Personally I think Fairport off to a great start. They're missing 3 of their top runners (Passalugo, Warnett, Hill) and still won East Aurora comfortably with an incredible spread of 23 seconds. The team also has a great future with many sophomores (Hill, Bubel, Hickey, Green, Leombrone). Now you can have your own opinions but I don't think you can say the team that ran 6 in the top 10 had a bad opener.
Personally I think Fairport off to a great start. They're missing 3 of their top runners (Passalugo, Warnett, Hill) and still won East Aurora comfortably with an incredible spread of 23 seconds. The team also has a great future with many sophomores (Hill, Bubel, Hickey, Green, Leombrone). Now you can have your own opinions but I don't think you can say the team that ran 6 in the top 10 had a bad opener.
Does Fairport’s performance justify the #1 rankings in the state that Dyestat gave them?
Personally I think Fairport off to a great start. They're missing 3 of their top runners (Passalugo, Warnett, Hill) and still won East Aurora comfortably with an incredible spread of 23 seconds. The team also has a great future with many sophomores (Hill, Bubel, Hickey, Green, Leombrone). Now you can have your own opinions but I don't think you can say the team that ran 6 in the top 10 had a bad opener.
Does Fairport’s performance justify the #1 rankings in the state that Dyestat gave them?
I don't think we can say yet. I believe the Mcquaid invitational will be a lot more telling.
North Rockland was 180, 180, 164, 157, 154, 146, 146.
That doesn't say "2023 NXN Bid", but it's a heck of lot better than pre-season projections, and unless Arlington did anything today makes them top dog in Section 1 shooting for states.
I don’t believe I said they had a “bad opener” I said it was “not great” which I stand by. I understand you think it was great but even missing 3 tops guys I wouldn’t call an opener that involves 5 guys running speed ratings between 161 and 166 “great” for a team that’s looking to be the best in the state.
There’s a lot of room between bad and great, if their top guys are all healthy and are better than the top 3s that Ithaca and Auburn had today then I would say today was a decent opener. As pointed out already McQuaid will be their chance to show how good they really are assuming their full squad is running.
As someone that’s followed XC in New York for over 20 years now I don’t really care who comes out on top this year, I just want the top 2 teams to not embarrass the state at NXN. If Fairport is one of those top 2 teams then believe me I’ll be routing as hard as anyone for a top 10 finish that shuts up everyone calling for the NY region to be combined with the Northeast.
Speed ratings for Auburn top 3 and Ithaca top 3 were excellent. Speed ratings aside, Churchville Chili had a great performance at their sectional course today. They may be a top 5 ranked team.
... even missing 3 tops guys I wouldn’t call an opener that involves 5 guys running speed ratings between 161 and 166 “great” for a team that’s looking to be the best in the state.
I tend to agree with this. One or two key guys has a bad day at Bowdoin Park in November and a tight pack of 160's is respectable, but somebody else is probably going to Portland. That applies to any team, but if you look at those numbers compared to other numbers you're seeing today, that's about what it'll look like.
Fairport can put this question to bed with one race, and there are plenty of races left. But quantifying a team's performance with 'Okay, but if...' pretty much implies that it wasn't a "great" race all on it's own.
If you trust the speed ratings, both Ithaca and Auburn would have cleaned Saratoga's clock today.
And Ithaca / Auburn also are better than St Anthony’s based on St. A’s last week’s performance without MacPherson (haven’t seen anything on St. A’s this week).
Brooklyn Technical beat St Anthony’s last week head-to-head too.
But Brooklyn Technical also raced at Bowdoin and Ithaca / Auburn has better speed ratings
You're gonna have to trust me (or not) on the math because it'll be annoying AF for everyone if I type it all out (mostly for me), but this is what a speed rating merge of yesterday looks like. Left out St. Ant's for lack of data, but they're probably in the 3-6 range.
You're gonna have to trust me (or not) on the math because it'll be annoying AF for everyone if I type it all out (mostly for me), but this is what a speed rating merge of yesterday looks like. Left out St. Ant's for lack of data, but they're probably in the 3-6 range.
