Event Results >>
Last Chance (Guelph)
Guelph, ON
February 17-18th, 2017
Results courtesy Speed River Timing
Results Session 1
Friday 2/17/2017
#1 Men Weight Throw
#2 Women Weight Throw
#3 Men Shot Put
#4 Women Shot Put
Results Session 2
Saturday 2/18/2017
#5 Women 300 Meter Run
#6 Men 300 Meter Run
#7 Women 600 Meter Run
#8 Men 600 Meter Run
#9 Women 1000 Meter Run
#10 Men 1000 Meter Run
#11 Women 800 Meter Run
#12 Men 800 Meter Run
#13 Women 3000 Meter Run
#14 Men 3000 Meter Run
#23 Women 60 Meter Hurdles Prelims
#24 Men 60 Meter Hurdles Prelims
#25 Women 60 Meter Dash Prelims
#26 Men 60 Meter Dash Prelims
#23 Women 60 Meter Hurdles Finals
#24 Men 60 Meter Hurdles Finals
#25 Women 60 Meter Dash Finals
#26 Men 60 Meter Dash Finals
#27 Women 1 Mile Run Mile
#28 Men 1 Mile Run Mile
Results Session 3
Saturday 2/18/2017
#15 Women Long Jump
#16 Women High Jump
#17 Men High Jump
#18 Women Pole Vault
#19 Men Pole Vault
#20 Women Triple Jump
#21 Men Triple Jump
#22 Men Long Jump
User Comments
-
Anonymous
Posts: 57354Blogger said 6 years ago
How do you guys feel about the mile conversion to the 1500? I kind of feel bad for the next guys in the ranking who just got bumped out of the top 12. I can't figure how a 4:12 mile can convert to a 3:47 1500m...
Quote comment
Sounds like everybody will race the mile on flat 200m track next year. -
Anonymous
Posts: 57354Anonymous said 6 years ago
Quoting: Blogger
"How do you guys feel about the mile conversion to the 1500? I kind of feel bad for the next guys in the ranking who just got bumped out of the top 12. I can't figure how a 4:12 mile can convert to a 3:47 1500m...
Sounds like everybody will race the mile on flat 200m track next year."
You read the rankings wrong. Seneca's 3:47 is the 3:50 flat track 1500m that he ran the night before. Not a single result from the Guelph Last Chance miles made it into the top 12 for men or women. Quote comment -
Anonymous
Posts: 57354Anonymous said 6 years ago
Quoting: Blogger
"I can't figure how a 4:12 mile can convert to a 3:47 1500m...
"
It doesn't. Their times in the rankings are from another meet. I will give it to you though that the mile->1500m conversion seems to slightly favor the mile. I also don't see how a banked track saves you 6-7 seconds in a 3000m over a flat track either Quote comment -
Anonymous
Posts: 57354Anonymous said 6 years ago
Quoting: Blogger
"How do you guys feel about the mile conversion to the 1500? I kind of feel bad for the next guys in the ranking who just got bumped out of the top 12. I can't figure how a 4:12 mile can convert to a 3:47 1500m...
Sounds like everybody will race the mile on flat 200m track next year."
I've been saying it is BS all season - no way a flat 200m mile is 25 seconds slower than a banked 1500m. Quote comment -
Anonymous
Posts: 57354Anonymous said 6 years ago
Those are 1500 times from the looks of things. Ran a 15 at U of T (Hal Brown) and a mile in Guelph on same weekend it seems. The 15 times are the ones in the rankings.
Quote comment -
Anonymous
Posts: 57354 -
Anonymous
Posts: 57354Stats Guy said 6 years ago
The reason you can't figure out how a 4:12 mile converts to a 3:47 is because it doesn't. That mile didn't change the rankings, Hal Brown results did.
Quote comment -
Anonymous
Posts: 57354Anonymous said 6 years ago
The result from Hal Brown (3:50 1500) converted to 3:47, not this mile.
Quote comment -
-
User since:
Oct 28th, 2014
Posts: 62Geo Major said 6 years ago
Quoting: Blogger
"How do you guys feel about the mile conversion to the 1500? I kind of feel bad for the next guys in the ranking who just got bumped out of the top 12. I can't figure how a 4:12 mile can convert to a 3:47 1500m...
Sounds like everybody will race the mile on flat 200m track next year."
The times that put the Guelph boys in the top 12 are from the night before at the Hal Brown meet (around 3:50-3:51 for Seneca, Black and Patton). Their times from the mile on Saturday don't convert to as fast. In the rankings Alex Cyr's 4:12 mile on a flat track converts to a 3:50 which seems a bit crazy but I don't think people will be rushing to race miles on flat tracks. Quote comment -
User since:
Oct 28th, 2014
Posts: 62Geo Major said 6 years ago
Quoting: Blogger
"How do you guys feel about the mile conversion to the 1500? I kind of feel bad for the next guys in the ranking who just got bumped out of the top 12. I can't figure how a 4:12 mile can convert to a 3:47 1500m...
Sounds like everybody will race the mile on flat 200m track next year."
The times that put the Guelph boys in the top 12 are from the night before at the Hal Brown meet (around 3:50-3:51 for Seneca, Black and Patton). Their times from the mile on Saturday don't convert to as fast. In the rankings Alex Cyr's 4:12 mile on a flat track converts to a 3:50 which seems a bit crazy but I don't think people will be rushing to race miles on flat tracks. Quote comment -
Anonymous
Posts: 57354Anonymous said 6 years ago
Does anyone know why the Guelph boys would double back for this mile after running top 12 times the night before, and a week out from OUAs?
Quote comment -
Anonymous
Posts: 57354Anonymous said 6 years ago
still... a 4:12 on flat give 3:50 on the ranking. Look at Cyr. I dont think a 4:12 worth a performance of 3:50.....
Quote comment -
Anonymous
Posts: 57354because they can!! said 6 years ago
Quoting: Anonymous
"Does anyone know why the Guelph boys would double back for this mile after running top 12 times the night before, and a week out from OUAs?"
Maybe even for the adulation of the home fans. Only those vying for a the best placing after first might be worried about OUAs. The real team(s) is looking further out at Usports. Check the team rankings. Quote comment -
User since:
Sep 1st, 2015
Posts: 4DR said 6 years ago
The actual 1500m rankings really just speaks for itself on this matter (1500-mile and flat-banked/oversize conversion).
Quote comment
Of the top 20 performances, only 1 happened on a banked 200m track which seems absurd to me. You'll all agree that most 200m banked track are in fact faster than most 200m flat track.
The faster tracks should be the destination of all Usports distance runners whereas runners now look for the "faster of the slowest" track (flat 200m) in order to get their mark. Actually, running on a fast 200m flat track or running the mile distance BOTH presents a favorable conversion.
It's probable that the actual top 12 doesn't gather the true best 1500m runners. Hard to say... But the actual top 12 for sure doesn't reflect the true best 1500m performances of the year which is deplorable.