Page: 1 / 1
UK Invite Qualification Criteria
Joined: Apr 2008
I am surprised that they allowed people admission into the field at UK this weekend based on PR performances as opposed to 2014 indoor performances. I thought events like NB Indoor Nationals based qualification on current year [i][b]indoor[/i][/b] performances. It is kind of a shame to see someone get in based on a time from 2 years ago that is :20 seconds slower than they have actually run in 2014 and there be another athlete who has a faster 2014 indoor time than that person not get in all. There are people who have not even run the distance they are entering at all this year. Mile qualifiers with 2 mile times only, 2 mile qualifiers with mile times only, etc. I don't have a vote in this, but it would seem to be much more consistent to say qualification is based on a 2014 indoor mark. Maybe this is not practical, but with the number of opportunities that there are (UK January meet, IU, OSU, Vanderbilt, and even Mason Co) to get an indoor mark, it would make the standards much more meaningful than basing them off of lifetime bests.
Joined: Jun 2005
@simtal New Balance allows you in on the basis of prior year performance, but the seeding is conditioned on current marks. Based on what I've read, I believe Jim Kaiser said something along those same lines here. There are clearly issues associated with using prior year PRs. E.g., if a kid gets hurt during CC, then it may be difficult for that athlete to come back and run well by the UK Indoor meet. I give Coach Weber and Jim K a lot of props on this meet though. They clearly bend over backwards to not only enforce the entry marks, but to let in as many kids as they believe the meet can efficiently tolerate.
Joined: Apr 2011
@simtal I share your concerns. We could have entered a few individuals who have PRs that would have easily met the qualification standards, but we were under the impression that entries would be based on 2014 indoors times. I've noticed an individual that is entered but hasn't race at all this winter, and there's likely a few more. I'm not saying that they shouldn't keep those individuals out that haven't raced yet...I just wish there was more consistency for entry standards especially when we are expected to pay entry fees prior to an athlete being accepted.
Joined: Jul 2006
The meet has never used only performances from that current winter. There are several athletes who have not run this season yet, check out the Top 10 times I have their 2014 season best on it. The * shows the athletes with no performance this season. The kid from TN that won the HJ at 6-08 set a new PR and has not been in a meet this season yet. Maybe an adjustment to just using prior year times.
Joined: Apr 2006
@jonathan Coach Weber and Jim Kaiser did an amazing job putting together the field that competed yesterday. To be honest, the entry procedures were done through DirectAthletics in which case when athletes were entered, coaches had to put in a performance. DirectAthletics for high school does not have the pleasure of having a Milesplit list of verified performances so Jim Kaiser was basically dependent on the honesty of the coaches entering, but Jim went back through and probably verified most of the performances whether they were last year or this year. It would have been a lot easier for him if he would have had plenty of indoor performances from this year, but the weather of the last two months has not cooperated, so he had to spend a lot more time going through the performances. If you want to judge Jim's clairvoyance, check the bottom few times/distances of each event. There were a very minimum of performances that were not of this elite meet quality. Looking at some of those names, my guess would be some just had sub-par performances for any of a number of reasons, just like any athlete having a bad day. Were there athletes that could have gotten in to the meet and performed better than some of the results- no doubt. But if I had an athlete that might be on the bubble, I would take a gamble on the entry fee hoping that some of those above scratch out or get eliminated by Jim's "Kentucky Milers Performance Challenge" or whatever he calls it.
Joined: Apr 2012
I think the UK team did a great job of getting excellent competition into the meet. If we really wanted to only include indoor times from this year it would hurt the KY runners more than surrounding states as places like Indiana & Ohio have more indoor meet opportunities. UK Wildcat and Vanderbilt HS meets were both on Feb. 1 so basically one opportunity to compete without major travel for many KY teams. The Mason Co. meets don't have pole vault and couldn't handle elite male vaulters as their set max for upcoming indoor state is 12 ft. As a family of vaulters we've had indoor competitions 3 of the last 4 weeks- 2 were the UK meets and one meant 6 hour drive each way to IWU. Our coaches had 3 athletes that we thought could compete with the qualification criteria even though 2 were "bubble"- figure the $10 each was worth the risk to enter because it is such a great opportunity if they get in. Glad we took the chance and had an outdoor time that got two "bubbles" in, as indoor times probably wouldn't have made it. One of our bubble guys actually beat outdoor PR even though he was one of the last ones to get in the meet & ended up "middle of the pack" as far as overall performance for the day.
Joined: Aug 2010
If I am not mistaken, they even allowed more athletes into some events then originally stated. Seeding and verifying that many athletes can't be easy and must be very time consuming. There is no way to get it perfect, but I think they do a great job.
Joined: Oct 2005
@jscott Yes, they did. If you looked at the entry lists on Tuesday night, the cut-offs were going to be ridiculous based on the number of athletes they said they were going to take initially. I would have had an 11:59 3200 girl not get in and a 9-1 vaulter. They added more heats and took more kids pretty much up to the projected cut-offs they had published. This past weekend was both the highest-quality and deepest indoor high school meet I've seen in KY.
Joined: Jun 2005
@BCrumbo Building on what's been said, I'd like to point out a couple things. 1. The meet literature does not address this topic of when the mark must be achieved. That said, you can't assume it's 2014 indoor marks just because it says nothing about 2013 outdoor marks. 2. Over the years, the entry process has been discussed at length by Jim Kaiser via the listserve and through this messageboard. This is something that newer coaches may obviously not know, which is understandable. Coach Weber and Jim Kaiser have created a gem of a meet, and I really admire how they bend over backwards to be as inclusive as possible with allowing kids into the various events. Jscott is correct, they did add sections and allow in more kids than originally advertised. Official is also correct in terms of the significant time cost associated with Jim having to go through those entries and weed out the falsified and unsupported marks. I checked just one event and found several marks that were either falsified or simply couldn't be verified. That process took a little time, and I only did it with one event and a handful of kids. Jim had to do it with the entire meet and about 60-70 kids per event. That's a lot of effort and for those of us who had kids that benefited from his effort (benefited in the sense that our kids moved up or made it into the meet), we greatly appreciate that effort.
Joined: Sep 2005
UK Invitational is one of the best-run meets I attend each year, indoors or out. Jim is also the most accessible and accommodating meet director in the land.
Page: 1 / 1