PROTRACK

A forum devoted to track events from 60m to the 2 mile. Mainly pro but also news from local, national and international sprint & middle distance competitions.

Log in

I forgot my password



Search
 
 

Display results as :
 


Rechercher Advanced Search

Latest topics
» Pitlochry (Scotland)
Sun Sep 09, 2018 4:35 pm by JH

» National Awards
Sun Sep 09, 2018 3:46 pm by JH

» Latest on Wind adjustments
Sat Sep 08, 2018 10:43 am by auspro

» South Australian Athletic League CALENDAR 2018-2019
Wed Sep 05, 2018 10:37 am by Admin

» Stawell Gift Nitro athletics option raised for next year's event
Wed Sep 05, 2018 8:47 am by Admin

» Canberra secures 'festival of athletics' in summer race revamp
Wed Sep 05, 2018 8:41 am by Admin

» Maddie Coates, Jacob Despard, to run at Warrnambool Gift
Tue Sep 04, 2018 5:02 pm by Admin

» Stawell Gift sprinter, author sell Eaglemont refurb before auction
Tue Sep 04, 2018 4:55 pm by Trackstar

» Blairgowrie (Scotland)
Mon Sep 03, 2018 3:19 pm by JH

September 2018
MonTueWedThuFriSatSun
     12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930

Calendar Calendar


You are not connected. Please login or register

PROTRACK » GENERAL » Women's Gift

Women's Gift

Go to page : Previous  1, 2

Go down  Message [Page 2 of 2]

31 Re: Women's Gift on Fri Apr 06, 2018 8:52 am

Toolman


Could the handicapper rehandicap her after the semi for rapid improvement or was it to late by then ? I thought OGA athletes were a case of any place any time ! They probably had grounds to. I wonder how many of the women would have put the cue back in the rack if she had of posted that 13.85 sec in the first semi and not the last. Reddingius being fq1 was not advantaged by Forsyth lobbing in her semi in a ballot. Love this sport. Always delivers in spades.

32 Re: Women's Gift on Fri Apr 06, 2018 10:31 am

Downesy


mmmmm, call me naive, but if you’ve set yourself for the biggest race and pay cheque of the year, are you really going to risk getting run out in the heats, in order to possibly create better odds? That’s one hell of a runner that can do that.

33 Re: Women's Gift on Fri Apr 06, 2018 10:52 am

Phantom

avatar
ProTrack Star
ProTrack Star
Well done Robbo on executing a perfect 12 month preparation and to EJ for delivering when it mattered. I love it when people wait all year thinking they are a 'chance' to win and when they come up short complain about it. Robbo and EJ did nothing wrong, they didn't come down and run poorly to milk more handicap, they prepared well and delivered off the mark she was given. I get the feeling some people feel a sense of entitlement when it comes to winning big races and when they fall short it's someone else's fault. EJ's win was a breath of fresh air for the women's gift.

34 Re: Women's Gift on Fri Apr 06, 2018 12:03 pm

untouchables

avatar
Phantom wrote:Well done Robbo on executing a perfect 12 month preparation and to EJ for delivering when it mattered.  I love it when people wait all year thinking they are a 'chance' to win and when they come up short complain about it.  Robbo and EJ did nothing wrong, they didn't come down and run poorly to milk more handicap, they prepared well and delivered off the mark she was given.  I get the feeling some people feel a sense of entitlement when it comes to winning big races and when they fall short it's someone else's fault.  EJ's win was a breath of fresh air for the women's gift.

Exactly right phantom, here we are driving all over Victoria a bit like alley cats for 25cm, instead of going to training and training hard. their plan was better than others lol!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfhQNv0otBQ

35 Re: Women's Gift on Fri Apr 06, 2018 12:50 pm

Fast


ProTrack A Grader
ProTrack A Grader
How things have changed in 2 years!

It is interesting that the poor decision-making by the VAL and the unfair treatment of Talia Martin in 2016 has resulted and influenced the strategies of next two women's gift winners both, in my opinion, very unhealthy for the sport, but who can blame them if the result is a Stawell Gift win without sanction.

This year hiding form in the heat to avoid sanction.
Last year not running 100m/120m to avoid comparison of performances and sanction.

I am not so sure we all should be condoning these approaches.

It is an achievable result under the current stewarding and system but I am not convinced that it is good for the future of the sport. To not support pro-running and improve over 10m year on year to win Stawell, remembering Talia Martin (as a 14 year old) was crucified for improving 3m year on year.


Should this approach be encouraged or do we want a circuit outside Stawell??

