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

June 2017
MonTueWedThuFriSatSun
   1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930  

Calendar Calendar


You are not connected. Please login or register

PROTRACK » GENERAL » Athlete of the meet Bendigo

Athlete of the meet Bendigo

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

1 Athlete of the meet Bendigo on Mon Mar 14, 2016 9:50 pm

chopper


Eligible runners Winners -4th in Restricted and Black Opal
Positions to be decided by improvement from last VAL run
Assume 0.1 sec = 1m
In equal 7th Tancredi (3rd Black Opal) improved 16m, Stevens (4th Black Opal) improved 16m
In 6th Lacey (Winner black opal) improved 18m - not sure of circumstances to give such a young talented runner 34m
In 5th Deane (2nd in restricted) Improved 20m
In 4th Tran (4th in restricted). Improved 26m
In 3rd Pike (2nd Restricted) Improved 35m
In 2nd Phelan (2nd Black Opal) Improved 41m
And winner overall Shillito K (1st Restricted). Improved 67m from last run

Maybe the track is short. Maybe it is something else

2 Re: Athlete of the meet Bendigo on Tue Mar 15, 2016 11:56 am

jknott123


10sports biz x 400 restricted nine of them prizemoney $300 bendigo $1000 why?

3 Re: Athlete of the meet Bendigo on Tue Mar 15, 2016 12:03 pm

timrosen35


I think some of your comments here are without much thought. Pointing out Luke Stevens improvement is ridiculous. Luke ran off scratch. He has been running Australian tour meets on track. If you think he is hiding his form that is just silly.

Paul won the Euroa 300m just last weekend. So I would say he has definitely displayed good form over the longer distances lately.

And finally Leigh. I know I am biased as I train with Leigh but have you ever watched Leigh run? He doesn't know the meaning of not trying. I haven't even seen him let his kids win a race to the end of the drive way he is that competitive. He was in the Ringwood 400m final but you just completely ignored that? The guy simply has enormous guts and found what I believe was his best ever run at the age of 40.



chopper wrote:Eligible runners Winners -4th in Restricted and Black Opal
Positions to be decided by improvement from last VAL run
Assume 0.1 sec = 1m
In equal 7th Tancredi (3rd Black Opal) improved 16m, Stevens (4th Black Opal) improved 16m
In 6th Lacey (Winner black opal) improved 18m - not sure of circumstances to give such a young talented runner 34m
In 5th Deane (2nd in restricted) Improved 20m
In 4th Tran (4th in restricted). Improved 26m
In 3rd Pike (2nd Restricted) Improved 35m
In 2nd Phelan (2nd Black Opal) Improved 41m
And winner overall Shillito K (1st Restricted). Improved 67m from last run

Maybe the track is short. Maybe it is something else

4 Re: Athlete of the meet Bendigo on Wed Mar 16, 2016 1:47 pm

BMara


Chopper
1m = 0.1............what an amazing stat to throw into an argument
its been a long year and we could certainly do we some comedy

Michael Johnson holds the world record at 43.18 for the 400mts.....or 9.26 metres per second ( not even Johno gets into your calcs)
Unfortunately he was unavailable to run at Bendigo, however Keely Shillito was able to run.
Keely runs 280m in 46.7, equal to 5.99 mts a second. And quite logically her final 5mts would be the slowest part of her race, maybe even as slow as 4m per second. In essence if she was off 115m (back 5m) she would not have made the final, and more importantly we would not have found a new running time comparison theory.

As for the rest of the mentioned runners , can't be bothered, got an appointment at KFC

5 Re: Athlete of the meet Bendigo on Wed Mar 16, 2016 7:29 pm

chopper


yes fair enough re 0.1 for 1m
5.4 msec at keilor
6msec at bendigo
if she had run the same speed at bendigo as Keilor her 280m time would have been 51.7
Not 46.7
She has not done the sport proud / or alternatively / she has done the sport proud

6 Re: Athlete of the meet Bendigo on Wed Mar 16, 2016 7:30 pm

jknott123


Hey marra you miss the point of the discussion it's not what time she ran it's how did she get the handicap to run the time she ran I could name six other novice runners who have been trying to win a restricted and I am sure if they were lifted 20m they would have run the time you also didn't comment on why it was a $1000 race compared to all the other $300 sportsman series races

7 Re: Athlete of the meet Bendigo on Wed Mar 16, 2016 8:05 pm

BMara


Hello Knotty
I think you're on the wrong thread, this thread is discussing the improvement made by individual athletes. I haven't mentioned handicaps, just mathematics.

the " bendigo sportsbiz restricted 400m" thread is discussing the 20m lift.

As to the other point Knotty, I certainly don't have anything to do with prize money allocation.
I would image the sponsor may have made the decision on that one.

Final point, "You can name six athletes that have been trying to win a restricted", thank god there's six of them.
I can name the twelve signs of the zodiac, doesn't make me a clairvoyant.

8 Re: Athlete of the meet Bendigo on Thu Mar 17, 2016 11:49 am

Fast


ProTrack A Grader
ProTrack A Grader
chopper wrote:yes fair enough re 0.1 for 1m
5.4 msec at keilor
6msec at bendigo
if she had run the same speed at bendigo as Keilor her 280m time would have been 51.7
Not 46.7
She has not done the sport proud / or alternatively / she has done the sport proud


You choose to conveniently compare one performance over different distances, Why?

Young Shillito ran a similar time and rpm at Stawell last year, and this year she has been fighting a foot injury, which was clearly evident at Keilor and Ballarat.

And when all is done she only won a novice race with random handicaps, which aim, to give all who enter a chance ....she won by the .01sec over 400m in a thrilling finish.

She was given an opportunity and rose to the occasion and just got there in one of the closes races of the year. Great effort young girl be proud opportunities don’t come that often in our sport.

9 Re: Athlete of the meet Bendigo on Thu Mar 17, 2016 3:52 pm

chopper


The distances were the same except for altering handicaps (she ran 20m less but overall 8 secs quicker from one race to the next 2 weeks apart)
Her little athletics results from Stawell last year were almost exactly in line with Keilor. 56 off 94m

As I said depending on your point of view
1. She has done herself, coach, family and sport proud as this is what pro running is meant to represent OR
2. She has not done the sport proud

Injury/Calibre of race/Close finish/Age are all smokescreens

Improvements between single races such as these should be noted and the wider fraternity of pro athletics should be the judge of their acceptability and desirability.

10 Re: Athlete of the meet Bendigo on Thu Mar 17, 2016 4:04 pm

Fast


ProTrack A Grader
ProTrack A Grader
What is target time for the race?

11 Re: Athlete of the meet Bendigo on Thu Mar 17, 2016 6:16 pm

jknott123


thanks for that info fast, so she had a foot injury and couldnt run at her best so the handicapper gave her a 60m lift, for not just a "restricted"race, a race worth $1000.my query is with the handicapping system we know that restricted races are different to other races but it was a $1000 race surely that must come into it.

12 Re: Athlete of the meet Bendigo on Thu Mar 17, 2016 9:06 pm

Fast


ProTrack A Grader
ProTrack A Grader
You’re welcome JKnot123.

But you’re are wrong. The handicapper, handicapped the race to be won in the target time.

My question was what was the target time?

However as I stated earlier young Shillito should never have won the race, the young lad of 84m should have but he failed to execute and repeat his heat performance, I don’t buy the argument that from 84 meters you have to go around a lot of athletes and are forced wide and that cost him the race. Really how many athletes do you have to go around from the mark of 84 metres? I think from memory he had to pass one athlete as the other 2 in front of him were in the finish.

Why the race was worth $1000, I don’t know, it was just another sportzbiz restricted for most. Why the club increased the prize money is a mystery but then again a lot the Bendigo club do is strange.

