Final results are posted
here, including The Bracket, all maps, WinSplits, and RouteGadget.
(Rounds 4 & 5 aren't up on RouteGadget yet, but expect those later today)
could you post also full list for the last round in one table? (very selfish interest here)
The not-quite-as-meaningful, but selfishly-requested, finish times of Round 5, independent of heat. ;-)
0:15:12 Ian Saari
0:15:28 Jourdan Harvey
0:16:27 Peteris Ledins
0:16:33 Adam Woods
0:16:50 Graeme Rennie
0:17:17 Elise Egseth
0:17:42 Lukas Zwicky
0:17:44 James O'Keefe
0:18:02 Erin Schirm
0:18:03 Ian Collings
0:18:09 Eric Bone
0:18:14 Will Enger
0:18:52 Alex Jospe
0:18:55 Celia Schofield
0:18:57 Tori Borish
0:19:30 Tyra Christopherson
0:19:33 Rex Winterbottom
0:19:35 Siri Christopherson
0:19:37 Eric Jones
0:19:41 Ben Smith
0:20:21 Simon Fors
0:20:26 Kseniya Popova
0:21:37 Bruce Christopherson
0:21:45 Vladimir Gusiatnikov
0:22:21 Cameron Devine
0:22:27 Ott Toomet
0:22:46 Tom Allen
0:22:54 Edward Despard
0:22:55 Emily Ross
0:23:00 Brett Buchholz
0:23:26 Nathan Klinge
0:23:52 Andrew Mason
0:24:00 Rachel Caulfield
0:24:16 Brian Gruber
0:25:00 Ryan Breseman
0:25:01 Marissa Roecks
0:25:03 Joanne Woods
0:25:18 Greg Barnes
0:25:36 Ann Marie Cody
0:25:47 Rebecca Jensen
0:26:05 Alison Schoenhardt
0:26:16 Rick Breseman
0:26:19 Kyle Haddad-Fonda
0:26:20 John Crowther
0:26:22 Julie Cassata
0:26:42 Kate Knapp
0:27:06 Marie-Josee Parayre
0:27:20 Tim Mundon
0:27:25 Stan Woods
0:28:58 Mike Rothmeyer
0:29:06 Zarina Parpia
0:29:11 Laura Collings
0:29:20 Evgeny Remizov
0:29:23 Jill Klinge
0:29:59 Kate Byers
0:30:28 Christian Whitmyre
0:30:45 Naomi Klinge
0:30:52 Debbie Newell
0:31:02 Charlie Klinge
0:31:13 Deborah Weinmann
0:31:17 Eileen Breseman
0:31:35 Bob Forgrave
0:33:14 Kean Williams
0:34:08 Nancy Devine
0:36:04 Marg Ellis
0:36:29 Jan Urban
0:37:01 Kirk Devine
0:37:51 Robin Nordberg
0:38:44 David Tallent
0:47:14 Alan Sauvage
0:47:21 Amy Winston
0:48:52 Ardis Dull
thanks!
let me explain what happened here:
my morning heat contained non-racing Nikolay and AliC that got injured on the way to first control. Once I saw that, I was in full control of the race finishing at comfortable 19:00 or so while Elise, Lukas and Ben were battling it out to an honorable result, finalizing it in the last meters of the race or so.
Now, for the final run I was well rested and had a pretty clean race. I was certainly well motivated; so the ending result.
It is interesting to see bunch of faster guys under me, so I cannot stress out how much a resting heat can cost.
In retrospect the strategic mistake was the time trial where I should have prepared better for that - I would not have ended with Eric, Graeme and Adam in a single run that cost me top 10.
In tactical level I should have run heats 2&3 in a much more relaxed way.
so a note for future all future tournaments:
1) time trial: very important (to not get 3 top 9 guys running against me early)
2) if you know you are top 2, jog as slowly as possible.
3) if you know you cannot make number 3, jog as slowly as possible.
In other words: Looking at the results, it's only the third place times that are truly legit :)
Yeah, after talking with most of the elites, I think I'll tweak the formula next year. After being thrown into the fire as the "last-minute-bracket-figure-it-out-guy" at the San Fran tournaments, I wanted to have a *much* simpler process that everyone could follow, would be quick, and wouldn't have any errors.
At SART 2015, the top 2 of each heat "advanced" plus the next fastest 1 of adjacent heats.
For SART 2016, I think I'll tweak it so that the top 1 of each heat "advances" plus the next fastest 3 from adjacent heats.
The tweak will put more pressure on the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th runners in each heat, because a 4th place finisher in one heat could be faster than a 2nd in the adjacent heat.
No tournament is completely fair, just look at March Madness. Some regionals have big upsets, reducing the amount of good teams which makes it easier to advance for the others.
I think it would benefit to have some butterflies earlier as well.
In Track: Heats consist of 8 athletes and advancements from the prelims are top 2 in each heat plus the next 4 fastest times (similar to your idea above).
Thanks for posting those result. The event this year was great, easy to follow (love the stickers), great maps and fantastic courses! It was a fun battle no matter where you fell in the bracket! Thank you so much Pink Socks!!
I am really looking forward to SART 2016!!
In addition to the results, we might have some nifty videos to share soon. I placed a GoPro at each hub control from Round 5.
Thanks for everything Patrick, and all of your fabulous volunteers. Everything went very smooth, the courses were great, i loved the bibs and the stickers. And thanks for the great weather as well.
Congrats to the organizers!
Why is Ian Saari never talked about for the Canadian National Team, great result!
Why is Ian Saari never talked about for the Canadian National Team, great result!
I was wondering the same thing after the finals!
If you look at the map, there was a 300m finish chute for the finals where I was expecting wild cheering and some potential last-second out-sprinting. The arena was as exciting as I had imagined. What I hadn't anticipated was that someone from the championship heat (Ian S. and Jourdan) would make up 3 minutes on the next heat.
The crowd was wildly cheering as 5 guys emerged into the top of the chute and started sprinting for the finish. What most people didn't realize is that it was a mix of two heats, that Ian and Jourdan were duking it out for the championship smack in the middle of an exciting finish of the previous heat (Schirm, Bone, Enger). It's too bad that Ian didn't receive the full glory of his fabulous kick over Jourdan.
Maybe an announcer for just the last two heats or a bigger gap between the last two heats' starting times?
Really great event. Thanks to all the volunteers.
I think it would benefit to have some butterflies earlier as well.
I'll look into that. Of the three tournaments I competed in San Fran, the most recent two didn't have any forking for any races, and the first had butterfly loops in only the first round, which felt counter-intuitive.
For SART, I knew that I wanted to have the championship forked. But given the terrain and course design philosophy for the semifinals, there really wasn't a good way to have that course forked at all. I figured that the big hill and/or route choice to #1 would do a good job of breaking up the packs.
I think butterfly loops at NSC would have been a smash, though. But I didn't want to add organizational complexity in Year #1. Depending on what the venues and terrain look like for next year, I'll look into more forked races.
Maybe an announcer for just the last two heats or a bigger gap between the last two heats' starting times?
I like the idea of the bigger gap for the last two. 5 minutes would be enough (3 minutes is probably enough; it could have been that this year was a fluke). Announcing would also be fun, something to look at for next year!
All RouteGadget files are now available on the
results page.
Thanks for a great event. I think the brackets mostly worked, but I like the idea of including 2nd and 4th place in the calculation. In the San Francisco sprints there was also the possibility of a really good performance leading to the possibility of promotion to a higher portion of the bracket (or a really poor performance leading to a demotion), but I think that made things too complicated. Here it was always possible to tell your possible path through the brackets, and who you might meet in later rounds.
I have a question about the stage 5 splits. On winsplits the splits are grouped by heat, but the five people in each heat were running the loops in different orders. The people running the splits in the same order were actually in different heats. Is there any reason we can't have splits listed for all the people doing each variation (e.g. everyone for course 5.4 together)?
Also (echoing comments from the Truckee A-meet) is there any chance we can get splits loaded to Attackpoint?
Thank you Gina, Pink Socks, and the rest of the Cascade crew who dreamt up the idea and made it happen. Super fun weekend!
The Stage 5 WinSplits grouping was my call. I figured that runners would rather compare against their heatmates, who, at this point, would be their closest competition of the weekend. Instead of one person per heat from all heats.
I'll talk to Gina about getting a separate sort posted. I'll also see about AP splits. Neither of us has done this before, and it's not standard procedure for CascadeOC events. But I can't imagine that it's too hard, and I don't want unsatisfied customers. (I'm pretty dumb when it comes to e-punch timing, and Gina is pretty new to it).
(I also can't guarantee speedy turnaround on this, since we have some home projects and work commitments that need attending to now that SART is over)
You might ask Valerie for tips, she is a wizard when it comes to posting crazy files like this.
Thanks to Patrick and Gina and all their volunteers for a really fun event. I'm glad I came out for it. Loved the head-to-head racing, and each heat you're getting a group of people closer to all the same speed, so it gets more and more exciting.
I do think each race could be shorter. If we had a 10-13min winning time, that would make everything tighter and more exciting within the heats. Would also change the nature of the race, making each a bit faster and harder.
Next year unfortunately conflicts with the Pawtuckaway Camping weekend, but I hope it's just as fun and successful!
acjospe- next year will likely be about 2 weeks earlier, so we can use the sweet new University of Washington map! So stay tuned for the official 2016 date.
Sept 10-11 is the SART date, as well as Pawtuckaway Camping weekend, so there's a conflict. Can't win 'em all.
Here's a nice writeup of the event from Adam Woods on the Team Canada blog.
This discussion thread is closed.