Silly season begins for WMA Sacramento worlds registrant list

Entrants are trickling into the Sacramento worlds database. Willie Banks is coming, for example. Bill Cheadle is making another comeback in the 400 hurdles. And then there’s M40 Lance Elliott of the United States, entered in the 800 meters with a time of 1:55. This led Masters Mole 2221c to write me: “Uh huh sure-Right: 1:55 verified. When did a 2:08 guy run 1:55? Here is Elliott’s rankings. Think I’ll enter with a 1:48 just for giggles.” In 1989, according to some old Iowa state meet results, Lane ran a 4:17 mile (or 1600, rather). So he probably ran a 1:55 at some point. But not lately. He ran a respectable 4:21.34 for 1500 last June at age 39, say these results. Anyone familiar with Lance’s recent racing? Can he go sub-2 in the 8?

Here's what Lance's submitted time looks like on Sacramento WMA website.

Print Friendly

January 8, 2011

28 Responses

  1. Terry Parks - January 8, 2011

    I thought that the verified referred to to your age and association membership.

  2. Jimson Lee - January 8, 2011

    Maybe they should ask 4 questions in the entry application:

    1) Open PR
    2) Age Group PR
    3) Season Best (or last year’s SB)
    4) What you really expect to run given your training times (and be honest if you don’t plan on showing up)

  3. peter taylor - January 8, 2011

    I agree with the general thrust of the comment by Terry Parks; I believe it is just an unfortunate coincidence that the word “verified” is placed next to the time or distance claimed. I do not think, in this case, that anyone is saying that the time of 1:55 has been verified.

    Times are important in this meet, of course, as I assume they will be used to draw up the quarterfinals in the 800. I am guessing that the times submitted in M40 will range from 1:54 or so to well above 2:30.

    Or will the quarterfinals be drawn up randomly? Or will there be three semifinals and no quarterfinals? Impossible to know at this point, but the makeup of the preliminary rounds will be extremely important to those seeking to advance.

  4. t-bird - January 8, 2011

    Wouldn’t it be a better story to email the guy first and see what’s up? This coming on the heels of your Phil Raschker admission.

  5. Thad Wilson - January 8, 2011

    I agree with Terry and Peter; “verified” refers to your age and association.
    From my experience, having a fast seed time might work against you. At the last two World Championships, I had the fastest entry time for the M55 100 Hurdle race. For the semifinals, I was assigned lane 7 in 2007 and lane 2 in 2009. The finals were seeded based on finish times. The same thing happened in the 400 hurdle race where I was given lane 8 in 2007 and lane 2 in 2009.

  6. Matt B. - January 8, 2011

    Peter- “I do not think, in this case, that anyone is saying that the time of 1:55 has been verified”

    Most certainly NOT. That is the problem.

    Do we allow entrants to just post whatever entry time they please, truthful or not? Or do we require verification?

    I like some of Jimson’s points. Except for point #1. Not sure how that would matter unless you were an ex Olympian and it would be cool to post in the program.

    Integrity is the question here. Regardless of whether if affects seeding or not. Why enter under a bogus time? I don’t get it. Use a qualification period- whatever that may be, all of 2010 or from Jan 1st 2010 to April 1st 2011, etc.
    Other competitors in your age group deserve honesty. I don’t appreciate the discrepancy at all.

    I remember entering “no time” once in an indoor Nationals; Big mistake;, I got some crappy outside lane, even though I was much faster than a few competitors who entered with fake times. I had not run indoors and was trying to be honest, even though I had superior outdoor marks from the previous season. We did not have trials it was just a final. Running on the outside lane and cutting in for two turns hindered my race, and I should have been in a more favorable lane.

    Of course at Worlds the trials should sort this out, but still, we should be held accountable. If others get away with it, then heck, why don’t we all just enter whatever times we feel like.

  7. Who's your Daddy ? - January 8, 2011

    Is it possible to only use a time from a sanctioned meet?

  8. peter taylor - January 8, 2011

    Matt, based on my long experience in masters T&F I will say the following:

    1. Entries for Sacramento will feature many times that bear no relationship to reality.

    2. None of these times will ever be verified by meet administration.

    3. People will submit “fantasy” times because they think it will benefit them in some way.

    My only “solution” is to go with the “time, date, and meet” system: “I, ‘Herbert Smith’, ran 2:01.98 at X meet on September xx, 2010. Meet was held in the city of x, country of y.”

