Did you give it to your MIAA rep as well? I certainly know it has never been brought up at a XC / T&F Committee meeting. I think a large part of the problem with issues not even getting debated is the process. Too much decision making power is in the hands of too few - the meet directors - without any oversight. The MIAA Committee members should see themselves as that but they simply go to these meetings to get a free luch.
Oh, boy…how to make friends and win votes (influence people)…
I’d be willing to provide what I have and support something like this to a committee. At the very least I think the CMTFOA should be using something like this to help make seeding the District E Meet a little more fair, though I will say they do a great job with what they have. If we have the numbers though, why not put them to use? Inaccurate seeding being allowed for post season meets is absolutely ridiculous. It’s 2015 for crying out loud, similar competition venues, FAT timing, and fair seeding should be standard practice by now.
There are plenty of young coaches that have the competency to work the computers, spreadsheets, and timing equipment needed to get this done in a cost efficient manner. And they are motivated for change! Gotta figure a way to utilize resources at hand!
By the time Districts rolls around there has been more than enough time for people to perform up to a standard. If you earn it you can go, if you didn’t you certainly shouldn’t bump others that did out of heats they deserve to be in.
My numbers are only for Fitchburg to Reggie.
My reasoning was that the District E Champs is the most inclusive + competitive meet run on a small track in CMass. It is also usually run within the same relative time of the year, therefore easier to compare similar environments for competition/effort/fitness from small track to Reggie.
Again, these conversions are average differences over a 14 year period of the top 5 finishers in D1 and D2 for boys and girls at the District E Championships (Fitchburg) and their subsequent performances at State Class + All-State Meets (Reggie Lewis) taking out of account any significant outliers. I would not be confident in saying it applies to any other track but Fitchburg, but could be used as a ballpark guideline if someone wanted to.
I think you make some very valid points. As will all new things, it seems to take some time before a groundswell gets things going. It took almost 10 years for the NCAA to get their indexing to reflect a more fair playing field and there are still questions when it comes to oversized 300 meter flat floor times vs 200 meter banked times.
To say teams should all come into Reggie to get times is simplifying the issue too much and not appreciating the talent that exists within the state, outside of the “Reggie circle”.
According to the newly release Alignment for Winter Track dated 2/5/15, Whitinsville Christian is moved up to Division 4 in Indoor track. Also so was Ayer/Shirley. others??
some qualifying times are different, does that mean some kids who thought they qualified, now do not? and vice/versa?
I do not know the answer to that question - but pretty sure that WC was moved by request just for this year, because they do not participate on Sunday’s. Kudos to the MIAA/MSTCA for accommodating their request and for them staying true to their beliefs!
great point! I know they have moved at some other meets to run saturdays against larger divisions for the same reasons. not sure about Ayer-Shirley though…
Hi everyone, looking to the MIAA Division 5 state Meet on the 15th. I like Alyssa Madden to place in the top 5 in the 300 and at least in the top 8 in the 55.
On a unrelated note I like another runner from Oakmont next indoor season in the 600 - Elyse Bartkus. She ran the 600 for the first time today at the meet against Bromfield and placed second to the top 600 runner for Oakmont.
Madden looks like a very talented 8th grader and I think she has a real chance of winning both the 55 and 300 on Sunday, if she runs them. It may not happen, but running a 7.58 at Fitchburg (in her third 55 of the day) is really impressive and she does have the # 2 seed time in the 300 at 41.82. Also - Oakmont appears to have found several other younger runners who have had a very impressive season - do they lose them in the spring to another sport or will they continue?
As for your comment on Bartkus - it would appear that she has a good deal of work in front of her to compete within the Mid-Wach and Central MA next year, based on her time and the times of the returners in front of her. But with Madden and Ciesluk to chase anything can happen if she is willing to put in the hard work-good luck to her!
Update on this thread, Alyssa Madden didn’t run the 55 but had a great showing in the 300 and has qualified for the New England Championship this Friday with a time of 41.38. She has run 3 consecutive personal bests in each of the Reggie meets she has run in during the state meets.
