OATCCC State Meet

E

EuclidandViren

Well-known member
Anyone else having troubles with the state meet?

I have tried to register and it's been 24 hours. Last year and this year have been a debacle. Did I read the rules wrong? Am I not understanding how to use Milesplit. Or does OATCCC and their high and mighty rules about only using Milesplit not know what they are doing?

Declaration & registration must be completed on MileSplit Ohio

  1. The FINAL TOP 30 PERFORMANCE LIST will be posted on Wednesday, February 26th at 12:00 noon
  2. To enter the OAT&CCC Indoor State Meet, the official coach of the high school team must declare and register all athletes from the list that wish to participate.
  3. The declaration and registration window will remain open from Wednesday, February 26th at 12:00noon until Friday, February 28th at 11:59pm.
  4. The scratch window is open for only 12 hours starting Saturday, March 1st at 12:01am and ending on Saturday, March 1st at 12:00 NOON. Scratching an athlete or relay team allows the next declared athlete or relay team in that event to be accepted into the event. There are no substitutions made from the same team.
  5. The list of accepted entries will be posted by Sunday, March 2nd at 6:00pm.
 
 
It was open for about an hour yesterday before they shut it down again due to multiple errors in the registration process- teams in the wrong division and incorrect import of seed times.

It has not been opened back up yet.
 
For the first time this year, they converted times from 200m track to 300m performances using the same conversion calculators the NCAA uses. An 800m time on a 200m track would have about 1.5 seconds (approximately) knocked off for state qualifying purposes.

The database on Milesplit reflects the raw times everyone ran. The OATCCC list has the conversion applied when appropriate.
 
Runningfast said:
For the first time this year, they converted times from 200m track to 300m performances using the same conversion calculators the NCAA uses. An 800m time on a 200m track would have about 1.5 seconds (approximately) knocked off for state qualifying purposes.

The database on Milesplit reflects the raw times everyone ran. The OATCCC list has the conversion applied when appropriate.
Click to expand...
That would make sense. Thanks for the update.
 
I think much of the problem was due to the conversion….. which most were a big fan of. Now, that it changes some of the qualifiers, some may not like it, as it knocked their kid back a couple places and out of qualifying. Also, a few tried to register for the wrong division and maybe were able to….. kinks need to be worked out, but IMO it’s a work in progress and getting better every year. I’ve only been at this indoor track thing for 35 years.
 
I like this set up. My constructive criticism would be to post weekly official lists with conversions included so athletes and coaches are not caught off guard.
 
VFL said:
I was looking at the 800 and something seems off to me.
When I look at the MileSplit rankings filtered by D1 Indoor we get this list.
When I look at the OATCC list for D1 Indoor, I see this list which I would have thought is the same.
So when I looked at a couple of individuals: Brock Jarrett - the times do not match up for the same meet. The same for Jack Nesbit and Brendan Steel.
What am I missing or is the system messed
Click to expand...
Further to Runningfast's response, Brendan's correct ranking was probably harder to sort out on the initial software pass because the review had to go deeper than his posted season best... that is, the algorithm couldn't just pick up the already ranked Milesplit DI times and pick out the times on flat 200M tracks for conversion. This could be the first pass, but then a further dive into each individual's other marks would be required to ID potentially higher ranked results... as in Brendan's case.
 
Good point, Galesxc. That is an idiosyncracy of this new conversion system.

The entry headaches were really frustrating earlier this week, but it seems like everything is getting worked out. I'm glad there is an open week between qualifying window and the state meet so there was time to sort all of this out without too much rush.

Overall, I think these conversions and the new four divisions will be positive changes. I'm grateful for all of the work the OATCCC puts into our sport.
 
galesxc said:
Further to Runningfast's response, Brendan's correct ranking was probably harder to sort out on the initial software pass because the review had to go deeper than his posted season best... that is, the algorithm couldn't just pick up the already ranked Milesplit DI times and pick out the times on flat 200M tracks for conversion. This could be the first pass, but then a further dive into each individual's other marks would be required to ID potentially higher ranked results... as in Brendan's case.
Click to expand...
As someone who is tackling this whole issue in my all-time ranking re-work (to be released at the end of the indoor season), I can tell you that I sympathize with the difficulty of their task. I've had to create as many as 7 different columns in an event in order to properly categorize a performance on a given track and convert that to a 200m banked track performance using the same conversions the collegians use.

For example, here are the columns I have for the boys 1600m and the conversion factors used to get to the 1600m distance on a 200m banked track.

1600m
  • 200m banked
  • 200m flat - Multiply mark x 0.9874
  • Oversized flat - 1:1 conversion
Mile (converting to the 1600m)
  • Undersized flat - Multiply x 0.9942 to convert to 1600m, multiply by 0.9941 to convert from undersized flat to 200m flat, then multiply by 0.9874 to convert from 200m flat to 200m banked
  • 200m banked - Multiply x 0.9942 to convert to 1600m (mile-to-1600m)
  • 200m flat - Multiply by 0.9942 (mile-to-1600m), then by 0.9874 (flat-to-banked)
  • Oversized flat - Multiply x 0.9942 (mile-to-1600m)

As I'm dealing with a historical set of data that is 50+ years worth of data, it takes a lot of leg work to properly categorize performances into today's conversion schemes. While it's a cumbersome task, it is worth the effort for future historians. The really interesting part of this exercise is doing the research into each university/college's facilities over the years. Even with this effort, however, not all tracks fit into this nice set of conversion standards. For example, the University of Cincinnati's Armory Fieldhouse, the sight of a couple of fantastic girls' 2-mile runs by Clayton Northmont great, Kristy Orre. That facility from 1981-1988 was a 188 yard flat track with four (4) rounded corners, two longer straightaways, and two short straightaways. For those of us that competed on the track, especially when sprinting, it was a challenge! There are no conversions for such a "tight" track like that, so I have to use the existing undersized flat to 200m flat conversion as part of the conversion sequence even though it is assumed that there are only 2 straightaways and fully-rounded turns.

So, hats off to OATCCC/Milesplit for their efforts!
 
Runningfast said:
Good point, Galesxc. That is an idiosyncracy of this new conversion system.

The entry headaches were really frustrating earlier this week, but it seems like everything is getting worked out. I'm glad there is an open week between qualifying window and the state meet so there was time to sort all of this out without too much rush.

Overall, I think these conversions and the new four divisions will be positive changes. I'm grateful for all of the work the OATCCC puts into our sport.
Click to expand...

I believe the process would have been easier and more transparent (and more useful to coaches) if the OATCCC performance lists would have been "live" from the beginning of the indoor season. In my imagination, I see an approach similar to the Mile/1600M, 3200/2 Mile conversions; new lists with an embedded set of "if-then" commands... for example, if "location" = "OSU", then OATCCC mark = 0.98__* the OSU time.

Following our races at Ashland on Friday, I had the top 30+ from the DI Milesplit rankings in an excel spreadsheet with conversions manually applied. It was kinda fun on Saturday and Sunday, updating the lists as new results popped up. By Sunday night, I had what turned out to be a pretty accurate idea of where we stood. I initially missed a couple cases like Brendan's and had to go look at a kentucky milesplit video to confirm the President's Day meet was on a banked track, but I was close and final fixes were quick and easy.

The point is, bugs happen and it looks bad when they only surface in the final, critical hours. Had we started eight additional "OATCCC D_ Performance Lists" from early on, the bugs would have been ID'd and quickly worked out over the course of the season.
 
galesxc said:
I believe the process would have been easier and more transparent (and more useful to coaches) if the OATCCC performance lists would have been "live" from the beginning of the indoor season. In my imagination, I see an approach similar to the Mile/1600M, 3200/2 Mile conversions; new lists with an embedded set of "if-then" commands... for example, if "location" = "OSU", then OATCCC mark = 0.98__* the OSU time.

