id":"43715","pb_type":"members","likes":"0","parent_id":"0","pid":"1172338","comment_id":"1172338","member_id":"43715","comment":"

<\/a>Doug Soles, on , said:<\/p>

\nI agree with you. I think many of the teams in the top 40 would give us a good race. I actually think Wayzata at #20 would probably beat us, that is why I'm trying to understand the logic behind it. I get Watchout's formula, etc. but I think the biggest issue for me is that the simple math of it is discounting the success that teams are having. Who has beaten Wayzata? Great Oak? I think to move a team in front of us that we have beaten pretty handily (with or without Maton) isn't a very logical thing to do. I'm just trying to understand how that makes sense so I can really understand how we stack up. The funny thing is I'm less worried about where we sit currently than I am trying to define who is truly better than us and why. Who are the teams that we are racing when it matters...if that makes sense.
\n
\nWatchout does an awesome job, no doubt. I think there is clearly a Northwest bias, as much as there is an East Coast bias from some of the other rankers. I think that is normal based on what you see live and in person and how much it impresses you. The next 3 weeks should be interesting for all. :)
\n
\nDoug
<\/div><\/div>
\n
\nWouldn't I be "discounting the success that teams are having" if I DON'T reward teams for getting better during the season?
\n
\nYes, you guys beat Summit - by quite a bit - at NPN. That was 7 weeks ago, they have improved enough that they would at least (with Maton) give you a run for your money with how good you guys were back then; at the same time, you guys aren't running as well as you were back then, so why should I give you guys the benefit of doubt but not Summit?
\n
\nThese rankings are about how things look RIGHT NOW, based on how runners have run this year - most specifically, how well they've done in the last few weeks. If Summit has been running better than you guys over the last month, why shouldn't they sneak past you in the rankings - despite any team result from nearly 2 months ago?
\n
\nEDIT: For a more complete explanation of Great Oak vs. Summit... here's a look at my ratings for Great Oak @ NPN and your last 2 major meets (Clovis & Mt. SAC) compared to Summit's last 2 meets (OR State and NXN-NW).
\n
\nGO @ Pre-Nationals: 191.1-190.7-183.6-179.0-175.8
\n
\nGO @ Mt SAC Invite: 192.6-188.4-179.1-178.9-168.1
\nGO @ Clovis Invite: 187.7-180.6-179.8-179.5-173.1
\n
\n Summit @ OR State: 202.0-182.8-182.5-179.1-177.4
\nSummit @ Northwest: (DNS)-183.1-182.3-179.1-173.9 (ratings could be a couple points higher, but these look reasonable to me)
\n
\n
\nWhat that shows to me: Summit is, over the last 3 weeks, running just about as well as Great Oak did at their best race this year: the only big differences are at #1 (edge to Summit, though not huge scoring-wise) and #2 (edge to Great Oak, with a notable difference scoring wise), though Summit also has a slight edge at #5 (though not enough to make up for the deficit at #2 in elite fields like NXN). That implies to me that, if both teams ran just as well as their best team races to date, it would be a close race - Great Oak probably having the edge. But when you look at how the two teams have compared recently, it's another story: Great Oak hasn't quite run as well as they were previously, which means Summit has the edge.
\n
\nSo, what is more important: how well a team is running now\/recently, or how well a team was running back in September? My rankings favor recent results over team scores from back in September, because I think it's MUCH more telling of how good a team is right now, and because I think ranking teams based on how good they are right now is more important than lining up with how things looked on a specific day 2 months ago.","date_added":"Nov 17th 2014, 1:11am","nest":0,"liked":false,"member":[],"can_delete":false,"item_id":299037,"item_type":"news","pb_image":"\/\/www.runnerspace.com\/forum\/uploads\/av-43715.jpg","pb_title":"watchout","pb_url":"profile.php?member_id=43715","pb_url_dns":"https:\/\/www.runnerspace.com\/profile.php?member_id=43715","pb_wally_id":"1073498"},"1172314":{"pb_id":"10145","pb_type":"members","likes":"0","parent_id":"0","pid":"1172314","comment_id":"1172314","member_id":"10145","comment":"

<\/a>cerutty fan, on , said:<\/p>

\nSpencer Dodds went backwards dramatically at the Mt. SAC Invite (ran 15:30 after showing 14:55 equivalent fitness at Clovis) and has slid slightly further back each race since, running 15:36 at league finals (equal to about 15:56 at Mt. SAC) and then 16:08 on the Mt. SAC course for prelims yesterday. I know that is only league finals and prelims, but it makes you guys look pretty vulnerable. I had heard that twittergram said he had bronchitis AND got a concussion just before the Mt. SAC Invite, is that true? Is he OK? You obviously know more about his situation than I would, but unless he rebounds or has been tempoing races for some reason, it looks like he won't be in the top 2-3 when you run your full squad.
\n
\nMt. SAC and Clovis estimates
\n14:45 - 15:10 - Doan
\n15:00 - 15:28 - Cortes
\n15:15 - 15:44 - Spencer
\n15:30 - 15:59 - Arvizu
\n??:?? - ??:?? - Dodds
\n??:?? - ??:?? - Quintana, Fountain, Eipp, Ruiz, Combe, Tibbitts?
\n
\nIf Dodds comes back and runs what he did already at Clovis, 15:21, and the other guys run the times above you'll qualify for NXN and do well (whether that is top 5 or top 15, i really have no idea; don't know teams outside of SoCal). Without him, you might have a couple teams sneak by you at State and only be taking the girls to NXN unless one of the big young talents like Quintana or Fountain really mans up. Like you said, the next 3 weeks will be interesting indeed!
<\/div><\/div>
\n
\nYes Spencer had a those issues and has been working back from them. He is looking good in workouts, and cruised prelims preparing to run fast at State and beyond. He will be fine when it matters. CIF Prelims is probably the biggest illusion race out there because some teams are just cruising and others are all out and so it skews things a bit. Unfortunately, Solomon Fountain badly twisted his ankle and had to end his season to focus on getting it healthy so he will not be back for xc until next year. Trust me, we are not over looking any team in the D1 SS ranks. Anyone can have a great day at any time.","date_added":"Nov 17th 2014, 1:07am","nest":0,"liked":false,"member":[],"can_delete":false,"item_id":299037,"item_type":"news","pb_image":"i\/no_avatar.png","pb_title":"Doug Soles","pb_url":"profile.php?member_id=10145","pb_url_dns":"https:\/\/Doug-Soles.runnerspace.com\/","pb_wally_id":"12696"},"1172296":{"pb_id":"50627","pb_type":"members","likes":"0","parent_id":"0","pid":"1172296","comment_id":"1172296","member_id":"50627","comment":"

<\/a>Doug Soles, on , said:<\/p>

\nThe funny thing is I'm less worried about where we sit currently than I am trying to define who is truly better than us and why. Who are the teams that we are racing when it matters...if that makes sense.
\n
\nWatchout does an awesome job, no doubt. I think there is clearly a Northwest bias, as much as there is an East Coast bias from some of the other rankers. I think that is normal based on what you see live and in person and how much it impresses you. The next 3 weeks should be interesting for all. :)
\n
\nDoug
<\/div><\/div>
\n
\nSpencer Dodds went backwards dramatically at the Mt. SAC Invite (ran 15:30 after showing 14:55 equivalent fitness at Clovis) and has slid slightly further back each race since, running 15:36 at league finals (equal to about 15:56 at Mt. SAC) and then 16:08 on the Mt. SAC course for prelims yesterday. I know that is only league finals and prelims, but it makes you guys look pretty vulnerable. I had heard that twittergram said he had bronchitis AND got a concussion just before the Mt. SAC Invite, is that true? Is he OK? You obviously know more about his situation than I would, but unless he rebounds or has been tempoing races for some reason, it looks like he won't be in the top 2-3 when you run your full squad.
\n
\nMt. SAC and Clovis estimates
\n14:45 - 15:10 - Doan
\n15:00 - 15:28 - Cortes
\n15:15 - 15:44 - Spencer
\n15:30 - 15:59 - Arvizu
\n??:?? - ??:?? - Dodds
\n??:?? - ??:?? - Quintana, Fountain, Eipp, Ruiz, Combe, Tibbitts?
\n
\nIf Dodds comes back and runs what he did already at Clovis, 15:21, and the other guys run the times above you'll qualify for NXN and do well (whether that is top 5 or top 15, i really have no idea; don't know teams outside of SoCal). Without him, you might have a couple teams sneak by you at State and only be taking the girls to NXN unless one of the big young talents like Quintana or Fountain really mans up. Like you said, the next 3 weeks will be interesting indeed!","date_added":"Nov 17th 2014, 12:44am","nest":0,"liked":false,"member":[],"can_delete":false,"item_id":299037,"item_type":"news","pb_image":"i\/no_avatar.png","pb_title":"cerutty fan","pb_url":"profile.php?member_id=50627","pb_url_dns":"https:\/\/www.runnerspace.com\/profile.php?member_id=50627","pb_wally_id":"1212787"},"1172251":{"pb_id":"10145","pb_type":"members","likes":"0","parent_id":"0","pid":"1172251","comment_id":"1172251","member_id":"10145","comment":"

<\/a>DontStopPre, on , said:<\/p>

\nMy take on it is you're undefeated and ranked 6th in the nation with a couple meets to go before you peak ... I'd say you're in a perfect position, why worry at this point where someone ranks you. Having said that, I appreciate you're position, you've built a program that you're passionate about and you want to advocate for your kids, and you feel some others haven't fully appreciated your accomplishments. I get that, just keep in mind other programs would love to have your problem. Plus there's very little difference between the nationally top ranked teams. Plus ranking teams is a difficult and thankless job.
<\/div><\/div>
\n
\nI agree with you. I think many of the teams in the top 40 would give us a good race. I actually think Wayzata at #20 would probably beat us, that is why I'm trying to understand the logic behind it. I get Watchout's formula, etc. but I think the biggest issue for me is that the simple math of it is discounting the success that teams are having. Who has beaten Wayzata? Great Oak? I think to move a team in front of us that we have beaten pretty handily (with or without Maton) isn't a very logical thing to do. I'm just trying to understand how that makes sense so I can really understand how we stack up. The funny thing is I'm less worried about where we sit currently than I am trying to define who is truly better than us and why. Who are the teams that we are racing when it matters...if that makes sense.
\n
\nWatchout does an awesome job, no doubt. I think there is clearly a Northwest bias, as much as there is an East Coast bias from some of the other rankers. I think that is normal based on what you see live and in person and how much it impresses you. The next 3 weeks should be interesting for all. :)
\n
\nDoug","date_added":"Nov 16th 2014, 11:55pm","nest":0,"liked":false,"member":[],"can_delete":false,"item_id":299037,"item_type":"news","pb_image":"i\/no_avatar.png","pb_title":"Doug Soles","pb_url":"profile.php?member_id=10145","pb_url_dns":"https:\/\/Doug-Soles.runnerspace.com\/","pb_wally_id":"12696"},"1172224":{"pb_id":"45158","pb_type":"members","likes":"0","parent_id":"0","pid":"1172224","comment_id":"1172224","member_id":"45158","comment":"

<\/a>Doug Soles, on , said:<\/p>

\nI appreciate the reply. I think national rankings are tough when some teams are at State or post season races and others are at league finals or prelims type races where you cruise through. I think one thing that is difficult is kind of like TCU\/Baylor in the college football polls. Baylor beat TCU but TCU is still ahead of Baylor. Not logical, but yet it is still there.
\n
\nI think the hard part is we have beaten 16 of the top 40 ranked teams, haven't lost a race including 4 major invites, scored a perfect 15 at our league finals, and dropped. I guess I'm just not seeing the logic of it. Hopefully we will make NXN and have a chance to race head to head. Again.
<\/div><\/div>
\n
\nMy take on it is you're undefeated and ranked 6th in the nation with a couple meets to go before you peak ... I'd say you're in a perfect position, why worry at this point where someone ranks you. Having said that, I appreciate you're position, you've built a program that you're passionate about and you want to advocate for your kids, and you feel some others haven't fully appreciated your accomplishments. I get that, just keep in mind other programs would love to have your problem. Plus there's very little difference between the nationally top ranked teams. Plus ranking teams is a difficult and thankless job.","date_added":"Nov 16th 2014, 11:25pm","nest":0,"liked":false,"member":[],"can_delete":false,"item_id":299037,"item_type":"news","pb_image":"i\/no_avatar.png","pb_title":"DontStopPre","pb_url":"profile.php?member_id=45158","pb_url_dns":"https:\/\/www.runnerspace.com\/profile.php?member_id=45158","pb_wally_id":"1182171"},"1172170":{"pb_id":"10145","pb_type":"members","likes":"0","parent_id":"0","pid":"1172170","comment_id":"1172170","member_id":"10145","comment":"

<\/a>watchout, on , said:<\/p>

\nIt's pretty much what cerruty fan already posted, Summit has improved since NPN and ran their best race at OR State. You can see with his OR State -> Clovis estimates that Summit isn't quite the same caliber team as they were early on. Also, doesn't help that NPN was GO's best boys race this year and that was 7 weeks ago (so not the most influential in the rankings at the moment).
<\/div><\/div>
\n
\nI appreciate the reply. I think national rankings are tough when some teams are at State or post season races and others are at league finals or prelims type races where you cruise through. I think one thing that is difficult is kind of like TCU\/Baylor in the college football polls. Baylor beat TCU but TCU is still ahead of Baylor. Not logical, but yet it is still there.
\n
\nI think the hard part is we have beaten 16 of the top 40 ranked teams, haven't lost a race including 4 major invites, scored a perfect 15 at our league finals, and dropped. I guess I'm just not seeing the logic of it. Hopefully we will make NXN and have a chance to race head to head. Again.","date_added":"Nov 16th 2014, 10:54pm","nest":0,"liked":false,"member":[],"can_delete":false,"item_id":299037,"item_type":"news","pb_image":"i\/no_avatar.png","pb_title":"Doug Soles","pb_url":"profile.php?member_id=10145","pb_url_dns":"https:\/\/Doug-Soles.runnerspace.com\/","pb_wally_id":"12696"},"1172102":{"pb_id":"71656","pb_type":"members","likes":"0","parent_id":"0","pid":"1172102","comment_id":"1172102","member_id":"71656","comment":"Many of us are confused as to why Wayzata drops to 20th spot after breaking the Heartland team average record by over 10 seconds. Their 1,3, and 5 runners had off days and they were still able to win the region with relative ease. They return 6\/7 from last year's nationals team and 20th seems a little ridiculous.","date_added":"Nov 16th 2014, 9:00pm","nest":0,"liked":false,"member":[],"can_delete":false,"item_id":299037,"item_type":"news","pb_image":"i\/no_avatar.png","pb_title":"beetjuice","pb_url":"profile.php?member_id=71656","pb_url_dns":"https:\/\/beetjuice.runnerspace.com\/","pb_wally_id":"1588122"},"1171750":{"pb_id":"43715","pb_type":"members","likes":"0","parent_id":"0","pid":"1171750","comment_id":"1171750","member_id":"43715","comment":"

<\/a>Bundang Social Club, on , said:<\/p>

\nWatchout, any reason why Lafayette MO isn't ranked?
\n
\nThey crushed Festus in the merge (http:\/\/mo.milesplit....\/results\/340693<\/a>). I don't follow MO too closely, but the performance certainly looked impressive. Would've guessed they're a top 15 or 20 type team.
<\/div><\/div>
\n
\nWow, looks like I made a mistake for all the Midwest teams that had state meets last weekend and added weighting to their state qualifying meet rather than their state meet (which would drop some teams down the rankings, and boost some teams up). You are right, Lafayette should have made the rankings (not cracking the top 20, but somewhere around Severna Park)...
\n
\nReally sorry I didn't notice that error before.","date_added":"Nov 16th 2014, 12:02pm","nest":0,"liked":false,"member":[],"can_delete":false,"item_id":299037,"item_type":"news","pb_image":"\/\/www.runnerspace.com\/forum\/uploads\/av-43715.jpg","pb_title":"watchout","pb_url":"profile.php?member_id=43715","pb_url_dns":"https:\/\/www.runnerspace.com\/profile.php?member_id=43715","pb_wally_id":"1073498"},"1171748":{"pb_id":"71621","pb_type":"members","likes":"0","parent_id":"0","pid":"1171748","comment_id":"1171748","member_id":"71621","comment":"Watchout, any reason why Lafayette MO isn't ranked?
\n
\nThey crushed Festus in the merge (http:\/\/mo.milesplit....\/results\/340693<\/a>). I don't follow MO too closely, but the performance certainly looked impressive. Would've guessed they're a top 15 or 20 type team.
\n
\nEDIT: And they all come back next year! (SO, JR, JR, JR, SO)
\nShades of La Salle 2013?","date_added":"Nov 16th 2014, 11:51am","nest":0,"liked":false,"member":[],"can_delete":false,"item_id":299037,"item_type":"news","pb_image":"https:\/\/fbcdn-profile-a.akamaihd.net\/hprofile-ak-xpa1\/v\/t1.0-1\/p50x50\/10653576_10154711662425171_2257460285295047970_n.jpg?oh=347b9ad0266edf2e1d2b707a0e74ac4a&oe=54FD97A9&__gda__=1426471700_6315d79581d7decf6669e268e9f23c6a","pb_title":"Bundang Social Club","pb_url":"profile.php?member_id=71621","pb_url_dns":"https:\/\/Bundang-Social-Club.runnerspace.com\/","pb_wally_id":"1587575"},"1170053":{"pb_id":"43715","pb_type":"members","likes":"0","parent_id":"0","pid":"1170053","comment_id":"1170053","member_id":"43715","comment":"

<\/a>cerutty fan, on , said:<\/p>

\nHa! Also, Summit is in the northwest, so they are dearer to his heart than you lowly SoCal folks. I'm still trying to figure out how Clovis North is ranked above Brea-Olinda, Canyon and Claremont. Canyon (175 pts) and Claremont (178 pts) beat Clovis (259 pts) at the Clovis Invitational pretty handily a month ago, and Brea-Olinda has beat Canyon 3 times this season, albeit by a narrow margin each time.
<\/div><\/div>
\n
\nFunny, I remember not too long ago when everyone seemed to think I was way too pro-California. :P
\n
\nClovis North: I don't think they ran particularly well at Clovis. Their race was better at Bella Vista across the board, and they were also more impressive than their Clovis race at the Clovis North invite (though that was a 2 mile flighted race, they looked as good as Madera South that day: 9:17-9:36; 9:32-9:47; 9:49-9:50 vs. 9:08-9:12; 9:30-9:51; 10:01-10:07 ... obviously much stronger than they looked at Clovis as their #6 was slightly faster than Madera South's #4, while at Clovis their #2 was barely ahead of Madera South's #4)
\n
\nBTW, thanks for posting the OR State vs. Clovis comparison. I actually had a little less than usual difference between Clovis and OR State (I think Clovis ran slow that day - heat? wind? I don't know the reason, but I only had a 7 second difference for those races rather than my usual ~15)","date_added":"Nov 15th 2014, 2:16am","nest":0,"liked":false,"member":[],"can_delete":false,"item_id":299037,"item_type":"news","pb_image":"\/\/www.runnerspace.com\/forum\/uploads\/av-43715.jpg","pb_title":"watchout","pb_url":"profile.php?member_id=43715","pb_url_dns":"https:\/\/www.runnerspace.com\/profile.php?member_id=43715","pb_wally_id":"1073498"},"1170048":{"pb_id":"43715","pb_type":"members","likes":"0","parent_id":"0","pid":"1170048","comment_id":"1170048","member_id":"43715","comment":"

<\/a>Doug Soles, on , said:<\/p>

\nHi Watchout,
\n
\nI'm not complaining as the rankings just give us an idea of where we are at, but how\/where is summit coming out better than us in this rankings set vs. the others. Looking at NPN, they must have made some amazing jumps and we must have taken some major steps back somewhere? Can you elaborate?
\n
\nThank you,
\n
\nDoug
<\/div><\/div>
\n
\nIt's pretty much what cerruty fan already posted, Summit has improved since NPN and ran their best race at OR State. You can see with his OR State -> Clovis estimates that Summit isn't quite the same caliber team as they were early on. Also, doesn't help that NPN was GO's best boys race this year and that was 7 weeks ago (so not the most influential in the rankings at the moment).","date_added":"Nov 15th 2014, 2:02am","nest":0,"liked":false,"member":[],"can_delete":false,"item_id":299037,"item_type":"news","pb_image":"\/\/www.runnerspace.com\/forum\/uploads\/av-43715.jpg","pb_title":"watchout","pb_url":"profile.php?member_id=43715","pb_url_dns":"https:\/\/www.runnerspace.com\/profile.php?member_id=43715","pb_wally_id":"1073498"},"1170036":{"pb_id":"43715","pb_type":"members","likes":"0","parent_id":"0","pid":"1170036","comment_id":"1170036","member_id":"43715","comment":"

<\/a>GeorgieTheK, on , said:<\/p>

\nI think we've pretty much established at this point that the rankings are done to generate controversy (as opposed to discussion), with the criteria pretty much being what watchout thinks they should be this week.
<\/div><\/div>
\n
\nWow Georgie, why don't you tell us how you really feel?
\n
\nWhat is your problem with the rankings? I can think of a few possibilities, but let me know which it is that is bothering you:
\n
\n1. CBA is ranked ahead of St. Anthony's
\n2. CBA isn't ranked high enough
\n3. CBA dropped in the rankings after Manhattan
\n4. FM isn't ahead of AF
\n5. Something I'm not thinking of?","date_added":"Nov 15th 2014, 1:59am","nest":0,"liked":false,"member":[],"can_delete":false,"item_id":299037,"item_type":"news","pb_image":"\/\/www.runnerspace.com\/forum\/uploads\/av-43715.jpg","pb_title":"watchout","pb_url":"profile.php?member_id=43715","pb_url_dns":"https:\/\/www.runnerspace.com\/profile.php?member_id=43715","pb_wally_id":"1073498"},"1170009":{"pb_id":"50627","pb_type":"members","likes":"0","parent_id":"0","pid":"1170009","comment_id":"1170009","member_id":"50627","comment":"

<\/a>GeorgieTheK, on , said:<\/p>

\nI think we've pretty much established at this point that the rankings are done to generate controversy (as opposed to discussion), with the criteria pretty much being what watchout thinks they should be this week.
<\/div><\/div>
\n
\nHa! Also, Summit is in the northwest, so they are dearer to his heart than you lowly SoCal folks. I'm still trying to figure out how Clovis North is ranked above Brea-Olinda, Canyon and Claremont. Canyon (175 pts) and Claremont (178 pts) beat Clovis (259 pts) at the Clovis Invitational pretty handily a month ago, and Brea-Olinda has beat Canyon 3 times this season, albeit by a narrow margin each time.
\n
\nAt NPN, if you put Maton in and say he scores 1 pt, that puts Summit around 128 pts and Great Oak around 68 pts. They ran really well at their state meet, which appears to run about 10-15 seconds slower than the CA state meet course. Of course their ranking is skewed moving forward since Maton is no longer running with his team, but with him in there they are certainly phenomenal.
\n
\nIf the conversion of 10-15 seconds is correct from the OR state course to CA, it'd look like this at Clovis (using 12 seconds).
\n
\n01. 14:33 - Maton
\n16. 15:30 - Martin
\n19. 15:31 - Fykerud
\n31. 15:41 - Jones
\n40. 15:46 - Merlos
\n45. 15:52 - Schoderbeck
\n78. 16:12 - Sjogren
\n
\nObviously GO ran Clovis a month ago and Summit ran their best very recently, but if that conversion is right then Summit may have won Clovis IF they put forth an identical effort to what they did at State with Maton. Without Maton they are about 20 points behind GO, again, with the unfair assumption they could have raced as well at Clovis as they did at their state meet.
\n
\nSummit really has a legit team, even without Maton.","date_added":"Nov 15th 2014, 12:53am","nest":0,"liked":false,"member":[],"can_delete":false,"item_id":299037,"item_type":"news","pb_image":"i\/no_avatar.png","pb_title":"cerutty fan","pb_url":"profile.php?member_id=50627","pb_url_dns":"https:\/\/www.runnerspace.com\/profile.php?member_id=50627","pb_wally_id":"1212787"},"1169935":{"pb_id":"9184","pb_type":"members","likes":"0","parent_id":"0","pid":"1169935","comment_id":"1169935","member_id":"9184","comment":"

<\/a>Doug Soles, on , said:<\/p>

I'm not complaining as the rankings just give us an idea of where we are at, but how\/where is summit coming out better than us in this rankings set vs. the others. Looking at NPN, they must have made some amazing jumps and we must have taken some major steps back somewhere? Can you elaborate?<\/div><\/div>
\n
\nMaton not running at NPN is probably the bulk of the explanation. The rest is likely due to Summit having a great State meet showing.
\n
\nDan","date_added":"Nov 14th 2014, 11:15pm","nest":0,"liked":false,"member":[],"can_delete":false,"item_id":299037,"item_type":"news","pb_image":"members\/avatar\/3295.jpg","pb_title":"dkap","pb_url":"profile.php?member_id=9184","pb_url_dns":"https:\/\/dkap.runnerspace.com\/","pb_wally_id":"10044"},"1169917":{"pb_id":"43639","pb_type":"members","likes":"0","parent_id":"0","pid":"1169917","comment_id":"1169917","member_id":"43639","comment":"

<\/a>Doug Soles, on , said:<\/p>

\n
\nI'm not complaining as the rankings just give us an idea of where we are at, but how\/where is summit coming out better than us in this rankings set vs. the others. Looking at NPN, they must have made some amazing jumps and we must have taken some major steps back somewhere? Can you elaborate?
<\/div><\/div>
\n
\n
\nI think we've pretty much established at this point that the rankings are done to generate controversy (as opposed to discussion), with the criteria pretty much being what watchout thinks they should be this week.","date_added":"Nov 14th 2014, 9:47pm","nest":0,"liked":false,"member":[],"can_delete":false,"item_id":299037,"item_type":"news","pb_image":"i\/no_avatar.png","pb_title":"GeorgieTheK","pb_url":"profile.php?member_id=43639","pb_url_dns":"https:\/\/GeorgieTheK.runnerspace.com\/","pb_wally_id":"1073375"},"1169589":{"pb_id":"10145","pb_type":"members","likes":"0","parent_id":"0","pid":"1169589","comment_id":"1169589","member_id":"10145","comment":"

<\/a>watchout, on , said:<\/p>

\nI disagree. Not every team runs at NXR and NXN, let alone run all their complete top 5.
\n
\nIMO, if a runner competes on the varsity squad at State, NXR or NXN they should be factored into the rankings.
<\/div><\/div>
\n
\nHi Watchout,
\n
\nI'm not complaining as the rankings just give us an idea of where we are at, but how\/where is summit coming out better than us in this rankings set vs. the others. Looking at NPN, they must have made some amazing jumps and we must have taken some major steps back somewhere? Can you elaborate?
\n
\nThank you,
\n
\nDoug","date_added":"Nov 14th 2014, 9:18pm","nest":0,"liked":false,"member":[],"can_delete":false,"item_id":299037,"item_type":"news","pb_image":"i\/no_avatar.png","pb_title":"Doug Soles","pb_url":"profile.php?member_id=10145","pb_url_dns":"https:\/\/Doug-Soles.runnerspace.com\/","pb_wally_id":"12696"},"1169344":{"pb_id":"54740","pb_type":"members","likes":"0","parent_id":"0","pid":"1169344","comment_id":"1169344","member_id":"54740","comment":"?, I guess we will see at southwest region.","date_added":"Nov 14th 2014, 9:17pm","nest":0,"liked":false,"member":[],"can_delete":false,"item_id":299037,"item_type":"news","pb_image":"i\/no_avatar.png","pb_title":"Coach Parise","pb_url":"profile.php?member_id=54740","pb_url_dns":"https:\/\/www.runnerspace.com\/profile.php?member_id=54740","pb_wally_id":"1390454"},"1169291":{"pb_id":"43715","pb_type":"members","likes":"0","parent_id":"0","pid":"1169291","comment_id":"1169291","member_id":"43715","comment":"

<\/a>loverubber, on , said:<\/p>

\nSummit should be adjusted based on the fact that Maton is out for his own now, am I right? Surely they cannot be 4th without him, and these are team ratings.
<\/div><\/div>
\n
\nI disagree. Not every team runs at NXR and NXN, let alone run all their complete top 5.
\n
\nIMO, if a runner competes on the varsity squad at State, NXR or NXN they should be factored into the rankings.","date_added":"Nov 14th 2014, 4:35pm","nest":0,"liked":false,"member":[],"can_delete":false,"item_id":299037,"item_type":"news","pb_image":"\/\/www.runnerspace.com\/forum\/uploads\/av-43715.jpg","pb_title":"watchout","pb_url":"profile.php?member_id=43715","pb_url_dns":"https:\/\/www.runnerspace.com\/profile.php?member_id=43715","pb_wally_id":"1073498"}},"last_id":"1169291","url":"comments.php?item_type=news&item_id=299037&item_url=gprofile.php?mgroup_id=46052"}