Flagstaff Meeting

Re: Pt Adelaide
by Z Score Sun Feb 21, 2021 5:51 am

.Z Score wrote:
Ryan Hage has the distinction of winning a Novice and Open in the same race category at the same meeting , not many athletes do that.He was trained by Youngy, the distances were 800m and 1000m , he now bobs up in an over 35 100m several years later and is allocated the Novice mark which places him just in front of Gross and over a metre behind Buchannan.Two very good sprinters.
If its good enough to use discretionary powers for the presidents son why not use them for Hage.Unfortunately this is what we have to put up with in SA , absolute embarrassment to the athlete and total lack of knowledge by the handicapper.The handicapper used disceretionary powers to place Hage on the novice mark, what a joke Port Adelaide Athletics Carnival
February 21st 2021
100 Over 35 - Heat 2
Sponsor - RPMS Rentals
Sash donated by RPMS Rentals
1st - $140 : 2nd - $70 : 3rd - $30 : 4th - $20 : 5th - $10 : 6th - $10 : Coach - $20
First 3 progress to the final
Pos Name Squad Colour Mark Adj. Time
1 Vince Musolino TOW Blue 8.75m 11.452
2 Ali Saliu SOU Yellow 15.25m 11.677
3 Christopher Leach MCK White 8.00m 11.930
4 Graham Henderson AAA Green 23.75m 11.941
5 Lisa Boyce NON Black 25.75m 11.973
6 Ryan Hage CAM Red 3.75m 13.151 .

The wheel is spinning , around and around it goes.Okay Mr Hage , you have 20m more to run at Flagstaff than Pt Adelaide, so we will give you an extra 8.25.
So the handicapper gives him the novice mark for Pt Adelaide 100m and then hes whizzed out to 12m for Flaggy over 35 120m.
How can we believe they are serious.

Wow thats some discretionary lift! Didnt have them around when I ran back in the day and you know what Im glad, because those wins were deserved not given.

Numbers not great again but are better than Loxton's.
Athletes that competed last year 211.
Athletes that have entered this year 239
My guess is that only approx 180 will actually compete this year.

All that money the Onkaparinga Council handed over that isnt to be used as prize money but at the same time acknowledge it will be used as prize money (huh???) and this is all they get, the spiel lodged was as follows;

The Flagstaff Gift Athletics Meeting showcases and encourages
participation in running events by both the local community and
visitors from all over South Australia and some from time to time
Interstate Athletes. Our aim is to provide and promote healthy
exercise for men, women and children of all abilities and ages and
backgrounds. This is emphasised by the diverse members of the
current squad and their families. We currently have people from
Barbados, Scotland, Malaysia, Italy, South Africa, Jamaica and
England. In addition to being an exciting day for competing athletes
and spectators, we find the event to be an invaluable recruitment
tool for general Athletics in South Australia, thereby providing
pathways for local Athletes to aspire to their best in all competitions.
Current and past team members have discovered the sport after
attending the event through connections with the local Football
Club, Little Athletics and local Fitness Groups.

What is highlight in bold is interesting, when has this ever happened in the past 10 years at Flagstaff Hill, let alone in the SAAL?

[quote="Top Sport"]Numbers not great again but are better than Loxton's.
Athletes that competed last year 211.
Athletes that have entered this year 239
My guess is that only approx 180 will actually compete this year.
quote]
Hi T.S.
Gossips told me , not to get fooled by the numbers.
They normally dont run a 70m womens at Flagstaff but are this week.All about making numbers look better towards the end of the season.Look at some of the names in the 70m, all tells a story.
He also said , closer to 150 than 200 again this week will run , going for 3 meetings in a row.
And by the way , the under 18 1600 has made way for the 70m womens and back in 2017 , the 1600m race had 15 actual starters. They dont do their sums very well.

Runners name: Charlie Hildyard
Coaches name: Luke Hildyard
Race: 550m Men
Assigned mark: 58m
Details: Howdy. Looking for some clarity around Charlie Hildyard's 550 mark at Flagstaff. Why has a
win reduction been applied to this mark?
Handicapper: Kym Morgan
Handicapper’s reply: Thanks for putting in the review. In looking into why a 0.92m win penalty was
applying to Charlie’s mark for the 550m Men’s race at Flagstaff, it was discovered that his win in the
800m U18 race at the 2019 Stawell Gift Carnival was incorrectly coded to apply to senior races also.
This coding has been corrected and Charlie will now compete off 59m this Saturday.




How many runners have been entered incorrectly - SAAL your drunk go home!

StevieBee wrote:

How many runners have been entered incorrectly - SAAL your drunk go home!

Poole Heat 1 Camden Classic ,it was Dartnel for goodness sake.

I'd say if this is the case it is highly likely there are many calculations not entered correctly with all due respect to those entering the data.
I think it should be shown how each persons base mark has been established.
I would like to see the transparency by showing the math. This way it could be alot easier for each athlete or coach to check if it is correct or not.
eg. A 7.59 entered as a 7.95 can make a difference to the resulting mark. It might only be .25 or .5 in a 70m or 120 but carried through the season might be the difference on making final or not or running red. It would be easy to enter data incorrectly.

Don’t even bother with the Z score trash. A waste of time.
VAL have a simple formula - best rpm in the last 5 years and best rpm in the last two years averaged for your season rpm. Start time divided by rpm gives start handicap but cannot start further out than your last mark. Nominal Ceiling time is also identified through this process but can reduce due to a singular performance through the year.

A simple process for everyone to check if you are on the right mark at the commencement of the year. If one of your performances data is tainted or corrupted it is easy to raise to request recalculation. This is transparent for everybody eliminates potential reliance on just computer dumps with bad data. It is simple to calculate and then apply against the conditional rules and regulations for handicap allocation irrespective of the mathematical handicap indication. Handicap movements are then slowly progressive and linked to acceptable performance and participation thus also ensuring reliable entry revenue for the league.

This VAL method is much better, clearer, transparent with conditional application to embrace conservatism than the stupid SAAL system that has a computer dump relying on too many sample points moving from week to week that is calculated through a hidden base mark formula, relying on data that can’t be checked because it’s relying on moving data from week to week. The SAAL system does not embrace conservatism in its allocation, it dumps runners out way too fast by just accepting the maths. The maths is solely reliant on a database that doesn’t recognise what track results are wrong, should be ignored due to being downhill, had a indexation applied, were entered wrong etc. When their system relies solely on the base maths with too many sample data collects it is invariably open to too much error with little ability to check it or correct it.

The SAAL system with its hidden base mark formula, flawed database, plonking handicap application and z score application is wrong in every aspect. No wonder the athletes in SA and interstate have lost faith and walking away leaving basically just a handful of younger athletes competing in SA.

Hey Will, there is no doubt in my mind it all needs to be a much simpler way.
Question for you is why is there a fascination for upto 5 year data to be used?

The reason why I ask is that doesnt that require a long search though results to find which is the fastest over 5 years? With different tracks, conditions, returning from injury etc etc.

My thought is more about the fact you run for now not what you did 4 years ago or more. Run this season, handicap for this season (taking into consideration last seasons results which are also relevant) not how you ran years ago.

No your best run in 5 years is easy to find. It’s indicative of your PB and capacity to refund that PB. The best in the last two years gives it currency to the the PB.

All other results just wish away realistic on capacity of also used in any calculation method. In other words you don’t want to use too many data collections just the best two two that reflect ability!

What they have done to big Luke is disgraceful. 2.50m in a gift.
Luke aint no 2.50m runner but is a proven , consistant more than handy athletic league athlete.
Yep Tolly , you won the 70m and 120m down at the Bay but its not going to happen again.

Absolutely, collecting too many best results over many years then applying different percentages which depend on your age will take alot of time if you want to check it or someone elses base mark.
By best result I assume you mean fastest result or best mps?

The aim of handicap process/handicapper should have the handicap weighted toward PB capacity and not form. The process/handicapper shouldn’t have an emphasis on making up for the difference in loss of form of an athlete which will would then reward mediocrity. The handicap weighted more to capacity PB encourages athletes to try and get near their nest or beyond their best. Therefore if the process is based more toward PB capacity the athlete that wins should be the athlete closest to their PB shape or beyond their on shape. Therefore the data collection of only the two samples once from 5 and one from 2 achieves the beat the position.
To have too many recent collection points ignores the ability of true Pb capacity and dilutes any recent capacity performance thus among a system make up too much difference for loss of form etc which is not the aim of true handicapping!

Top Sport wrote:Absolutely, collecting too many best results over many years then applying different percentages which depend on your age will take alot of time if you want to check it or someone elses base mark.
By best result I assume you mean fastest result or best mps?

Yes best rpm form 5 years and best rpm from 2 years.

Z Score wrote:What they have done to big Luke is disgraceful. 2.50m in a gift.
Luke aint no 2.50m runner but is a proven , consistant more than handy athletic league athlete.
Yep Tolly , you won the 70m and 120m down at the Bay but its not going to happen again.

Another victim of running in the VAL but penalised in the SAAL?

Ran at pre-bay off 5m, runs in VAL off 5.5m has a win over there then gets penalised here all of 2.5m

He did run damn good at Castlemaine though!

Top Sport wrote:

Z Score wrote:What they have done to big Luke is disgraceful. 2.50m in a gift.
Luke aint no 2.50m runner but is a proven , consistant more than handy athletic league athlete.
Yep Tolly , you won the 70m and 120m down at the Bay but its not going to happen again.

Another victim of running in the VAL but penalised in the SAAL?

Ran at pre-bay off 5m, runs in VAL off 5.5m has a win over there then gets penalised here all of 2.5m

He did run damn good at Castlemaine though!

Bias track though, which they dont take into account here in SA. Driving athletes further away from running in SA

Old mate Gossips had it right again, only 147 competing athletes today.

Seriously is this what the pro system members want? A dying SAAL.

Under this system you will lose sponsors, meets, prize money, lose more athletes and so it goes until nothing.

The system is killing the comp, ignoring removing either all or at least about 50% of certain elements of the system is killing the comp. If the president thinks tweaking parts of the system or constant parameter changes will resurrect the comp they are sorely mistaken and he will kill the comp.

Only a major overhaul and major changes will restore the confidence in athletes and coaches.

Can anyone tell me how many SA athletes ran at the
Warrnambool?

SA Whisperer wrote:

Top Sport wrote:Numbers not great again but are better than Loxton's.
Athletes that competed last year 211.
Athletes that have entered this year 239
My guess is that only approx 180 will actually compete this year.
quote]
Hi T.S.
Gossips told me , not to get fooled by the numbers.
They normally dont run a 70m womens at Flagstaff but are this week.All about making numbers look better towards the end of the season.Look at some of the names in the 70m, all tells a story.
He also said , closer to 150 than 200 again this week will run , going for 3 meetings in a row.
And by the way , the under 18 1600 has made way for the 70m womens and back in 2017 , the 1600m race had 15 actual starters. They dont do their sums very well.

My mate Gossips is seldom wrong, got the numbers correct again even though 239 had entered.
Deng the toast of Loxton , one week, then choosing to run at Mile End the next says it all.

StevieBee wrote:Can anyone tell me how many SA athletes ran at the
Warrnambool?

Put it this way Stevie , the quality of SA runner , running at the Bool was much much much better that ran at Flaggy

At what was considered one of the worst attendances in decades rudeness by some and avoidance by the president was the order of the day, its disappointing people behave this way, while the old guard remained open and friendly.
What happened to fixing this comp Colin? What happened to bringing everyone back on the page, listening to everyone, sounds like there is selective consultation with an agree with me or forget it attitude.
Why are only certain people allegedly being contacted Colin, some asking for lifts as the only way they will compete and suddenly they have a discretionary lift??

Gossips has been on the blower to me and said it was the worst attendance for a meeting by spectators and athletes that Gossips has ever saw.
By last race , only spectators that were there, was Stoksey and his dog.
Alarmingly , he has told me next meeting will be worse as it clashes with a Port game on TV.
People hate Port.
But Gossips tell me the choice of watch Port win or going to an saal meeting to watch or run Port will win .
How tragic is that.

Top Sport wrote:At what was considered one of the worst attendances in decades rudeness by some and avoidance by the president was the order of the day, its disappointing people behave this way, while the old guard remained open and friendly.
What happened to fixing this comp Colin? What happened to bringing everyone back on the page, listening to everyone, sounds like there is selective consultation with an agree with me or forget it attitude.
Why are only certain people allegedly being contacted Colin, some asking for lifts as the only way they will compete and suddenly they have a discretionary lift??

TS, that's a pretty big statement and we can see it's true. Look at the lift a Camden runner got at Camden..

5m for being interstate. It's makes you wonder!!!!

A few calls were made prior to Loxton to various athletes.
My source tells me it was a Loxton 120m athlete that had no intention of running unless he got a lift.
Ballsy and probably should have asked the handicapper and perhaps he has in the past and its fallen on deaf ears? Not sure but it is alleged it was the President he spoke to and well low and behold he entered and got a discretionary lift.

Now I know some of those who get on here for a read will think this is just nonsense but if it isnt then what have you signed up for this season? Who have you put your trust into?

Has this happened before? If it has, how many times? Is it acceptable? Is it appropriate? Do you think this is fair? Should he step down?

No, its all good, nothing to see here, its all above board, its all fair, its all going great. You all enjoy it while it lasts.

RINGADINGLING Im being told that the phones are already ringing off the hook to get athletes for the McKinnon meeting, expect to see a few athletes going around that havent run much this season.
Gossips has told me that it will be a home town victory in the main race and he will have somewhere between 240 and 260.