Indeed..

Many agree , but , but after FM domination in 2004, I believe it was and getting beat at Nationals? I think, many have downplayed the 2.5 time tested Vanny results

Not me, this is all time stuff no matter where it was or the distance

King999, on , said:

I'm just getting to the results after being in the mountains all weekend.


To borrow a kingism - FM a horror show. Seriously.

Are we not talking about this? I know the race was fast, etc. But they had their #2 guy at 12:21, and 4 guys under 12:40.

I think CBA ran really poorly, as poorly as they have run in the past 10 years. In fact, the last time they had a team that was good enough to run well and didn't was...at Manhattan in 2004 when they got waxed by FM. But even on their best day they don't come close to FM.

FM's performance might be the best HS team performance ever. Top guy who is legitimately one of the best 5-10 guys in the country (if not better), with 3 other guys within 30 secs of him.

Scary stuff. Kudos to them.

watchout, on , said:

That's correct. As they say, "scoreboard".

cerutty fan, on , said:

So... they scored essentially the same amount of points as a pair of US#15-30 ranked teams and not far off a US Top-5 team, while some of their runners had clearly bad days (their #3 and #4 ran as their #7 and #6 in the championship race, and two of their 'B' team runners ran faster than they did as well), and you think that means that, despite running well and winning Nike South last week clearly showing they are either #1 or #2 in Texas and #2 or #3 in the South, and what that all means is they should drop back to #29-34 (behind teams they beat last week)?

Come on.

EDIT: Let's take a closer look at this, because it's a great example of how the snapshot of a single race can show something different than what the actual results over the course of the season has shown.

On the left is the rank within their team (including a quick estimate of the race today) and on the right is how they ran (all were in the championship race).

Claremont -
#1/2 Adam Johnson = #31 (15:48.25)
#1/2 Mike Lowrie = #19 (15:38.09)
#3 Jonah Ross = #16 (15:36.51)
#4 Dylan Powers = #45 (16:00.61)
#5/6 Tom Englebert = #67 (16:16.26)
#5/6 Jonah Evans = #76 (16:20.17)
#7 Tab Backman = #119 (16:40.69)

Canyon -
#1 Wesley Walsh = #5 (15:23.32)
#2 Chance Lamberth = #8 (15:26.76)
#3/4 Ryan Thompson = #40 (15:57.29)
#3/4 Dylan Scarsone = #28 (15:46.41)
#5/6 Dalton Tanner = #94 (16:27.45)
#5/6 Travis Gradijan = #95 (16:28.07)
#7 Omar Ledezma = #151 (17:04.28)

Southlake Carroll -
#1 Eli Canal = #22 (15:43.60)
#2 Reed Brown = #18 (15:37.60)
#3 Timou Toure = #103 (16:32.21)
#4/5 Ansel Richards = #70 (16:18.02)
#4/5 Shea Whatley = #42 (15:58.60)
#6 Charles Gardner = #43 (15:59.18)
#7 Johnny Kemps = #60 (16:11.76)



So, Southlake Carroll's #5/6 guys (though not on this day) beat Claremont's #4, and Southlake Carroll's #1-2 punch (both today and their usual runners) beat Claremont's #1-2 punch.

Meanwhile, Southlake Carroll's #5/6 guys (though not on this day) were far ahead of Canyon's #5; their #5 on the day was STILL almost 10 seconds ahead of Canyon's, and their #4's were very similar (though Canyon had the better day up front).

Despite the fact that the only reason Canyon (175) and Claremont (178) scored less points than Southlake Carroll (185) was because of the makeup of the Championship race's field, the fact that Southlake Carroll had a more significant trek to get to the meet, were coming off a big win the week before, and had a worse day when looking at "who ran what" vs. "who should have run what", you believe all that is irrelevant because Canyon scored 175 points, Claremont scored 178 points, and Southlake Carroll scored 185 in the championship race.

watchout, on , said:

I would still say they should drop at least 10-15 spots to 29-34 range. I wouldn't rank them based on a "merged" score using runners that raced in less competitive races and therefore had less traffic to negotiate given where they finished. Their boys that ran 16:02 (10th place in DI) and 16:09 (14th in DI) wouldn't necessarily have run faster than their 5th runner (16:11 for 69th) did in the Championship race.

In this case the merged scored definitely does not take precedence over the actual race score. If they had one or two kids run 30-40 seconds faster in the DI race then that would be different.

Now that all the races at Clovis are done, Southlake Carroll ends up #2 in the full merge. Anyone still think they should drop out of the top 30?

EDIT: Power merge scores =

• 140 - Great Oak - 78:37.79 (US#4)
  
• 187 - Southlake Carroll - 79:21.06 (US#19)
  
• 189 - Canyon (Anaheim) - 79:01.23 (was on the bubble, which means US Top-55)
  
• 195 - Claremont - 79:19.72 (US#28)
  
• 202 - Madera South - 79:12.96 (US#16)
  
• 242 - Westview - 79:39.41
  
• 249 - King - 79:59.32
  
• 278 - McQueen - 80:04.66 (unranked but was US#41 if I listed beyond 40)
  
• 282 - Clovis North - 80:09.45 (was on the bubble, which means US Top-55)
  
• 293 - California (Whitter) - 80:19.71
  
• 300 - Beaumont - 80:22.16
  
• 319 - De La Salle - 80:34.44
  
• 321 - Central Catholic - 80:41.33 (US#13)
  
• 337 - Agoura - 80:49.45
  
• 347 - Ventura - 80:52.97
  
• 347 - St John Bosco - 81:00.08
  
• 349 - Clovis - 80:51.90
  
• 356 - Paso Robles - 81:06.23
  
• 360 - Davis - 81:06.57
  
• 362 - Arcadia - 80:47.82
  
• 383 - Quartz Hill - 81:16.12
  
• 383 - Jesuit - 81:10.10

...

watchout, on , said:

Yes, true and I think they do know this is not the time of year that you HAVE to beat the world but I would bet anything they're not happy with this result.

EDIT: and on another front, Briana Gess won the girls B race by 25+ seconds, in the third fastest time of the day. She was 5 seconds behind wunderkind Kelati who ran in the Easterns race with PLENTY of competition. Gess should be ranked much higher.

I guess she has now done something!!! :-)

King999, on , said:

I was trying to put a positive spin on their race; my apologies.

Perhaps looking at the NY trio would be better then:

#3 St. Anthony's times were better almost across the board than CBA's times that year (only spot that St. A's didn't have the edge was #3, where they ran 12:59.3 to CBA 2011's 12:58.2). The NY teams that beat CBA are all very very good.

I rarely use team times OR even 5 man avgs to look at a race

They get too skewed by one guy possibly, which happened today

The issue here today was that this was a very fast race 20 under 12:45 35 under 13:00, when you pick up scoring at second with 47th you have no chance, in this type of field.

No doubt, that's a very good trio of NY teams.

It's worth putting into perspective: CBA's team time was pretty similar to what they ran in 2011, when they edged Southlake Carroll 91-95 to win NXN.

A ~13:00 average isn't world-beating anymore, but it's still a very solid mid-season mark en route to bigger meets later in the season.