Regionals Observations


What did you observe as you went through the results from Regionals on Monday?

I noticed that 4:15er Nate Gomoll did not compete which means another notable runner from last year saw his season end with an injury.

I also noticed that there were some pretty quick 1600 meter relay times at Regionals with Homestead throwing down a 3:19 uncontested.


Kettle Moraine ran 3:20


I cannot speak for him but he and Ryan Kromer had very similar outcomes at their conference meets. Maybe they realized after not experiencing success on the same level as previous seasons (due to injury, sicknethat it just wasn’t in the cards this year.

Other observations:

  • Fourth place in the Middleton Regional’s 1600 was 4:26.81
  • Middleton Regional 4x8s had NO reason to go 8:08 or less when fifth place was 8:44!
  • Ryan Nameth won the Verona Regional 3200
  • Aric Miller beat Alec Miller in the Beaver Dam Regional’s 800
  • McKena Ramos ran 4:23.74 when fourth place was 4:37. No 300m hurdles for him like some previously thought.
  • Andrew Dusing ran 1:55.17. Not only is that fast but he might be a darkhorse in that sectional and for the state meet.
  • Someone mentioned it in the other thread but Bryce Miller is attempting the distance triple in D2. He’s certainly had enough rest all season due to the weather!
  • Andrea Ostenso ran 5:15/11:00 at her regional. Has had nearly same amount of rest as Bryce Miller.


Between Catholic Memorial with Sam T. and Joe Novak, and St. Joe’s with Matt Foster (22.06), Chris Madden (10.84), 4x1 (44.2 with bad handoffs), and Kevin Ryan in the mile/2, that team title is going to be a tight one. Assuming all goes well with these guys on Thursday and all qualify for the state meet, are there any other D2 teams that can challenge these teams?


If the honor roll is accurate and one were to score it like a meet:

48	Shorewood
38	Catholic Memorial
35	Monroe
31	Kenosha St. Joseph
28	Little Chute
23	Mount Horeb
23	Kettle Moraine Lutheran
21	Ashland
17	East Troy
15	Aquinas


It is interesting that the 5th runner in the mile at the Boyceville Sectional (4:43) had the 8th fastest mile time of all the regionals. We could have a time that would have been an extra qualifier had it been at sectionals but won’t be because it was at regionals.


The WIAA should make a provision for strong Regional performances like they do at Sectionals, especially when there are so many sectionals with incomplete heats/flights.

In D1 there is a Sectional with only 7 boys 4x4 teams and one girls 4x8 with only 7 teams.

In D2 Sectionals there is also a 4x8 with only 7 teams, a 4x2 with only 6 teams and only 13 & 15 vaulters in that same sectional.

D3 has three of the four sectionals with less than full fields in the PV, with one sectional only having 12 boys and girls vaulters. That sectional also only has 13 girls in the 300h and 4x8, and only 15 boys 4x2 teams and 15 guys in the HJ. Another sectional is 1-2 entrants short in three relays and the girls 32. The Colfax Sectional that CCdude mentioned is two light in the girls 4x8, but has 19 in the girls HJ!??!?!

Can someone PLEASE explain how 19 can qualify in the HJ!?!??!

Last observation that relates more to another thread I recall on this site. I noticed a Hyland girl running for SPASH - I’m wondering if she is the daughter of John Hyland who was a great middle distance runner for SPASH? Also see the Schraeder name on a couple of boys at Port Edwards and was wondering if A-R-N-I-E is their father?


I also would like to see some sort of provisional qualifiers for Sectionals. There are a couple of very imbalanced regional pairings in the state.Off the top of my head, I would say that in Division 1, if you finish 5th or lower but have a better mark than the winner of the other regional (which I have seen happen often enough), you get to go to Sectionals. I’m sure that would lead to some complaints from coaches whose athletes end up in a newly-created slow heat at Sectionals (and other complaints too, I’m sure), but at the very least, it would keep people somewhat honest at Regionals and prevent teams from slow-jogging their way through events.

EDIT: Or, in cases like the situations listed above, where not all the slots for a Sectional are filled, allow them to be filled with the next-best non-automatic qualifiers from Regionals. That’s probably not a perfect solution either, but I think it’s better than what we currently have.


Yeah, obviously no solution is perfect but it just seems kind of silly that a kid can take fifth in one regional in the two mile (at boyceville again - 10:49) who would have won all the other three regionals in the colfax sectional with that time.

I particularly agree with gunlap about stopping kids from “slow-jogging.” It seems lame to me.


I am not sure why “slow-jogging” is lame. Seems like good coaching to me if someone is following the rules. I agree some of the rules should probably be changed, but with the way the rules are now, if you can run a 5 minute in the 1600 and can make it to sectionals, why run harder than you need to, especially if you are racing several events. It does create an unfair advantage if one regional has much better competition than the other, but each athlete needs to do what gives him or her the best chance to get to state.


So here is my question about slow-running through Regionals: if you are in a regional with only 4 relay teams, could you literally walk the relay event? Do you have to make an honest attempt to do some level of running? Would it be considered unsportsmanlike to walk?


Great question! I’m unaware of an honest effort rule, but in D2 & D3 Sectionals they do have a slow and fast heat in most running events.


So does anyone think the WIAA will step in and adjust the HJ to 16 qualifiers or let this one slide??


If I were a runner in a position to slow-jog at Regionals and still qualify, I would probably do it too. I don’t really have a problem with people being smart and taking advantage of the rules that are in place, but like MU alum said, I think some of the rules should be changed.


If the Regional host didn’t run a jump-off, I’m not sure that they’ll do anything, other than probably not have that school host Regionals again next year. My guess is that it would not be possible/practical to have a jump-off at this point.


With runners who are in multiple events you are right. And certainly as long as it’s legal I don’t have a big problem with it. But with 2 days in between regionals and sectionals I would never have my kids do it (except for saving for a later race), it just isn’t why my kids and I are at the meet! Also, is there any real evidence that holding off on monday will help you run faster on thursday? (Not a challenging question, I’m actually curious).


I would think someone doing a 1600 and either 800 or 3200 double would certainly benefit by running as slow as possible at regionals. To run 4 quality distance races in 3 days is not ideal. With that said, for a 1:55 800 meter runner, would it benefit him that much to run 2:05 instead of 2 flat. Neither is going to tax him that much.


I would think someone doing a 1600 and either 800 or 3200 double would certainly benefit by running as slow as possible at regionals. To run 4 quality distance races in 3 days is not ideal. With that said, for a 1:55 800 meter runner, would it benefit him that much to run 2:05 instead of 2 flat. Neither is going to tax him that much, but going 1:56 or 1:57 would.


If running as slowly as possible to qualify is really that much of an issue to some people there are only a few possible rule changes that could fix this.

1. Come up with sectional qualifying standards similar to the provo used in NCAAs. Requiring that the runner be both in the top 4 and run the provo time in order to move on to sectionals.

2. Require those who are in the top 4 to be within a certain number of seconds away from their pr in that event. i.e. if the rule was that you had a to within 45 seconds of your pr in the 3200, a 9:30 3200 meter runner would have to run at least 10:15 or faster. Obviously the times would have to adjusted per event.

3. Say there is a loaded regional with 6 guys who can run under 9:35, but then there is a regional with only 2 guys who can break 10 which could then allow guys who have only ran 10:20 to qualify for the sectional. IMO, it isn’t fair at all to those 2 guys who have ran faster than 9:35 to not qualify for there particular sectional. To deal with this I think there should be extra qualifiers, similar to the way we have extra state qualifiers.

4. The only other way I can think of to fix this issue is to have auto qualifier times into the sectional. If a runner hits a certain time during the season, they should be allowed to make it into the sectional automatically, but they must also be required to run at the regional and finish with a time that is at least the 16th fastest time run when combining all regional results.

I recognize none of these options are a perfect way of alleviating the problems that occur but they would help make sure that those who have run very well make it at least to the sectional and given the chance to get an extra qualifier, instead of getting bumped out of a loaded regional while someone with a MUCH slower time is able to run at state because that particular runner as a very weak regional and sectional.


Sounds like that Boyceville regional was a difficult one this year. I remember not too long ago the Princeton Sectional being very difficult (it still might be, haven’t looked). I hope your runner has next year.

You’re assuming that is the best effort from those runners in different regionals but that is probably not the case. Although, 4:43 is a great time and he probably should have earned at least a spot in sectionals. The WIAA track tournament is not set up that way. It is not set up on fair, it is set up on location. This very same argument can be made in all sports at all levels.

A solution to the problem, I think is far away. Qualify on time! I love the idea but meets being hand timed, with tail winds, low sand pits and workers that might not know track would make that an even bigger issue.