    This so-called solution would never work for an international meet, I am afraid (it could work for an American meet if there was interest).

  9. Matt B. - January 8, 2011

    Good point. I would say it can certainly work for U.S. championships. It may not be as feasible for an international meet, but each country or federation should use some sort of verification system to help reduce these fantasy times.
    I’m not going to say it should go as far as penalizing anyone if they enter fake times, but if there were at least some sort of challenge system, where you can question a competitors time to the meet officials prior to competition than perhaps this dissuade these types of entries in the future. If evidence shows that the time simply can’t be verified than the individual’s time should be wiped off the board and listed as ‘No time’ or the fastest verifiable time from the previous year. The burden really should be put back on the athlete. The competitor should have to prove their time to the best of their ability.
    Simply ignoring the issue and just shrugging our shoulders saying that this is just the way it is, is really not good enough. We all deserve better.

  10. Terry Parks - January 8, 2011

    I think the seeded times should always be taken with a grain of salt. When I first registered for last year’s Nationals, my best time was around 2:21, I ran 2:11 right before the Nationals, but then dipped down to 2:06 in the finals. I didn’t get a great lane because of my slow seeded time, but I knew I could run much faster than the seeded time, so I was not overly concerned.
    I know that the competition will be fast and fit at the Worlds, so I am placing my efforts in to training hard and running much faster than last year. The truth about your fitness and your competition’s fitness will all come out on the track in Sacramento.

  11. jumpinjoe - January 8, 2011

    I think Terry is on the right track. As we continue to age (thankfully) we never know which body we’ll be using until day of competition i.e. some days I wake up feeling 30, other days feeling 80. So why not have blind draw for all events that have preliminary rounds?

  12. Don Young - January 8, 2011

    I’m hoping to get a good starting lane for the marathon. Makes all the difference:) Jimson for those of us who never ran up to our potential all 4 times are the same..;p

  13. Ken Stone - January 8, 2011

    Hi, t-bird.

    Happen to have an email address for Mr. Elliott?

    I’d love to write him!

  14. peter taylor - January 9, 2011

    I will amend my comments to say that declared times in the 800 won’t be as important as they will be in the 400 or 400 intermediate hurdles. There, being in lane 8 or 9 is a real disadvantage, as these are hard races and we can be unsure of the required pace to qualify (and when someone comes up on the inside it’s too late).

    Seeding times could also be important in the 5000. In the M50 5000 at Sacramento last year, David Cannon defeated 21 other men by running 16:08.79 (final finisher was timed in 25:26.02). Let’s say they have 54 runners at worlds in the M50 5000. I assume they would split it into two races based on time.

    Let’s say the split is at 20 minutes even. Submitting a time of 18:30 would guarantee you the faster section even if you can’t break 26 minutes in reality. No big thing, I guess, but many people will prefer the faster section and there could be a lot of mischief (and disappointments in the seeding).

  15. peter taylor - January 9, 2011

    Just reread Thad Wilson (above). It all depends on whether they use the declared times to seed. At nationals, from my experience sometimes they do and sometimes they don’t (not sure about worlds). Oh, well, perhaps the bigger point (per Matt B.) is that submitting bogus times is a bad thing in and of itself.

  16. Mary Harada - January 9, 2011

    Over the years I have seen some pretty bogus times submitted by women masters in or near my age group. I think it was for the Lahti WMA that a Russian woman – whose name I had not seen before – and in my age group- put down some totally out of this world time that were not possible even for elite athletes. I assumed that it was in error – but I was eager to see who she was and how she ran. She was a no-show.
    For the Riccione WMA a Polish woman in my age group put down some impressive but not other worldly seed times – and she was the real deal. I had not seen her before, have not seen her name on European masters meets since then, and she did not appear in Lahti. Maybe she will turn up in SAC! That would be fine with me – as I am now in an older age group! She was one fine runner.
    This is not much of an issue for the older women and older men age groups as the numbers are small and most competitors known . However for the younger and much larger age groups that have heats – playing fast and loose with seed numbers is no joke. There should be some penalty for these jokers – such as having them run their heat wearing knee high rubber boots.

  17. t-bird - January 9, 2011

    Yes, Ken, you can find his mailing address on the net.

  18. Jim Schoffman - January 9, 2011

    I first met Lance last summer at the meet where he ran 2:08 . He comes across as a humble guy excited to get back into track. This was his first 800 since college so he’s a newbie to master’s track. He didn’t have any idea what he could do and ran by himself out front. I was 2nd at 2:22. He is planning to run the Drake Relays masters 800 at the end of April and knows what it will take to be out front in that race. I think with the 1:55 he posted is what he believes he can accomplish and in no way trying to game the system.
    He has the tools and drive to come close. We will find out more at the Drake Relays.

  19. Stefan Waltermann - January 9, 2011

    As to seeding in the preliminary rounds for the 800 m @ the worlds, I’ve got a story. In San Sebastian, Spain they lined up 16 of us 1500 m style at he starting line and 8 or so (seeded?) a few m ahead. Told us that we could cut in any time, again 1500 m style. Gun went off and a world war started. Spiking, elbows flying, fists flying, head butting, intentional tripping… only close combat rules applied. By the time, we were finally running, those 8 guys in front of the war zone were gone.

    Sounds funny? Tell that to an athlete who went half way around the world to run an honest 800 m race at the world
    championships.

  20. Wishing it were so - January 9, 2011

    Re post #18 I appreciate his enthusiasm but a seed mark is an actual performance not a wish list. Most websites let you update your seed marks or times if you have a better performance in the future. If you are his friend please let him know of this and how it can negatively affect other competitors so he can correct it to an actual time, not something he hopes he will run. If he reaches 1:55 at the Drake relays he can update his mark at that time.

  21. Lance Elliott - January 9, 2011

    I would like to apologize for my registration for the World Master Championships. The last thing that I want to do is attract negative attention or submit a registration that is considered silly. The application is rather lengthy and when I filled in the times, I thought it was best to enter times I felt were representative of what I hope to run at the meet. If it was wrong to do that, I will have the times changed to what I ran last summer.

    I have enjoyed starting to run again and look forward to competing as a master runner. I appreciate all of the support I have received and would much prefer being involved in celebration, and not controversy.

    Regards,
    Lance Elliott

  22. Matt B. - January 9, 2011

    Stefan

    Exactly. We spend a lot of time and money to get there and we deserve proper seeding.
    That is just not acceptable. I’m sorry you had to be a part of it. Not Funny.

  23. Moraghan - January 10, 2011

    There were 12 of us in the 800m final in Hungary for the Europeans(no semi). So, in theory, the seedings would have been important as 4 of the lanes were shared.

    As it happens those times seemed to be largely ignored so it didn’t make much difference anyway.

    The entry system for that meet didn’t have any way of updating your times post entry submission.

  24. Ken Stone - January 10, 2011

    Lance graciously replied to some questions, and I’ll post his answers later. Sample:

    I ran track and cross country for Iowa State University from 89-94. … I placed at almost every Big 8 meet I ran (typically mile/1500), and was on the winning 4×800 relay one year. I never qualified for nationals, missing by less than .3 seconds one year. My best 1500 was 3:45. I ran a number of races between 3:45 and 3:47, but never had the breakthrough race of 3:42 which I was in shape to run.

  25. john - January 11, 2011

    who cares…he’ll run in some qualifying heat..he’ll either do well or not do well…

  26. Mary Harada - January 12, 2011

    Good comment – times listed are supposed to be performance marks – not in my dreams or in my former life as an Olympic star marks. The entry form for USATF meets has space for indicating when and where the seed time was achieved. When I have not run an event within the last year or two – I try to make a realistic educated guess or leave it blank.
    As I mentioned above – on rare occasions I have seen some entry marks for women in my age group or around my age group that are so clearly impossible – World Record times – in your dreams – that I laugh. But again – it does not matter much for my age group but for younger men and women – it can make a great deal of difference.

  27. peter van aken - January 12, 2011

    what about registration space on the form for weather conditions during the race you are submitting as a seed time- was it raining/windy, Sacramento type temperatures? Were you having an exceptionally good day, having PR’d in an earlier event and now going for broke in another? Was your girlfriend/children watching from the stands, so you ran faster than you thought you could?

    Describing the conditions under which you set the mark you are submitting could prove useful in evaluating where to see you….

  28. Reader - May 21, 2011

    No one mentioned that it was a nice move by Mr. Elliot to amend his time after being notified of this thread, particularly as he wasn’t being malicious with his optimistic self-seeding. I self-seeded optimisitcally as well, but no one seems to have noticed!

Leave a Reply