Will EJ run again in the VAL?? I hope so ...but hopefully just not at Stawell, we will wait and see???

I am not sure that Queenslanders, interstaters, or beach sprinters really appreciate how fragile the VAL circuit is. ...and therefore the future of professional running.

The past 4 women’s Stawell Gift winners, whether you hate them or love them, they continue to support and promote the VAL circuit on a regular basis.


To put it in perspective the 2nd biggest women’s event on the VAL circuit, the Ballarat Gift, struggled to attract 30 entries this year.

36 Re: Women's Gift on Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:37 pm

Robbo


That is some good gear Fast... wasnt it you and and crew that was selling Hcping should be done of there best runs not their worst? Or doesn’t that apply to this argument?
She declared numerous 12.6 runs prior to Stawell 2017. She declared a 12.45 prior to 2018 Stawell and she has run about 12.15 (in final)? Improvement of O.5 over 12months 0.3 in 3 months is not unreasonable for an underdeveloped athlete. I’m sure I have heard that before.

Saturday was a genuine shit race and I suspect that you didn’t give us a hope and failed to see us do full session on Sunday to try get her head back in the game. I love the theory but it myth.

If she ran 13.85 raw in heat on Saturday what would they pulled her for? The wind was +2.9 so adjusted time would have been 14.00 (wow). Everything under the sun was declared so I’m not sure just being better is a reason to nab someone. I ranted to the VAL about the wind adjustment for two days and expressed concerns over the impacts it could have on semi draws even to the point I was open about her electric trial times.

Don’t sweat we will be back down there... my 20th year this year and Im still enjoying the left field theory’s that continue to be an important part of the fabric of the great race. Keep it up.

The Stawell Gift is seen as a National iconic and should be continued to be treated as such. If you need an event resvered for a local winner than I’m sure their a plenty of gifts to achieve this.

37 Re: Women's Gift on Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:51 pm

Fast


ProTrack A Grader
ProTrack A Grader
Absolutely athletes should be handicapped on their best and poor performances should be ignored. This should all be transparently disclosed.

Robbo don't take it as an attack on youself....what you and EJ did was all with in the current rules.

My point was to highlight inconsistent officiating and the need for change. And to point out again how unfairly and wrongly Talia Martin was treated in 2016 and how this poor officiating has lead to avoiding strategies not in the best interest of the sport.

38 Re: Women's Gift on Fri Apr 06, 2018 2:12 pm

BMara



What fool could possibly suggest that a runner gets penalised for improving on two runs 12 months apart.

Also
Peter, Peter, Peter get over it, read the Ararat results form 2016 again and then read the rules again.

Stop blaming anyone else other than yourself and your own sense of invincibility by taking a 15 year old to Ararat, two weeks before Easter, with what obviously could have been the most bizarre instructions in the history of the sport.

"Do we want a circuit outside Stawell "
"hiding form in the heat to avoid sanction"
"how fragile the VAL circuit is"



Last edited by BMara on Sat Apr 07, 2018 10:21 am; edited 1 time in total

39 Re: Women's Gift on Fri Apr 06, 2018 3:22 pm

Phantom

avatar
ProTrack Star
ProTrack Star

Exactly right phantom, here we are driving all over Victoria a bit like alley cats for 25cm, instead of going to training and training hard. their plan was better than others lol!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfhQNv0otBQ[/quote]

You said it yourself Untouchables. Rather than chasing 25cm how about you try to win a race, somewhere, anywhere?  Instead you chased ticks and lifts and still came up short. Ambition and Ability are 2 different things!

40 Re: Women's Gift on Fri Apr 06, 2018 10:55 pm

Thatsthestats


Phantom wrote:
Exactly right phantom, here we are driving all over Victoria a bit like alley cats for 25cm, instead of going to training and training hard. their plan was better than others lol!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfhQNv0otBQ

You said it yourself Untouchables. Rather than chasing 25cm how about you try to win a race, somewhere, anywhere?  Instead you chased ticks and lifts and still came up short. Ambition and Ability are 2 different things![/quote]

Boom ha ha Phantom!! Shots fired. Why didn’t she run the 70m at Stawell. Much better show in that I would have thought

41 Re: Women's Gift on Fri Apr 06, 2018 11:33 pm

untouchables

avatar
Thatsthestats wrote:
Phantom wrote:
Exactly right phantom, here we are driving all over Victoria a bit like alley cats for 25cm, instead of going to training and training hard. their plan was better than others lol!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfhQNv0otBQ

You said it yourself Untouchables. Rather than chasing 25cm how about you try to win a race, somewhere, anywhere?  Instead you chased ticks and lifts and still came up short. Ambition and Ability are 2 different things!