She is seeded 13th at the New England and no doubt she will see a number of faster runners there. Great experience for an 8th grader and I look forward to seeing all the young runners for Oakmont next year.
Unfortunately, I hear that there is no waiver for 8th graders for the spring so Alyssa and the other 8th graders running indoor now will not be able to run for HS in the spring.
Also, I think that Bartkus has been battling a foot injury during indoor so hopefully that will get worked out for spring.
There is no doubt Madden is talented and she has proven she can run with high schoolers. I can’t say that I am surprised about the lack of a waiver, though. I am actually more surprised that they got a waiver for the winter. Oakmont has 675 students in their high school. The 675 number is within 25 of schools like Ipswich, Norwell, Old Rochester, Seekonk (I don’t believe any of those schools use middle schoolers). There are talented middle schoolers in other districts (Wachusett Regional comes to mind), it is just the way it works.
With that said - the future at Oakmont is REALLY bright. If that group stays together, they have district titles in their future!
The waiver rule is ridiculous. My kids, 2 years apart, at the same school, were only allowed to run in 8th grade. Waivers denied in their 7th grade years. A school with less than 200 students. Did not win a single meet those 4 years. 5 miles down the road a school with 400 students got waivers all 4 years. Kids shouldn’t be included/ excluded based on a 5 mile difference in residence. Let them all run.
Not sure where you are located in Central MA but there are many middle school track programs in the spring that would love to have 2 more athletes join them. USATF also puts on youth meets thru the winter, but you would have to go into Boston for those.
If your kids really enjoy it then I would pursue those avenues and have them run against kids there own age for now - plenty of time to run when they actually get to HS - what’s the rush?
There are also possibilities to search out youth clubs. There are lots of ways to get kids involved at a grassroots level. Honestly diversity can be their best ally when they are young so having them do all types of different activities and sports doesn’t mean that they are at a disadvantage athletically by the time they get to high school
My kids are already through that period and in high school now. It’s not a matter of being disadvantaged athletically, but that it’s not fair that one kid sits and watches kids he/she competed against in youth meets being part of a team simply by virtue of being on the right side of a border. The rules of waiver in MASS are arbitrary at best and serve no one’s interests. a simple all middle schoolers or no middle schoolers would be more fair. And I’m not just speaking of track, the way the rules stand now, a larger school can use middle schoolers to fill out a JV team, but a smaller school without a JV team cannot fill a varsity team or start a JV if they are projected to be above minimum team size.
A team can have middle schoolers if they have the same principal, but cannot have middle schoolers if both schools are at the same location but have different principals… Try explaining those nuances to the kid who can’t play.
Doesn’t matter to me anymore. It was just a comment on the arbitrary nature of the rules.
…and Coach O’Malley (OmM37) and his staff on a great team upset on the girls side!
Also to the three Central MA Individual champions:
Chelsea Owusu - on an amazing stretch run to catch the defending state champion and pass her on the inside FTW!
Kevin Hack - Nipmuc in the HJ - 6’ 8
Leonardo Ramirez - Fitchburg in the SP - 55’ 9
Madden had a great indoor season on the Oakmont HS team but as MA2010 said “what’s the rush?” she will have years to run with the HS and I believe it was a positive experience for her and will make the transition to the HS team next indoor season as a freshmen that much easier. I can’t wait to see her run in the freshman/sophomore invitational next indoor season.
Interesting fact I found out… Madden holds the school record for the 100m and 200m at Overlook middle school and now holds the school record for the 55m and the 300m at Oakmont HS. I guess she will be trying break her own records at this point until she runs in the spring of 2016 for the HS and looks to break the outdoor records at her distances…
Question for everyone, do you think a runner like her should train at the 400m in the spring? Is there any benefit in that?
Depends… My 2 cents?
In all honesty for HS she should develop her 400m as a means of making her well rounded but depending on her build and with that speed early on she could likely be a standout middle distance runner later in her career. Focusing early on speed/power/technique and injury prevention will only serve to benefit her as she grows. Patience, consistency, and conservative long term planning throughout the growing process will go a long way in helping maximize her potential regardless of what events she chooses to excel at. She has shown true potential, but any coach knows that potential is the most useless word in the dictionary…