13 Re: Athlete of the meet Bendigo on Thu Mar 17, 2016 9:42 pm

chopper


The handicapper would know the target time.
I suspect the target time is 48.0 with a 0.5sec allowance for the Bendigo track
He would not have wanted the Restricted to go faster than the Black Opal which has I believe a target time of 46 with a 0.5sec allowance
Restricted goes down in 46.7. 1st 4 showed considerable impressive improvement
Opal 44.99 2nd 45.5 (right on target time)

Im not sure other athletes are to blame for her win!

In gift terms Heat X of the Ararat Gift the athlete goes down in 13.0 dead. (the athlete has never broken 13 ever. To give the athlete a chance in the biggest race of the year the the handicapper gives the athlete a 25% lift from 8m to 10m and then in the Stawell Gift the athlete goes down in 11.65. (a 11% improvement)

Do we say well done thats pro athletics with the acclaimed great training and coaching effort full of courage and a great battle through injury and adversary
Or do we say the athlete +- associated entities has/have put themselves way before the sport

14 Re: Athlete of the meet Bendigo on Fri Mar 18, 2016 8:40 am

Fast


ProTrack A Grader
ProTrack A Grader
Chopper I’m not sure what inside information you have, to reach those conclusions, but I believe you are wrong as that is not what the VAL rules and regulations state.


The handicapper’s job is to handicap athletes and make them competitive.


The administration then set a time to which they want the races to be won in, usually referred to as the target time.


The handicapper then sets and adjusts handicaps with the aim to have the race won in the target time.


It is irrelevant what adjustment the handicapper makes - ideally it is just enough to run the target time.


In the restricted races the handicapper has total discretion and can lift athletes as much or as little as he thinks is needed- with the aim to have them run the target time.


In some other events, under the VAL rules, the handicapper is restricted/ limited to the extent to which he can lift athletes, but not the restricted races.


If the handicapper gets it wrong and he will from time to time especially in the discretionary handicapping environment , and an athlete’s runs faster than the target time his handicap will be adjusted back to the target time.


So specifically if we apply this to the restricted 400m.


I have searched the VAL site (Handicapping Regulations) and to the best of my understanding and interpretation the target time for the 400m is 46.5sec (ceiling), however in the stewards report there was a track allowance for Bendigo of 0.5sec so the revised allowed time for the 400m races at Bendigo would have been – 46.00


So the target time for the 400m races at Bendigo to the best of my understanding would be 46.5sec however with the 0.5sec allowance, athletes could run as fast as 46sec without a handicap adjustment (pull). Please direct me to the VAL rules if this interpretation is wrong.


No runner in the restricted 400m race ran faster than the target time of 46.5 however a few were close with the fastest 3 being:

Kyle Hilston 46.67
Keeley Shillito 46.70
Dani pike 46.71


The race could have been won by anyone of these athletes.


So under any assessment of the VAL handicapper -he has achieved exactly what he set out to do - have the race won just outside target time.


Well done handicapper.


That is professional running – handicapping athletes to run a target time.


I therefore say well done pro-running outcome achieved.

15 Re: Athlete of the meet Bendigo on Fri Mar 18, 2016 8:58 am

Ribera

avatar
Expert
Expert
Good summation FAST. However don't confuse open race target times to restricted target times. Whilst it is not written I think the target time the handicapper works to may be more around 47.5 for restricted. It seemed every time a runner broke 47.5 in a restricted race throughout the year they were adjusted back.
As Bendigo had a 0.5 sec track allowance, the target time would have been around 47.0.

16 Re: Athlete of the meet Bendigo on Fri Mar 18, 2016 9:13 am

Baltimore Jack


On the contrary FAST, I think if you asked the handicapper he wouldn't have punched the air with excitement watching young Shillito win off 120m. Not when she ran 57sec off 80m, 55sec off 100m then 46.7 off 120m. Irrespective of the track conditions it was a massive improvement. Stuff like this just does a handicapper's head in.

