Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 32

Thread: Mistake or new Boys Mt. SAC course record!?

  1. #11
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by Coach Barnes View Post
    What I do not understand is how some athletes were missed altogether. They went through the entire process with their team, but are totally missing from the final results. Yet, the Flotrack video clearly shows them finishing and with no one else around them. Even the announcer says their name, but they are nowhere in the results. Sad.
    That's what I was alluding to in my previous post. My number 4 girl remembers passing a San Clemente girl and one other right at the chute. We know she was behind my No.3 and we know where my No. 5 was, but my No. 4 isn't listed. Just a little frustrating. Again, new timers and new system. Stuff happens. Hope they fix it!!!

  2. #12
    Updated Boys D5 Sweepstakes (Race 45) for those interested:

    1 St. Joseph's 39
    2 Flintridge Prep 72
    3 La Jolla C. Day 88
    4 Woodcrest Chr. 133
    5 Thacher 146
    6 St. Margaret's 151
    7 L/Desert Chr. 211
    8 Ontario Christian 217
    9 Crossroads 226
    10 Webb 268 (#2 crossed the line but wasn't in results)
    11 Chadwick 276
    12 Brentwood 312
    13 Sage Hill 352
    14 Hamilton 352
    15 Poly 365

    In the video of this race, I see someone on the left with a clipboard writing something down as runners finished ... is he our backup system?
    Head Coach
    Chadwick Cross Country

  3. #13
    FYI, I had my managers time all of my runners and everyone was approximately 3-4 seconds slower.

  4. #14
    Rich,

    I had your girls at: 18:47, 19:16, 19:16, 19:19, 19:43 and 20:05. This is based on the video and I didn't catch your 7th runner. Nice work out there!

  5. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Big Bear Lake
    Posts
    75
    Quote Originally Posted by CoachMedellin View Post
    FYI, I had my managers time all of my runners and everyone was approximately 3-4 seconds slower.
    Slower? Your times were slower than the official results? Or do you mean the results were 3-4 seconds slower than the times your managers recorded?

  6. #16
    Overall, chip timing technology is not the issue. We have several meets in California now that have been using chip timing with excellent results, starting with the state meet a few years ago and already several meets this year. It has proven to yield results faster and just as accurate or more accurate that previous systems.

    This particular weekend a timing crew from out of state was hired to come in and take on a monstrous challenge and they encountered some difficulty.

    Unfortunately, what happened this weekend was an isolated but high-profile issue. Think back to last year, when results were also very problematic nearly 24 hours after the conclusion of the meet -- and chip timing wasn't used.

    Mt. SAC deserves credit for putting in the time to actually get it right. It takes additional time and effort, but the importance of eventually getting it right is highly appreciated.
    "Cross-country is an individual sport. Succeeding in cross-country is a team sport!"

  7. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Studio City
    Posts
    53
    We also experienced the 3 second difference from observed results vs. posted official results. Those 3 seconds could make a difference for PRs, team records & such. I'd be interested to see if this was the case by most or all teams. If so, we will make the adjustments on our end for team purposes. As long as it all gets worked out I'm not going to be too worried.

    I for one see this as the inevitable direction timing will go in our sport & see it as ultimately a good thing. Some growing pains are to be expected, but I'm definitely in favor of the chips in the bibs and not on the feet as that matches the way finishes are actually judged in our sport.
    ----------------------------------------------------
    "To whom much is given, much is expected"

    Tim Sharpe
    Head Coach XC
    Distance Coach T&F
    Harvard-Westlake

  8. #18
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    13
    Rich, I agree. Having been involved with timing in our invitational for many years, I know the headaches that can develop. My comments, were just my concerns about the number of mistakes in the results, and not at Mt. Sac. The chip system is absolutely the way to go and the wave of our sports future. As a former Mountie, my loyalties are intact!! This is still the best Invitational in the nation. Well after ours of course. :~)

  9. #19
    It looks like some scoring results have already been corrected. We appreciate the Mt. SAC crew for taking the time to deliver accurate scores. Going back through that many race videos is quite the undertaking. Again, the effort is appreciated. Any word on what will happen with timing issues? The general consensus seems to be that posted times are about 3 seconds slower than what athletes actually ran.

  10. #20
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    La Habra, CA
    Posts
    15
    Most of the D3 results were redone yesterday (Sunday). A lot of work ! It is appreciated - Mt SAC people !! Thanks !!
    As for the 3 seconds issue. I only had someone at the finish line for our varsity boys race (#15), so I just assumed my student timing had just missed the gun, since he was consistent.
    Was this a problem with all Friday races? On Saturday as well?
    Bryan Leighliter
    Richard Gahr High School
    XC (Boys)
    T&F Distance

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •