PoleVaultPower.com

Like last year around 40% of the top 20 ranked vaulters did not make the NCAA finals. Do not like the system. Do not like different height progressions at the two sites. If the east had been the same as the west I think the outcome could have been different there. Big difference between 5.40m and 5.32m.

kewh wrote:Like last year around 40% of the top 20 ranked vaulters did not make the NCAA finals. Do not like the system. Do not like different height progressions at the two sites. If the east had been the same as the west I think the outcome could have been different there. Big difference between 5.40 and 5.32.

How would it be different.. you only take the last twelve standing at each regional regardless of where the started jumping

What system would you like to see implemented? Haven't they prorgressed from no regionals, to four regionals to two regionals. What others methods are there left to try?

Where are the results of the EAST? It's got to be over by this time (5:32 PM EDT).

I'd like to know if the height progressions stated were really different. They should not have been different even though it really does not make a diference at all.

Vaultref wrote:

kewh wrote:Like last year around 40% of the top 20 ranked vaulters did not make the NCAA finals. Do not like the system. Do not like different height progressions at the two sites. If the east had been the same as the west I think the outcome could have been different there. Big difference between 5.40m and 5.32m.

How would it be different.. you only take the last twelve standing at each regional regardless of where the started jumping

What system would you like to see implemented? Haven't they prorgressed from no regionals, to four regionals to two regionals. What others methods are there left to try?

Where are the results of the EAST? It's got to be over by this time (5:32 PM EDT).

I'd like to know if the height progressions stated were really different. They should not have been different even though it really does not make a diference at all.

Scrape the first round or regionals, and do it just like indoors. Take the top 18 ranked and have the NCAA's earlier. Simple.

If they're all trying to qualify for the same (one) national meet, why in the world would there be different height increments? I understand that 12 is 12 but why would there be any reason to make each regional different? If the goal is to get the best of the best they really should do it like indoors.

hye

yes i was "confused' when i saw different heights at east and west... from my involment from time to time my TOTALLY understanding was that each regional MUST start at the same marks... mandatory...

so who, what and how did that change???? who made that "ass-i-nine decision?

I think the first look needs to go to who "gained' more in the west from the result!

The other sports are "laughing' at track and field (and happy we continue to 'screw' ourselves) with these type of events….

It is a travesty to not have Andrew, and the other 30% not in the meet…. Just so some coach or AD can tell their boss they had athletes "qualify" for the big show……

I'm still all about "doing it when it counts" and my athletes always PRed at NCAA's, but this system hurts the sport and the athlete…

dj

If it is a 'Regional' then heights are irrelevant. However, if it is a 'Preliminary Round' all things should be identical. The bars should start at the same heights and have the same progressions. Also in a true preliminary round, the prelim should offer competition but you should not be punished for being in a better round. This is why they should do it like they do the running events at the actually regional, but over all. For instance at regionals in a sprint race there are three heats and top three places and the next three fastest times make it through. In the vault it should be something like top ten and then the next four best heights out of the east or west. So if 11-14 in the west are higher than 11th in the east, 11-14 still gets to go to nationals.

I still think it offers competition and a sport to track and field by having a qualifying round. People complain that the best guys didn't get in. Well they just got unlucky and had a bad day on the wrong day. But it adds some kind of sport to the sport. It is just like the championship rounds in any other sports. The best two basketball teams do not always meet in the NCAA Championship final. This keeps guys from being able to just go find a last chance meet and beat out someone by .01 to get into nationals when they go to three meets in one weekend to chase a height.

I asked about this over a T&FN and they said that the rules this year were that the bar started at 20cm below the lowest qualifier in that region... which makes NO sense if this is supposed to be a preliminary round of nationals.

I thought the best system for pole vault was how they did it the first year of regionals. They took the top however many from each region, and then they took a few non-qualified athletes based on marks from the season.

For example, if instead of doing 12 + 12, what if we did 8+8+ next 4 based on regional jumps, and then next 4 based on marks from the season.

I don't have time at the moment to put together what that field would look like, but maybe someone else can...

Give me a freaking break. They vaulted at Texas. That is worth 6 inches at least. You cannot compare between sites. No way to normalize. Indoor 4 of 8 top finishers were from East. East regional had good conditions this year, but historically have been in some crappy spots. Sick of the east vs. west rhetoric. Conditions throughout the year are not the same. Many of the East guys are just starting to get good weather.

Why don't they just give the top 3 or 4 ranked in the country an auto spot in NCAA's and let the rest sort themselves out in the Regional? Allow the top 3 or 4 to compete at the Regional if they desire, but give the elite of the events an auto bid.

carryabigstick wrote:Give me a freaking break. They vaulted at Texas. That is worth 6 inches at least. You cannot compare between sites. No way to normalize. Indoor 4 of 8 top finishers were from East. East regional had good conditions this year, but historically have been in some crappy spots. Sick of the east vs. west rhetoric. Conditions throughout the year are not the same. Many of the East guys are just starting to get good weather.

Do the east region vaulters tend to perform better at Nationals than the west region vaulters? If they are held back by bad weather all season and at regionals, they should perform better at Nationals, right?

I don't have time at the moment to research that question, but I think that few people would disagree with the point that more of the traditional pole vaulting schools fall in the west region. There's no way to make the two regions equal every year in every event.

Traditionally the West has done better in past few years but that discussion is for another thread. However whoever said you cannot compare the two meets as far as conditions is right. I do think things would have been more equal had the progressions been the same though. In both regions it took the 4th bar to make the meet depending on scratches. The east was 5.27 and the west was 5.35. Most people come in at entry to make sure not to NH and jump every bar. And since there are 24 guys per pit, depending upon how each meet was ran, it took more than 3 hours of jumping.

What I am getting at is in the East it did not matter what the bar was at, because most people came in at entry and by the time the bar got to the same height it took to make in the west the meet had been going on for so long that everyone seemed to start looking exhausted. It was 94 degrees and humid at around 2:30 when the bar went to 5.32 in the east. I think that had entry been the same and 5.35 been the 4th bar, just about as many people would have jumped that height as in the west.

Rules states that opening height was 20 cm below lowest entry, thus the discrepancy.

Will be interesting to see how things shake out at the finals.

A whole bunch of quality guys in a pretty narrow range, winner could come from anywhere.

I think Marvin is the early favorite for a place like Drake though.