Tweet
Maybe this belongs on the historical board because it's three weeks since the NCAA meet and I'm still catching up on things since returning from a lot of track in California. But at the NCAA meet it seemed almost as if the officials perversely made a point of deliberately putting athletes from the same school in the same heats: five Stanfords in a 5,000 heat, three Arkansawyers in a high hurdles heat, three LSU sprinters in a women's 100 heat. (Don't hold me to these; I haven't checked the programs for exact examples, but there were some like these.) I suppose the draws are done by computers, based on seasonal times in the first round and qualifying times in subsequent rounds. But couldn't the instructions to the computer include an algorithm (I have no idea what that word means, but it is a wonderful word and in a waning lifetime I may never get a chance to use it again) that says something like: "Unless necessary, e.g., when there are three athletes from a schoool left for two semi finals and even then divide those athletes as far as possible, do not put athletes from the same school in the same heat; go to the athlete with the nearest equivalent performance"? As Bob Hersh confirmed for me and as anybody who has followed world championship track knows, the IAAF does this for countries in Olympics and world championships.
-
-
Re: NCAA Woodenheadedness
If they're using Hytek to run the Meet (most likely) it can be done by the clerk and should be as a matter of course whenever possible if it doesn't provide any athlete/school with an advantage. Its done all the time in USATF Meets, although Mo Greene got lane 1 in the 200 final and obviously couldn't throw his weight around enough to get it changed like he used to do, so he said his knee hurt. WAAAAA! -
Re: NCAA Woodenheadedness
...and then contended that it was his coaches's decision to scratch him.
...traveled over three thousand miles to see the best athletes in America.
...still a good meet with or without the scratches
...kudos to those who perservered and competed.Comment
-
Re: NCAA Woodenheadedness
A technician who worked on the Sacramento system assures me that the clumping was pure coincidence, based on seed times.
He also says HyTek indeed has a team-exclusion rule built in, but it isn't used at Nationals.Comment
-
Re: NCAA Woodenheadedness
One more example of the NCAA ignoring the international rules of the sport and thinking they can operate in their own world because they know better than everyone else. And they're dead wrong.
(Another prime example, of course, is the nonsense of having heats with the winner qualifying and the rest on time. It makes a mockery of the process.)Comment
-
Wooden-headedness
I see the word "Wooden-headedness", and I immediately hark back to the National Spelling Bee Contest on ESPN a few weeks ago. "Could you use that word in a sentence", the boy asks? "Yes", says the moderator, "10 NCAA Basketball Championships in 12 years for UCLA can be attributed to Wooden-headedness."Comment
-
Re: NCAA Woodenheadedness
NCAA CAN ignore international rules because they have their own, just like high school has their own. NCAA, NFHS, USATF and IAAF all have their own sets of rules and they aren't always the same. NCAA isn't under any obligation to follow international rules. USATF usually adopts IAAF rules, something we saw with the smaller sectors for throwing events. The false start rule is a different issue.Comment
-
Re: NCAA Woodenheadedness
>NCAA CAN ignore international rules because they
have their own<
I know they can. The question is, should they? And should they do it as often as they do? I think not.Comment
Comment