Boom ha ha Phantom!! Shots fired. Why didn’t she run the 70m at Stawell. Much better show in that I would have thought [/quote]

we moved house so she missed two weeks of training leading into stawell, thats why she did not run the 70m. its not going anywhere and i think sensational run after a slow start in the semi for 5th place at stawell, 2nd at castlemaine and 1st at frankson i am happy she is happy cherry

42 Re: Women's Gift on Sat Apr 07, 2018 7:10 pm

Fast


ProTrack A Grader
ProTrack A Grader
BMara wrote:
What fool could possibly suggest that a runner gets penalised for improving on two runs 12 months apart.

Also
Peter, Peter, Peter get over it, read the Ararat results form 2016 again and then read the rules again.

Stop blaming anyone else other than yourself and your own sense of invincibility by taking a 15 year old to Ararat, two weeks before Easter, with what obviously could have been the most bizarre instructions in the history of the sport.

"Do we want a circuit outside Stawell "
"hiding form in the heat to avoid sanction"
"how fragile the VAL circuit is"



Shot me for supporting the VAL.

What are you implying my instructions were?

At Ararat in 2016, I had just returned from a week at the Nationals in Perth that morning and did not even see Talia Martin’s before her heat at Ararat.

I do not issue my athletes with instructions before races only words of encouragement sometimes, but rarely. Nor did any of my coaches issue me with instructions before races...we obviously live in a very different pro-running worlds.
I guess that is because you are an ex-bookmaker and are always looking for a sting or a bet, I am not a gambler so betting and that aspect of the sport does not interest me at all. I also believe that betting on pro-running is all but dead and we should move past this as the focus of Stewarding.

I always encourage athletes to compete and support the VAL even if it is only two weeks before Stawell as I did this year at Parkdale. I was under the misconception that, as Ararat was a non-penalty meeting and Stawell handicaps had been declared, there was nothing to lose by encouraging my 30 plus athletes to run and support Ararat.

In hindsight it was a bad decision (to support Ararat) but I never expected you to interpret the rules the way you did at a non-penalty meeting after Stawell handicaps had been declared, naive you would say, to trust that people would act with the best of intentions.

I am not sure you should hang your hat on your poorly written catchall rules. The poor performances of every athlete can be caught under the current rules; it is all a matter of how they are applied.

It all comes down to how you interpret and apply your rules. To crucify a kid for a poor run in adverse condition, huge head wind, over a different distance 100m, at a non-penalty meeting after Stawell  handicaps have been declared, and ignore all other better and best performances in your assessment, only raises unanswered questions. Especially when the explanation is that she improved 7m, when she had just the week before Stawell (and the week after Ararat) run 5th in the State Championship 200m final, this in addition to having won 2 Junior Stawell Gifts at the previous 2 Stawell’s and made numerous Gift finals during the year. She only improved 2.7m from Ballarat to Stawell a very reasonable improvement given; she was only 15 years old. This year’s Stawell Gift winner improved more than that in the same period and she is 21 years.

It is hard to convince the silent majority and me that sanctioning her in that context is in the spirit of fair Stewarding. Sure, there will be haters because she was a frontmarker but that is not her fault.

You must consider the intentions of the athlete...what could Talia possible achieve by running poorly after handicaps were declared at a non-penalty meet?

I think there is a need to revisit the purpose of stewarding in assessing performances.

The purpose of Stewarding (in assessing performances) is to assist in the accurate handicapping of runners.
Moreover, decisions should be made with this in mind.

There is no way the treatment of Talia was in the interest of achieving more accurate handicapping...handicaps for Stawell were declared.

However it is encouraging that you have changed your interpretation of the rules in the past 2 years, while inconsistent with past decisions, they are welcomed.

43 Re: Women's Gift on Sun Apr 08, 2018 7:42 pm

BMara


Sleep Sleep

44 Re: Women's Gift on Sat Apr 21, 2018 10:37 am

Whispers


ProTrack Star
ProTrack Star
Athlete Eric Sapac was fined $200 after his win in the Backmarkers 1600m. Although Eric had not raced over 1600m for some period of time it was still deemed an unacceptable improvement.

So Eric goes away , works his butt off and its called unacceptable.
Elizabeth goes away , works her butt off and its called a great training effort .Twisted Evil Twisted Evil

45 Re: Women's Gift on Sun Apr 22, 2018 8:14 pm

Slowcoach


Too much Sleep Sleep  going on. Rolling Eyes

46 Re: Women's Gift on Mon Apr 30, 2018 8:11 pm

Fast


ProTrack A Grader
ProTrack A Grader
Whispers wrote:Athlete Eric Sapac was fined $200 after his win in the Backmarkers 1600m. Although Eric had not raced over 1600m for some period of time it was still deemed an unacceptable improvement.

So Eric goes away , works his butt off and its called unacceptable.
Elizabeth goes away , works her butt off and its called a great training effort .Twisted Evil Twisted Evil  


Whispers,  the Stewards have the power under current VAL rules to determine any poor performance inconsistent and these rules have the full support of the VAL board as there is no appetite to change them despite the inconsistent application.

Put simply the Stewards can deem any poor performance inconsistent, there are no timelines or reasonable easy to determine guidelines.

I have argued many times that an athletes PB should be linked to any inconsistent sanction determination as all athletes are able to return to their PB form or very close to it up to the Vets age.

The only qualification would be that the PB times need to be performed in legal wind conditions (less than 2m/s), the main problem now is that false adjusted times are destroying the integrity of the VAL data base and the Stewards are using the false time to determine sanctions.

Linking inconsistent running to PB’s would provide clarity to athletes and fair consistent Stewarding.

It is hard to encourage athletes to support the circuit when any poor performance they put in can be used to determine inconsistent running especially when PB's can be ignored in any assessment.

47 Re: Women's Gift on Sun May 06, 2018 8:51 pm

Fast


ProTrack A Grader
ProTrack A Grader
It is the end of another season so time to review and improve some rules in this space.

Stewarding (in reference to assessing performance) is as simple as asking one question ...what is considered reasonable or acceptable improvement to win?

Reasonable or acceptable improvement to win - Is it 2m, 3m, 4m, 5m for the 120m?...or 0.3sec or 0.4sec or 0.5sec?

Not improvement from 5 years ago or 2 years ago or 2 weeks ago or 5 weeks or 5 days ago...it is - what is reasonable improvement to win (and you can limit it to the big races) from your previous best performance no matter when it was? This would actually provide for fairer handicapping and disclosure of ability as runners would need to bring down their PB’s to avoid sanction if they were hiding ability and had improvement.

Stewarding does not need to be inconsistent and complicated. 4 simple steps.

1. Set the acceptable improvement to win criteria. (improvement from PB) – Clearly define unacceptable improvement.

2. Establish and disclose all athletes legal (wind less than 2m/s) PB’s. (at the moment the Stewards and handicappers don’t even know an athletes PB or refer to it before issuing sanctions)

3. Disclose the races where unacceptable improvement will be sanctioned.

4. Disclose the penalties for unacceptable improvement– fines or handicap review.

“Not rocket science!”

48 Re: Women's Gift on Wed May 09, 2018 2:32 pm

justheshot


Interesting we had front page news when PODS girl Talia improved about 6m - but officials seem happy enough to see the 2018 winner improve about 13m - race to race in Vic

49 Re: Women's Gift on Sun May 13, 2018 6:29 pm

Fast


ProTrack A Grader
ProTrack A Grader
It's not how much an athlete improves from any random run (e.g. a non-penalty meet at Ararat after handicap have been declared) to win that's important, it's how much an athlete improves from their PB that's relevant, fair and important. (An athletes PB should be the cornerstone and basis of their handicap)

Talia Martin for example improved 2.9m from her previous PB to win Stawell and was crucified, vilified and bullied for doing do so. Yet many others who improved far more have been celebrated, supported and endorsed by the VAL over many years.

The only relevant question is how much did the athlete improve from their PB to win.

Time to make the rules relevant, reasonable and fair and not take an athletes poorest performance and wrongly judged and sanction on that basis.

Most of this is reasonable and common sense but the rules need to reflect this so they can't be abused.

Clarity is needed for athletes so they can support and grow our great sport. We can no longer afford to continue to tolerate inconsistent and random interpretation of our rules. It undermines the integrity and credibility of professional running.

One simple rule for all - unacceptable improvement to win classic races outside the tolerance range will not be tolerated.



We need to be professional, clear and consistent in our rule setting and interpretation.

It is over 2 years since the Talia Martin injustice and still there is no consistence and clear application of the “inconsistent running rules” and the integrity and credibility of professional running, as a result continues to undermine the progression and acceptance of the sport.

Sponsored content


Back to top  Message [Page 2 of 2]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum