isnt the scoring system 6 4 3 2 1 ?????
isnt the scoring system 6 4 3 2 1 ?????
never mind i am wrong 10 8 6 4 2 1 is the correct way my bad
runnersfan wrote:
isnt the scoring system 6 4 3 2 1 ?????
And remember there is no 200 for the men, or 500 and 1000 for the women, even though those events are listed on Direct Athletics performance lists.
any dark horses out there??
we all know the favorites..but who do we think will come out of nowhere?
runnersfan wrote:
the princeton milers are so deep. i personally can't wait until penn realys 4xmile, they have a legit shot at oregon's 16:03 record....
it would be nice to see a sub 16 but i dont want to get ahead of myself.
"A legit shot at 16:03."
Your post might be one of the dumbest I've seen on letsrun in a long time. It goes to show why princeton gets so much flack on letsrun.
Princetonians by definition are full of themselves I guess.
Let me start with praise. The Princeton crew is unreal. They should be top 5 at NCAAs in cross next year. That doesn't mean they are anywhere close to 16:03.
Four 3:59 milers doesn't equal anything close to 16:03. And Princeton has roughly four 4:02 milers. That probably doesn't even equal 16:10 as it's a relay where you run by yourself and it's outdoors in the wind (I'd take their PRs and add 10 seconds to estimate a 4 x mile time).
I am willing to bet $10,000 to your $1,000 that Princeton doesn't break 16:03 at Penn Relays.
I'm also willing to bet up to $1,000 to your $1,000 that no one on the Princeton squad even breaks 4:00 at Penn.
I really want to make this bet. If you are serious, we can send the money ahead of time to the letsrun people, they can keep it and then one of us collects when it's over.
Let me do the math for you, I think there is less than a 50% chance that a single runner breaks 4:00 at Penn Relays for Princeton. One or two of them might barely be in sub 4 shape but no way do they do it by themselves, out front.
And I'm not offering this bet to make Princeton look bad - just you the poster. Look at Oregon last year - no one broke four for them and they had Centro, Acosta and Fleet on it.
Cabral is tough as hell so maybe he does but no one else. That's my only fear. Whoever runs leadoff has the best bet of doing it due to competition but leadoff leg is normally tactical.
The frosh thrower Dustin Brode from Harvard I expect will challenge for a top of the podium in the shot put, as his high school PR is close to 58 ft and he has thrown 56 ft so far this year...Kate Grace I think can do the 800/1500 double.And Nico Weiler is back for pole vault... is he in top shape? Now that is the question.I wonder if the Penn high jump frosh Reynolds will get NCAA qualification this weekend or not. He's about 2 inches away.
runnersfan wrote:
any dark horses out there??
we all know the favorites..but who do we think will come out of nowhere?
The men should be all Princeton but the women's meet could come down to the last event. Let's get it on!
wow?
sorry for being optimistic/positive.
sure 16:03 would be very hard but they definitely have the talent in my opinion.
last year they ran 16:21.41 (5th)
Indoor '10 best Penn '10 split
Soloff 4:06.24 4:05.0
VanAckeren 4:08.07 4:01.2
Mathabane 4:07.37 4:12.4
Amirault 4:11.10 4:02.8
Case for Callahan
Having a breakout sophomore year runs 1:48 and 4:01 indoor is in my opinion a good case for 3:59 outdoor material.
Case for Amirault
Last year ran 4:11 indoor to a 4:02 outdoor split
This year ran 4:01 indoor to a ???? outdoor split
a good case for 4:00 in my opinion
Case for Cabral
Last yr's PR 4:08, this yr so far 4:03 but again his steeple strength I feel will result in a 4:03 outdoor split
Case for VanAckeren
unknown only ran 2 mile races this yr off of no xc
he has potential to run a solid split as seen last year.
OBVIOUSLY there are so many factors to running PRs for all 4 runners. Like you said wind/rain/heat is huge, also not running by yourself is big as well.
my point wasnt to say they have it in the bag. it was to state that Princeton's depth is very strong. Im not stupid. To break a record in a relay EVERYTHING has to go right, that is what is great about relays anything can happen. Im just saying they should be favored and not considered a long shot.
Im sorry you took the word 'legit' to seriously.
I apologize.
I'm pretty sure Cabral ran a 4:00 mile last spring, it shows up as his PR in his bio
agreed.
his 4:08 PR last year was an indoor PR.
A little digging and we find pr's for everybody...
Cabral 4:00.64 (TCNJ Last Chance)
Callahan 4:01.03 (NYU Team Challenge)
Amirault 4:01.85 (TCNJ Last Chance)
Van Ackeren 4:01.2 (Penn Relays split)
Given that Callahan and Amirault both ran 4:01 in a glorified team time trial at the armory last week each certainly has the potential to make a legitimate run at sub-4 before the indoor season draws to a close.
That said 16:03 is a completely unreasonable pipe dream for this line up. As a point of interest the squad may line up better in a DMR than 4xmile with two guys under 1:48, two guys under 46.5, and 4 guys under 4:02 they ought to be able to figure something out.
Here are a few numbers to show how much deeper Heps guys have gotten in the last two years, by comparing the Final '09 list to today's
Event/#10 Time in '09/# of those times achieved at Heps/Where that mark ranks on this year's list.
800 - 1:53.31 - 3 - 17th
1000 - 2:27.32 - 4 - =16th
Mile - 4:10.40 - 4 - 19th
3000 - 8:18.44 - 0 - 16th
Comments:
- Wow
- '09 was on Harvard's fast track
- the 3000 in '09 was sit and kick, but so was the 1000 final.
- Wow
Ancient Ivy wrote:
Here are a few numbers to show how much deeper Heps guys have gotten in the last two years, by comparing the Final '09 list to today's
Event/#10 Time in '09/# of those times achieved at Heps/Where that mark ranks on this year's list.
I like the idea, but wouldn't it be a better comparison to do the overall top 10 performance listings for each of those seasons instead of comparing a whole season with one meet? As you said, the 1500 and 3k for indoor 2009 where sit-and-kicks.
C/M Runner wrote:
Ancient Ivy wrote:Here are a few numbers to show how much deeper Heps guys have gotten in the last two years, by comparing the Final '09 list to today's
Event/#10 Time in '09/# of those times achieved at Heps/Where that mark ranks on this year's list.
I like the idea, but wouldn't it be a better comparison to do the overall top 10 performance listings for each of those seasons instead of comparing a whole season with one meet? As you said, the 1500 and 3k for indoor 2009 where sit-and-kicks.
I guess I wasn't clear but that's what I did: The entire 2009 season v. 2011 up to today, while noting how many '09 times were achieved at Heps.
Oops sorry about that. I guess my coffee had not kicked in yet.
does anything think that callahan (princeton) can do the 800/mile double?
C/M Runner wrote:
Oops sorry about that. I guess my coffee had not kicked in yet.
does anything think that callahan (princeton) can do the 800/mile double?
There is no reason to, they have the depth to win both events without him trying. He'll run the 800 and anchor the 4x8, and other guys will cover the mile.
what about Kate Grace? Everyone's talking about Princeton distance, but Grace beat out some of Princeton's top distance runners (including Higginson) at HYP. Can SHE pull off the 800/mile double?
rando wrote:
what about Kate Grace? Everyone's talking about Princeton distance, but Grace beat out some of Princeton's top distance runners (including Higginson) at HYP. Can SHE pull off the 800/mile double?
No she'll only be running one of them (800).
interesting nugget
after the heat sheets were announced here is what the "on paper results"
Thus, the 3k and 5k may not be accurate due to some runners not running both also across the mid distance events 500-1000 some runners are running that event for the first time aka Princeton's Callahan 1k and Columbia's Moriarty 800m
also heptathalon isnt up yet. so not counting that event
187.2 Princeton
160.8 Cornell
61 Dartmouth
51 Penn
32 Columbia
29.5 Harvard
27 Yale
9.5 Brown
runnersfan wrote:
interesting nugget
after the heat sheets were announced here is what the "on paper results"
Thus, the 3k and 5k may not be accurate due to some runners not running both ...
But who would run both? Cabral? Higginson? Anyone else?