I do agree tho, Hillson should have won based on the heat result. 47.53 final after a 46.67 heat. He failed to back up. Only got himself to blame.

17 Re: Athlete of the meet Bendigo on Fri Mar 18, 2016 9:47 am

Fast


ProTrack A Grader
ProTrack A Grader
The kid obviously needed a significant lift to be competitive and run target time, the handicapper assessed that to be 20m, had he assessed it to be 15m she would not have been anywhere near winning or running target time.

Nobody knew the kid would get a lift, and it’s not about the prize money the kid is just so thrilled she was able to win a sash, really $500 is not a lot of money and I would be surprised if any of these restricted runners do it for the money. From my perspective the aim of the 400m series it to try to win and get enough points and secure a start at Stawell where you get the opportunity to run in a final at the famous Stawell gift meeting, but we all have different goals and aims.

So to suggest she pulled up at Ballarat to get a 20m lift to set and win Bendigo is so far from the mark.

On a separate point though, I believe the limit for these races should be 100m for girls and 70m for boys. I believe that gives the handicapper enough scope to handicap from scratch and if an under 20 restricted athlete can win from scratch then he deserves it, you only win once before losing your restricted status.

18 Re: Athlete of the meet Bendigo on Fri Mar 18, 2016 9:40 pm

chopper


My last word on this as Stawell is more important
If we have kids who compete in little athletics less than a year before undertaking a pro athletics sting presumably in concert with stables, coaches and families then the sport is in trouble.
I would fully support a disqualification clause where improvement that is greater than 10% from the previous run (within a time limit of 4-6 weeks). The 10% threshold could be less eg 5%

19 Re: Athlete of the meet Bendigo on Fri Mar 18, 2016 9:57 pm

Fast


ProTrack A Grader
ProTrack A Grader
A sing really what would you say about a win on the hallowed turf at Stawell?

The future of our sports is the young ones...especially in a junior novice event. They are the path way of the future.

20 Re: Athlete of the meet Bendigo on Mon Mar 21, 2016 8:45 am

ShaneMcK


Moderator
Moderator
I think what a lot of people miss here is the graduation process. Because Restricted and Open events are handicapped with a different scope of regulations regarding lifts, target times etc, the level of disparity between these two sets of handicaps are too great.

Look at this scenario;
During the course of a season, a 13 year old athlete can be thrown out as far as 100m quite easily in a Restricted event.
They are ineligible, at this age to compete in Open/Women's races due to their age.
They win a Restricted 400m Series race and have NEVER entered an Open/Women's event.
The next season, the enter their first 400m Open/Women's race and receive a handicap of 20m as per Schedule 2 – Table of Novice Handicaps on page 33 of the Handicap Regulations.
This athlete is now 14 years old. Will run for the next x amount of years at the back of each heat before their handicap can move fast enough to be inline with their ability and competitiveness.

By putting these kids out on such over inflated marks at such a young age is potentially detrimental to their development. If an athlete can run the target start time from 100m, then by going back to 20m (as per the related information above), their chances of being near the start time are way off.
Start time for the Open 400m is 47.6 and Women's is 53.9.

My personal opinion is that the younger athletes should NOT be thrown out on such inflated, disproportionate handicaps. Keep their handicaps far more modest, allowing them time to still race in the Restricted events for a few more years, until they;
1. Have more proportionate marks in the senior ranks
2. Have a few more years of developmental racing behind them
3. Allowing and supporting the graduation of much faster and older athletes into senior ranks where the handicaps are more proportionate and they are much more competitive.

14 year and 15 year old athletes should not be losing their novice status unless they are genuinely fast and genuinely competitive in the senior ranks already. But their graduation process probably would have taken care of itself by then.

The notion of getting athletes competitive quickly does have merit, but get them to this competitive point quickly in the junior events, NOT the Restricted events. This way, teenage athletes will have the opportunity to compete in a lower pressure environment (which is what the junior events are supposed to be for) serving their "apprenticeship" so to speak in the Restricted events, and graduating to the senior events when they are mentally and physically capable of being competitive, not just competitive due to a large mark in Restricted events.