Following our races at Ashland on Friday, I had the top 30+ from the DI Milesplit rankings in an excel spreadsheet with conversions manually applied. It was kinda fun on Saturday and Sunday, updating the lists as new results popped up. By Sunday night, I had what turned out to be a pretty accurate idea of where we stood. I initially missed a couple cases like Brendan's and had to go look at a kentucky milesplit video to confirm the President's Day meet was on a banked track, but I was close and final fixes were quick and easy.

The point is, bugs happen and it looks bad when they only surface in the final, critical hours. Had we started eight additional "OATCCC D_ Performance Lists" from early on, the bugs would have been ID'd and quickly worked out over the course of the seas
Click to expand...
I like your suggestion in the 1st paragraph. I'm going to add that to my "to do" list in creating a cross-reference sheet for the community. Will try to get that out by Monday.
 
Many of my coaching friends think it is unfair that D1 is smaller in the number of schools than D2/D3/D4.
I just want to point out the qualification differences from D1 to D4 for girls.
I am not trying to make fun of any team or individual, but to point out that there is a glaring difference. Especially in the relays and distance events.

16th place mark for each division. Running events only.
Event D1 D4
4x800 10:05 12:33
4x400 4:12 5:01
4x200 1:47 2:01
3200 11:20 13:44
1600 5:11 5:34
800 2:21 2:29
400 59.15 63.08
200 25.51 27.14
60 7.85 8.33
60H 9.37 10.36
 
EuclidandViren said:
Many of my coaching friends think it is unfair that D1 is smaller in the number of schools than D2/D3/D4.
I just want to point out the qualification differences from D1 to D4 for girls.
I am not trying to make fun of any team or individual, but to point out that there is a glaring difference. Especially in the relays and distance events.

16th place mark for each division. Running events only.
Event D1 D4
4x800 10:05 12:33
4x400 4:12 5:01
4x200 1:47 2:01
3200 11:20 13:44
1600 5:11 5:34
800 2:21 2:29
400 59.15 63.08
200 25.51 27.14
60 7.85 8.33
60H 9.37 10.36
Click to expand...
4 Divisions for Indoor State is too much..3 would have made sense
 

Attachments

Last edited:
It should actually be fairly easy to have live converted results. Yes, there might be a few errors that crop up, but if results with conversions and CORRECT divisional placement for schools were available dynamically, then those errors would be found earlier rather than later. This is what databases were made to do. [And why there is a reason to use databases and not spreadsheets for some tasks.] Hopefully that will be in place for next season. I am sure the OATCCC is frustrated with all of the Milesplit issues this year, but you have to expect growing pains when you make a significant change.

On the subject of divisions, I wonder if the indoor meet will stay four divisions or go to five next year? It seems like logistically five might be hard to do. With four divisions we have two double meets. With five it seems like you might need to have a third day.
 
mathking said:
It should actually be fairly easy to have live converted results. Yes, there might be a few errors that crop up, but if results with conversions and CORRECT divisional placement for schools were available dynamically, then those errors would be found earlier rather than later. This is what databases were made to do. [And why there is a reason to use databases and not spreadsheets for some tasks.] Hopefully that will be in place for next season. I am sure the OATCCC is frustrated with all of the Milesplit issues this year, but you have to expect growing pains when you make a significant change.

On the subject of divisions, I wonder if the indoor meet will stay four divisions or go to five next year? It seems like logistically five might be hard to do. With four divisions we have two double meets. With five it seems like you might need to have a third day.
Click to expand...
One idea for next year with outdoor going to 5 divisions, and since there are less schools for indoor than outdoor, would be to use those 5 divisions but put them into 4 for indoor using the following format: D1, D2, D3, and then combine D4/5 like they used to do with D2/3 for indoor. This would keep the meet to 2 days and some events for this year in D3 and D4 didn't even have 16 or 30 marks/times, so this would help with that. This would elimninate them coming up with their own formula to figure out divisions like they did for this year, and divisions would be based off of outdoor like they have done every other year.

I also agree with you about being able to see the rankings with conversions on a more regular basis. I'm unfortunatley not surprised by the issues with milesplit. As a coach I've found there to be multiple issues every year with the rankings, and contacting anyone at milesplit has been near impossible and they don't respond or fix issues when I've sent them in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top