Runner Triathlete News [ return ] From Message Chris Hunt   12/21/2002 10:21:17 Subject: more on rankings... IP: Logged Message: Ok, I have been reading these posts regarding the rankings and have some comments here... One of the most common gripes I read is that races were omitted from the calculations, in essense due to race directors not submitting them to Ed. While I agree strongly that it would be simplified if we could visit a website and readily determine if races were submitted, my question to you is this; where were you all season, if you were so concerned with your rankings? Periodically during the race season I would e-mail Ed and inquire as to the status of results for races I had done, and them proceed to encourage that race director to submit. In some cases it took several e-mails over months........you would not have these submitted if it were not for me taking this action(we both benefit from this). Anyone could have done the same, rather than wait until after the rankings were posted to complain.......my point is to be proactive, instead of reactive. Second, the general thought here is that the rankings are incorrect due to some race being left out...and the conclusion has been drawn that the age group winners will change when these are included. If these omissions are the reason that you expect change to result from, well...I doubt that the winners will change much. My rationale is this, and I will use myself for this example. I am currently ranked 12th overall and 3rd AG(35-39) with 94.1 points. I know that these points are correct because I understand the formula and come up with the same result. Now, most of the AG winners had over 90 points average, and any races not submitted were not worth over 90 points(check the list of races included in the rankings), so I fail to see how any race worth 90 points to the winner would affect those of us with well over 90 points........what do you think? Mr. Know   12/21/2002 11:45:16 RE: more on rankings... IP: Logged Message: If a person had done two races and has points of 103 and 96 and their 3rd and 4th race of 89 points each didn't get included, then those people fitting that profile will have a shot at taking an overal AG award. If every athlete from every race emailed Ed every weekend to check, then Ed would get thousands of emails weekly. That wouldn't be fair to Ed. Chris Hunt   12/21/2002 11:55:56 RE: more on rankings... IP: Logged Message: Yes that would be correct, but my thought on this is that anyone capable of generating those points values of 103 and 96 would have raced enough and finished high enough in other races that this would be moot point. Do you have someone in mind or is this a hypothetical situation from a anonymous person(Mr Know) Bret Tate   12/23/2002 10:33:14 RE: more on rankings... IP: Logged Message: I've been reading this thread and the prior one regarding rankings. From my perspective, I can understand the frustration of doing a race that is sanctioned and not having it count. For instance, Jeff and Brede's tri in Houston - which by the way I found to be an excellent small tri - was not counted in the RTN December mag. rankings. That would have been my third race and final race - my season was cut short because of injury. While I would not have earned 90 points in any of my races, receiving a ranking would have been a good indication of where I was prior to injury and prior to any type of taper. It would have provided me some additional feedback as to any corrections I needed to make in my mid-season training for this year. Second, because I live in a small town, I don't have the opportunity to train with a group of triathletes. So, having some feedback as to how I'm doing on a regional level would have been helpful. Finally, as I plan this year's races, I hope to concentrate on the higher point races, but I'd like to use smaller races as good practice. I'm new to the ranking system and am still learning how to calculate which races will garner significant points. A list of races with point totals would be helpful from a historic base. One last note, I found that those who do the rankings made an effort to answer my questions in a very timely manner. While I don't plan on using the rankings as the only measure of success for my triathlons, I really do appreciate the effort put in to calculating these rankings. sebastian   12/25/2002 19:54:26 RE: more on rankings... IP: Logged Message: Chris: The whole point is besides the final outcome of this years ranking. It is stated in the USA Triathlon bylaws if Im not mistaken that the ranking of the athletes in each region is the responsibility of that regional board and part of what those $7.5 per athlete USAT gives to USAT-SMW should go to this purpose. I don't feel that the SMW region does ANYTHING for it's membership yet we provide most if not all of their funding. Im still waiting for someone on the board to come out and even try to make an excuse for how CRUMMY their management is. Long Time Triathlete 12/26/2002 10:12:13 RE: more on rankings... IP: Logged Message: I don't see how you can say that the SMW region does nothing for the athletes. We've got one of the most active regions in the country, just look at the race calendar. Granted, there have been problems this year with the rankings, but we have a ranking system that has been used as a model for the national USAT rankings. Do you think that it's just happenstance that we have almost a race a weekend from April to October? I don't. Some of the SMW board members are the same race directors that direct and produce these races. Why don't you stand up and attempt to direct a race. Or better yet, do like Olen and run for a board position for the regional board or for a local tri club if there is one in your area. How often have you volunteered at a race? It's pretty easy to point out the flaws of a system when you are just a bystander. Until you (as an athlete) have been up until 1 or 2 in the morning and then wake up at 5 the same morning to set up a safe bike course for athletes like you, you've really got very little right to complain. And no, I'm not a race director, I'm an athlete just like you who has volunteered for a half dozen races over the past year. Sebastian   12/26/2002 17:29:39 RE: more on rankings... IP: Logged Message: Long time triathlete: You know what, I just may run next year as you suggest. Sure, let's not complain about anything, we should just consider ourselves lucky right? First of all I've helped in my share of races too. I am appreciative of all the effort that race directors put fourth and I know that a lot of the guys that serve on the board are out there as race officials and race directors as well, however if the usat-smw board would make a little bit more of an effort to attract people to do things like take race official clinics, they would not have to be out there themselves. Also on the number of races, it's a supply demmand world my friend and as long as the races keep filling up there will be people puting them on. Also, don't forget that we all fork up $40 or more to participate. Yes, having these many races is a privilege but without us the participants there would be none either. The issue is not the number of races here anyway. My gripes are that: 1.- The usat-smw does not properly comunicate with it's membership 2.- The rankings and the website have gone to hell over the last year I also happen to know that Im not the only one that has a problem with this maybe just one of the few that cares enough to say something about it. Mr. Know 1/06/2003 22:36:36 RE: more on rankings... IP: Logged Message: well chris, I'm not trying to start anything, but my point earlier was valid. I have only looked at the du results, but, in the 40 - 44 mens group, their was a big change. there were 9 new names added and a new guy at #1, Ted Roberts was at #3 and he was knocked to #6 and now does not receive an award at the banquet. Overall with the du results, there were an additional 24 men ranked and 2 women. jerry richard 3rd in the 50 - 54 mens group also may now get an award. Mr. Know 1/06/2003 23:10:59 RE: more on rankings... IP: Logged Message: still not trying to start anything.... Patrick Marr is now 2nd overall in Tri. Brandon is #1 where he should be and Tim Terwey is moved to masters overall. RTN has a picture of Tim saying that he edged out Brandon, that is not RTN's fault, but I hope the new issue has corrected pictures, corrected ballots for favorite races, as well as the new rankings. In the under 19 AG, there is a new winner along with a lot of new names. Nothing changed at the top in the 20 -24 or 25 - 29 except new names added in. The 30 - 34 group had changes and reshuffling around near the top. The 40 -44 group has a new winner. I could continue, but my point is made, the races that were left out has had a dramatic effect on the rankings and those who complained and didn't leave it as it was can now see the impact that redo-ing the rankings has caused. Rick R. 1/07/2003 18:10:33 RE: more on rankings... IP: Logged Message: Why are the Island Du results not listed for the athletes who were there, other than Dana Lyons???? This is extremely frustrating! Chris Hunt 1/07/2003 18:16:44 RE: more on rankings... IP: Logged Message: With all due respect, yes there were changes(not as many as most expected, and but more than I anticipated) in some of the age groups. None in mine, at least regarding those who were listed in RTN as AG winners 35-39. But, I started this thread and began it wanting to point out that things were awry all along, and in an attempt to at least ensure that most of the races I went to were scored, I acted as a liason between Ed Whitcombe and the race directors, thereby obtaining results for him. It seemed that from my standpoint, most athletes waited until after the closing date, and then complained. My point was, and still is, if you are concerned about your standings, be proactive, rather than reactive. Every year there are races left out, like everyone else, my standings have suffered as a result of this. Yet this time, after the results are in print, it is decided to call them null and void. Why was this year different? Ask Ed....this has always been a problen...results are left out because some race directors don't submit to him. I have no heartburn with the retabulation...my position was secure. I am glad that those people whose rankings changed for the better recieved what they were due. I am not advocating the current system or saying it is without flaw...just that we are in control of our own fates, don't leave it to someone else. With a mimimum of effort, anyone can ensure that results for races that they participated in are included. In doing this, everyone who participates in that races benefits. While you prefer to be anonymous(and it matters not to me) I sincerly hope that the new results were an improvement for you........look forward to a new race season and enjoy. P 1 Next Page>>