There are several young athletes this season that have won a Restricted 400m. They have been from large marks. Next season they will have a mark not greater than half of their winning mark. Work out the RPM, then apply it to a start mark and apply it to the minimum and maximum progressions allowed for both Open & Women's 400m races and you will see how long it will take for these young athletes to get a mark to be anywhere near competitive again.

examples;
Daylesford Alex Tzilantonis 100m 48.844 rpm 16.26sec/100m (Stawell Restricted Final mark 91m)
Ringwood Edward Tassell 68m 46.855 rpm 14.11sec/100m (Stawell FM 55m)
Keilor Justine White 100m rpm 16.20sec/100m (NTT in final, but 48.60 in the heat) Stawell 400m Women's 40m
Bendigo Keely Shillito 120m 46.701 rpm 16.67sec/100m (Not entered in any 400m at Stawell)

If we apply their Sportzbiz 400m winning rpm against their Stawell mark we get the following;
Alex Tzilantonis 91m 50.31 (Sportzbiz Restricted Final)
Edward Tassell 55m 50.75 (Front Markers 400m)
Justine White 40 58.32 (Women's 400m)

Now these times are miles outside target times of the Open/Women's events and will take an athlete competing at every event to acquire enough credited runs to get their mark out, but not near a competitive mark. The 400m lift Range 0-8m for OGA.


_________________
Thanks
Shane McKenzie
W: www.speedclinic.com.au | F: www.facebook.com/SpeedClinicMelbourne |
T: twitter.com/ShaneMcKenzie | C: Athletics Australia iCoach Profile
http://www.shanemckenzie.com

21 Re: Athlete of the meet Bendigo on Mon Mar 21, 2016 1:33 pm

Fast


ProTrack A Grader
ProTrack A Grader
Shane some good points.

Part of the solution is in maintaining and building the underage pathway events it would be good to see consistent under 17 and 21 events over the same distance at most meetings. I think that the restricted / novice concept is nearly passed its use by date and it’s time to replace it with consistent under age partway events (series) and to, if necessary, increase limits in minor events to cater for novice athletes over 21.

The future is capturing the interest and offering pathways for the young and those finishing Little Athletics and keeping them in the VAL. This is not happening consistently as many underage athletes, as you stated are losing their novice / restricted status and have limited events to enter.

Hence the race in question ( 400m sportzbiz) should be an under age race and not a novice.

22 Re: Athlete of the meet Bendigo on Mon Mar 21, 2016 5:05 pm

chopper


said i wouldnt post but cant resist
the pros cannot work without some honesty and integrity from the athletes and coaches and families
irrespective of age or event, novice or open

its a bit like the senate crossbenchers - they all believe because they gamed the system and they won that they are entitled to be in the senate for 7 years. All of us who are outside the system think they should not have got their by gaming the system and the wider country would be better off without them

23 Re: Athlete of the meet Bendigo on Mon Mar 21, 2016 7:14 pm

Fast


ProTrack A Grader
ProTrack A Grader
i believe the sport has integrity provided a system has been followed and target times are upheld.

The current system for the restricted 400m is random handicapping to give different runners a chances every week, as long as the target times are not made a mockery of, it is rather refreshing to see differ faces in these pathway race v seeing the same runners in finals every week. I have no problem with runners getting lifts and a given a chance, even if they improve considerably because they were given that chance.

24 Re: Athlete of the meet Bendigo on Mon Mar 21, 2016 10:29 pm

MPoppins


I agree with Shane and Fast.

As for Chopper, seriously, it's time to move on. If you knew the child you were accusing to be dishonest, as I do, you would KNOW that she is incapable of cheating! Keely is still developing and like her parents, she is still unaware what she is capable of. No one expected her to win, no one can explain why she won, and it will be a long time before she can possibly win again. So please just drop it and let's enjoy the weekend ahead

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