Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 35 of 35

Thread: Rumor going around about only two heats at prelims?

  1. #31
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Whittier, California, United States
    Posts
    73
    Rene,

    My issues are the first post. Could you imagine combining 1600 heats during track? How difficult would advancing become when there is twice as many bodies and twice as much talent? The Riverside course is wide at the very start and that's it... bad start and you are in the back. Sure there is tactics that can be used... but does anyone want to play games at prelims? Does anyone want to risk an injury on a crowded starting line and course? To tell you the truth, I'm just as worried for spectators running around the course as I am for the kids in the race...

  2. #32
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Whittier, California, United States
    Posts
    73
    Was hoping for some clarification on those items I brought up earlier, but I assume the amount of post may have buried those concerns on one of the previous pages?

    So back to my questions.... (I added one more)

    Will the course be 2.94 or 3.0? If 2.94, why?

    If possible, could we get the breakdown of how many teams qualified this year compared to last year or the year before? I don't see why we went to 2 heats when we have 48 teams in the girls D2 and 45 in the D2 boys? Three heats would have made these fields 15 and 16 each? That sounds like a much more manageable field size compared to 23 and 24 per heat (or 161 + 5 individuals and 168 + 5-6 individuals per heat).

    I also see the following in the rest of the divisions:
    D5 girls = 23 teams + 11 individuals and 24 teams plus 10 individuals
    D5 boys = 31 teams + 4 individuals and 30 teams plus 4 individuals
    D4 girls = 21 teams + 5 individuals and 22 teams plus 5 individuals
    D4 boys = 18 + 4 individuals in both heats
    D3 girls = 23 teams + 3 individuals and 22 teams + 4 individuals
    D3 boys = 21 teams + 2 individuals in both heats
    D2 girls = see above
    D2 boys = see above
    D1 girls = 27 teams + 5 individuals and 29 teams + 4 individuals
    D1 boys = 29 teams + 4 individuals and 29 teams + 5 individuals

    D5 boys and D1 boys are at 30 and 30-31 teams each!! D1 girls are at 27 and 29 teams... That can NOT BE A GOOD IDEA FROM A SAFETY STANDPOINT!!!

    Also, can you tell us what the vote was? How many were in favor and how many against?

    Also, the rationale for making this decision in September without knowing the field sizes yet?

    Thank you for the clarification on these concerns!

    Tony

  3. #33
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    12
    My biggest concern for 2 heats is that there are 31 schools in Heat 1 and 30 schools in Heat 2 for Division 5, yet you still must finish in the top 12 as an individual to advance. Way more schools and way more athletes, yet no change for individual’s to advance. I have a girl who set a goal to make the SS Finals because she was not likely going to make State, it just got a lot harder and that is a shame as she has worked tirelessly toward that goal since early July. In the past when there were 2 Heats they did not consist of 30 teams, it seems to me that with 2 heats of that size the individual advancers should be expanded to at least the top 15, probably 20.

  4. #34
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Huntington Beach, Ca
    Posts
    46
    I think part of the blow back is the fact that the decision could have been made public 2 months ago.

    I definitely have concerns over the field sizes though. The ability for bubble teams to have a shot at making Finals is much better in a smaller heat format in my opinion. Teams with a strong 1-2 runner have a bit of an advantage in fields this large. If you look at the results of say Woodbridge or Clovis, the top teams are generally those that have 1-2 low placing individuals that can make up for a bit of the lack of depth. Teams that don't necessarily have a front runner, but rely on pack strength, are at a disadvantage in races like this. Now I'm not saying that a team with a good pack cannot be successful, but in a smaller heat format, that pack can definitely be further up and give that team a better shot. Maybe I'm over-analyzing it or looking at it the wrong way. Just my 2 cents.
    Brian Brierly
    Edison HS (SS)
    Head Cross Country Coach
    Track Distance Coach

  5. #35
    In short, it feels like the decision has been made to "try this out" and we'll see what happens. There is a lot at stake for a lot of kids here and experimenting at this time is foolish and potentially dangerous. Would CIF entertain changing the football field dimensions or swimming pool length for the playoffs? Then, why mess with cross country? I've seen the course and 200 kids making that first left turn is going to be a nightmare. There are ten races Saturday; I predict at least one restart. We all know how easy and psychologically advantageous restarts are for athletes.

Posting Permissions

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