runnerboy1510
Member
Not sure if it has been asked yet or not? Is there a reason some of the results from timing first are not populating in milesplit. The Joe Lenge Dublin Classic results are still not in milesplit.
Ok, just checked again... Joe Lenge results are in the Meet Results listing... format looks typical... however, results have not made into individual athlete profiles and don't seem to be in the rankings.For a few weeks, the Joe Lenge results were in the Milesplit Meet Results list, but not incorporated into the rankings. I know little to nothing about dBase management, but maybe others can identify the breakdown.
From experience, it is not an immediate thing that happens. Databases are updated periodically during the day, and so we have to be patient. The biggest concern I have with those databases is allowing bad data in to begin with. Several events on the girls side were including team relay marks as individual marks in the list leaders, and the current girls' LJ mark of 20' 6.5"on the girls' side is pure bunk.Ok, just checked again... Joe Lenge results are in the Meet Results listing... format looks typical... however, results have not made into individual athlete profiles and don't seem to be in the rankings.
Ok, just checked again... Joe Lenge results are in the Meet Results listing... format looks typical... however, results have not made into individual athlete profiles and don't seem to be in the rankings
The Joe Lenge meet was on April 13, more than two weeks ago. Our Wayne results were in the dBase about the time I drug myself out of bed on the Saturday after. The typical time lag is not the problem in the case of the Joe Lenge results.From experience, it is not an immediate thing that happens. Databases are updated periodically during the day, and so we have to be patient. The biggest concern I have with those databases is allowing bad data in to begin with. Several events on the girls side were including team relay marks as individual marks in the list leaders, and the current girls' LJ mark of 20' 6.5"on the girls' side is pure bunk.
College marks making onto the HS lists have also been problematic this year.
As a tool, I prefer MileSplit to AthleticNet for a number of reasons. However, I do need to check AthleticNet regularly for stuff that's missed or stripped from the reporting on MileSplit (such as relay member names on too many occassions to count). No one source is perfect.Poor decision on their part if your theory is correct. A database is only as good/useful as it is complete. So they are limiting the quality and usefulness of their database ... and the inclination to use their database and site. I'm sure that would not be the outcome they want. Not very smart.
Out of curiosity, why do you prefer Milesplit? Or maybe, what do you use Milesplit for that you prefer it?As a tool, I prefer MileSplit to AthleticNet for a number of reasons. However, I do need to check AthleticNet regularly for stuff that's missed or stripped from the reporting on MileSplit (such as relay member names on too many occassions to count). No one source is perfect.
Think this is a problem? Try the backlash over FloSports taking the broadcast rights for the Diamond League next year at the rate of $30/mo vs. the soon-to-be $8/mo for Peacock. Lots of anger over that move - which I predict will be a disaster.
There are basically two strategies companies use in a situation like this. (1) Make your product better so people want to use your product. (2) Try to get into a position where people have no choice but to use your product. Given that Milesplit is the OHSAA's and OATCCC's current choice for post season and indoor state meet meet entries, they have effectively gotten (2) in place.Poor decision on their part if your theory is correct. A database is only as good/useful as it is complete. So they are limiting the quality and usefulness of their database ... and the inclination to use their database and site. I'm sure that would not be the outcome they want. Not very smart.
My preference is from that perspective of a researcher, not one who enters/modifies information. MileSplit I've found far easier to find needed information.Out of curiosity, why do you prefer Milesplit? Or maybe, what do you use Milesplit for that you prefer it?
The virtual meet feature is definitely a plus in Milesplit's favor, and the lists it generates by events look a little cleaner to me. But otherwise, as both a coach and as someone who teaches programming, I find Milesplit far more annoying than Athletic.net. Part of that is just the speed with which Athletic.net adapts and makes changes.
But for ease of use I find Athletic.net a far better platform for putting in entries (being able to see a continuous list of all athletes and the events they have entered, being able to enter athletes into event through the event page or through the athlete page, quicker navigation to and between our meets). I also think it is much better for getting our results. Honestly the lack of a team filter for results on Milesplit is baffling. But I also like how much easier it is to correct results (athlete's swapped, athlete name mistakes, typos in entering marks) in Athletic.net. It is also easier to set up and manage your own meets. Finally, I have found the speed of response for technical support to be better with Athletic.net.
I completely agree about the Flotrack debacle in the making.
There is a team filter at milesplit.Out of curiosity, why do you prefer Milesplit? Or maybe, what do you use Milesplit for that you prefer it?
The virtual meet feature is definitely a plus in Milesplit's favor, and the lists it generates by events look a little cleaner to me. But otherwise, as both a coach and as someone who teaches programming, I find Milesplit far more annoying than Athletic.net. Part of that is just the speed with which Athletic.net adapts and makes changes.
But for ease of use I find Athletic.net a far better platform for putting in entries (being able to see a continuous list of all athletes and the events they have entered, being able to enter athletes into event through the event page or through the athlete page, quicker navigation to and between our meets). I also think it is much better for getting our results. Honestly the lack of a team filter for results on Milesplit is baffling. But I also like how much easier it is to correct results (athlete's swapped, athlete name mistakes, typos in entering marks) in Athletic.net. It is also easier to set up and manage your own meets. Finally, I have found the speed of response for technical support to be better with Athletic.net.
I completely agree about the Flotrack debacle in the making.