PROTRACK

A forum devoted to track events from 60m to the 2 mile. Mainly pro but also news from local, national and international sprint & middle distance competitions.

Log in

I forgot my password



Search
 
 

Display results as :
 


Rechercher Advanced Search

Latest topics
» VAL CALENDAR 2017/2018
Today at 4:03 pm by youngy

» 2018 BUNBURY GIFT
Tue Aug 08, 2017 10:33 am by AussiePro

» Bridge of Allan Highland Games
Mon Aug 07, 2017 3:08 pm by JH

» Stand Up Comedy debut
Wed Aug 02, 2017 3:16 pm by youngy

» St Andrews (Scotland)
Tue Aug 01, 2017 11:42 am by JH

» Mull Highland Games.
Fri Jul 28, 2017 1:57 pm by JH

» Regular VAL runner picked in U/18 Vic Metro AFL team to play WA
Wed Jul 26, 2017 10:16 pm by Willo the Whisp

» Airth(Scotland)
Sun Jul 23, 2017 9:09 am by JH

» Vale.. John Stoney John passed away last wednesday and his funeral will be held today in Albury
Fri Jul 21, 2017 12:50 pm by Jack Stoney

August 2017
MonTueWedThuFriSatSun
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031   

Calendar Calendar


You are not connected. Please login or register

PROTRACK » GENERAL » Concerning Marks

Concerning Marks

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

1 Concerning Marks on Wed Jan 23, 2013 10:26 am

Mark Concerned


Reflecting on some of the marks this season in middle-long distance events and there is reason for concern that those in charge are getting the job done wrong. Apologies to those runners highlighted below, definitely nothing against any of you individually, simply the marks that are the issue.

Starting in the 400 and Jay Blake saw not a standard pull between seasons, but instead a 1m lift. A young improving kid gets a lift between seasons. This would never have happened under the old regime. The kid deserves success but 2 wins in a row, one being a major 400m gift, highlights the error in his mark.

On to the 800 and the Maryborough winner saw no standard pull between seasons, while the Rye winner didn’t even see a pull after his win the week before at Daylesford…

To take the cake though, how about this one: After Stawell last season Craig Harris was pulled 45m for winning the 1600 front markers, 185m back to 140m. Fair. Other mile winners at Stawell are yet to run again this season. By comparison, after winning the front markers 2 mile by 7 seconds/35m, Phil Noden gets a 40m pull (this is comparing his Ballarat 2 mile mark to his Wangaratta mark released this week). Can someone explain this? It simply does not make sense getting pulled 45m for winning the mile and only 40m for winning the 2 mile. Previous 2 mile winners at Stawell have been pulled somewhere between 80m-200m over the last 4 seasons.

Once again, this is not about putting the spotlight on these runners, instead on the handicapping system.

MOB can we get your opinion here? Are runners actually supposed to be pulled between seasons, a ‘standard pull’? And maybe your opinion on the other issues?

2 Re: Concerning Marks on Wed Jan 23, 2013 10:37 am

jknott123


not to sure what you mean about a pull between seasons but the maryborough 800m winner was back 14m from his stawell mark last year.

3 Re: Concerning Marks on Wed Jan 23, 2013 10:46 am

Mark Concerned


Last run off 58m last season, then started on 58m again this season. (The field had a lift in the 800 at Stawell)

4 Re: Concerning Marks on Wed Jan 23, 2013 11:11 am

MOB

avatar
ProTrack A Grader
ProTrack A Grader
Firstly just to clarify, I'm no longer on the handicapping panel but there is a review and appeal process available to all if they wish to use it - refer to the VAL website. I would encourage agrieved athletes to do so.

MC, whilst I'm happy to discuss the handicap process in general, I won't be discussing specific marks on an open forum. I will say however if you want some credibility it is a good idea to get your facts straight before going to print. The Mary 800 winner ran off 58 at keilor last year and was allocated 72 for Stawell. The Ringwwod 400 runner has not been lifted between season as you claim. The Bendigo field was pulled back to scratch.

Athletes cannot be lifted between seasons in established events. In many cases however the mark they last ran off may not be their last allocated mark for the season as they may have received a lift after their last start prior to Stawell.

In regards to the Stawell penalties, they are also considered alongside the start mark calcs for each athlete. Generally the Stawell penalty is applied to the start mark calc, not the finishing mark.

5 Re: Concerning Marks on Wed Jan 23, 2013 11:19 am

jknott123


mob on the ball again not all runners were lifted 14m for stawell last year i believe lonain received a 4m lift plus 10m for o/seas runners running so his 58m this year is 4m back from last season

6 Re: Concerning Marks on Wed Jan 23, 2013 11:28 am

Mark Concerned


Appreciate that MOB.

The Ringwood winner ran off 46m at Keilor last season, 38m pulled back at Bendigo, then started the new season running off 47m. I can see though, his 38m Bendigo mark may well have included a 1m lift, therefore simply starting the new season where he left off. I do think it's a dangerous game for the handicapper to not pull everyone back a small amount between seasons. Otherwise we'll be seeing some exceptionally fast times across the board late in the season, expecting many to go closer to, or under, ceiling.

I also understand that the pull takes into consideration the time run but the 2 mile race discussed was pulled back to scracth (front markers running further than they usually do) so you wouldn't expect a fast time at all. The winning margin would also presumably be taken into consideration, easily 35m back to 2nd place. A 40m pull leaves the winner able to easliy win over the same distance when he next lines up. And it just doesn't stack when you compare it to the pull afforded to the 1600m winner.

7 Re: Concerning Marks on Wed Jan 23, 2013 12:18 pm

DizzyRunner


ProTrack Star
ProTrack Star
The 3200m have to be the most difficult event to handicap in recent years. Given they are run so infrequently, only 4 this season and 4 last season, and the fact that they are so poorly populated (see below), this becomes highly problematic.

Dizzy hopes the practice of giving athletes lifts in the 3200m even when they haven't run 3200m during that season (based purely on poor performances in 1600m races and a desire to make these people semi-competitive), is over.

Let's also not forget how distorted marks and performances become when fields are altered due to athletes like Mottram turning up at Stawell.

2011/2012 VRTA 10 Finishers
2011/2012 Wangarrata 16
2011/2012 Ballarat 13
2012/2013 Vrta 10

8 Re: Concerning Marks on Wed Jan 23, 2013 12:57 pm

Guest

avatar
Guest
Mark Concerned wrote:
Starting in the 400 and Jay Blake saw not a standard pull between seasons, but instead a 1m lift. A young improving kid gets a lift between seasons.


Whilst young and improving may be relevant to OGA athletes, Jay Blake has been running for numerous seasons and is well established. His age and recent improvement are irrelevant unless he has been deemed to be pulling up.

Nonetheless he receives what every other runner receives in a min 1m lift for 3 acceptable performances.

9 Re: Concerning Marks on Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:07 pm

Phantom

avatar
ProTrack Star
ProTrack Star
A runner doesn't necessarily come back in handicap from the finish of one season to the start of the next, their sample set decides whether this happens. For some runners it may take 2-3 seasons before their finish mark reflects what their start mark could be (hope that makes sense).

10 Re: Concerning Marks on Wed Jan 23, 2013 2:28 pm

Admin

avatar
Admin
Admin
http://www.websound.net.au/cgi-bin/valsearch.pl?MEETING=&SEASON=&DISTANCE=&CATEGORY=&PROGRESSION=&PLACE=&FIRST_NAME=Jay&SURNAME=Blake

Check Jay Blake's VAL history. He's in his seventh season. He certainly served a long apprenticeship, running four full seasons without a win. Finally won his first race at Maribyrnong in 2011 in his fifth season. He has steadily gone out in the marks commensurate with his form and regular participation. He's run a lot of races for his five sashes. The Ringwood Gift was his first open 400m win.

http://protrack.easyforumlive.com

11 Re: Concerning Marks on Wed Jan 23, 2013 5:59 pm

jknott123


stop worrying about jay blake winning the ringwood gift work out how katherine clarke can run 3rd in the frontmarkers 400m at stawell off 48m and runs off 48m at her first run in the open 400's this season as somebody said every body should come back not just a few

12 Re: Concerning Marks on Wed Jan 23, 2013 11:25 pm

MOB

avatar
ProTrack A Grader
ProTrack A Grader
Pretty simple John, because she went 47.7 and 47.9 at Stawell and the starting time is 47.6. It was only last week you were saying what a great run it would be if she challenged at Ringwood. Using the 10% rule, 48 for a female is equal to about 10 for a male, which makes her the best performed runner on the day. She has a genuine crack at everything she runs in and is one of the best racers in the VAL. She is a Gun.

Honestly guys before we have a crack at someone's mark can we at least check our facts and the guidelines before going to print. We don't like it when the boot's on the other foot.

13 Re: Concerning Marks on Thu Jan 24, 2013 6:32 am

jknott123


sorry mark but i was told when i quried my 2 runners coming back that it was new season mark or words to that effect i am not querieing her run just the inconsistency

14 Re: Concerning Marks on Thu Jan 24, 2013 12:51 pm

Guest

avatar
Guest
jknott123 wrote:sorry mark but i was told when i quried my 2 runners coming back that it was new season mark or words to that effect i am not querieing her run just the inconsistency


Are your runners OGA? Did they break any ceiling times?

15 Re: Concerning Marks on Thu Jan 24, 2013 6:15 pm

GT


MOB,
Stick to the Guidelines would be welcomed by all interstates runners!

16 Re: Concerning Marks on Thu Jan 24, 2013 7:01 pm

DizzyRunner


ProTrack Star
ProTrack Star
GT wrote:MOB,
Stick to the Guidelines would be welcomed by all interstates runners!

GT - show how much you love transparency by posting links to the guidelines of other states which are just about impossible to find. One could be forgiven that their are no guidelines in the states other than Vic given that it is an absolute lottery in so many cases #neverGoingToTassieAgain

17 Re: Concerning Marks on Thu Jan 24, 2013 9:15 pm

ToM

avatar
ProTrack Star
ProTrack Star
GT wrote:MOB,
Stick to the Guidelines would be welcomed by all interstates runners!


I'm not quite sure why MOB would need to "stick to the guidelines" given that he is no longer serving as a handicapper and is only offering information based on his wealth of experience.

Sponsored content


View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum