projections again

[xcrunner15]

Did it again, sorry for up so late. and sorry for only 23 but im tired and heading to bed


Individual Rankings


1. Nick Holmes, Limestone 14:29 P.R this season (Peoria), set this last week in win at Conference by himself. Looks super strong this season, with that 14:24 (I converted to 14:39 cause of how fast that course was) but also the 14:29. If he continues to improve how he has, he looks to be the favorite for the state meet right now. It will be interesting to see if he can keep it up as I’ve noticed and few people have pointed out how he tends to drop off at the end of the season, but otherwise, the clear favorite.

2. Derek Campbell, Sycamore 15:12 P.R this season (Sterling), won conference in 15:47 (slow course) over a tough Geneva field. Looking strong this year, won every meet he’s run in I believe? Although Hird’s run a faster P.R then him, Campbell’s not only beat him at Woodruff (4-5 seconds) and Sterling (20 seconds) but hasn’t run on a fast, course like Peoria, since woodruff. Looks to be third rematch this weekend at regionals which will feature sycamore, Kaneland, alleman, and Dixon but will mainly come down individually to Campbell and Hird

3. Tim Hird, Alleman 14:53 P.R this season (Credit Island), 15:02 last week at conference win in Quincy(Boo self promotion I know). Id say been running pretty strong lately and will be a good matchup at regionals.

4. Blake Brooks, Dunlap 14:56 P.R this season (Credit Island), 15:00 at Peoria this last weekend (also by himself) Defintely coming on strong after dropping more then 30 seconds from his Peoria time to this meet. I’d say its gonna be these 4 contenders come state time fighting for the state championship. Deffinetly strong to run that by himself, but he just keeps getting stronger.

5. Colin Mickow, Princton 15:10 P.R this season (Peoria), won conference this last week, not sure on time (heard 15:30,) but do know he was 10 seconds back of Hird at Sterling. Don’t know much on him besides 15:10 this early is deffinetly good Will be a surprise to most people come state time.

6. Kevin Forde, UHIGH 15:20 P.R this season (Peoria), won conference, 15:28? I think but cant find results. Ran exceptionally well at Peoria Notre Dame (15:05 but I converted 15 seconds cause of the fastness of the course). Also ran well placing 2nd at east Peoria invite. Strong runner, but most likely going to be heading the second pack along with Mickow, Ferrigan, McMorrow, and others. Time wise he gets the nod right now over most the other guys.

7. Kasey Ferrigan, Dixon 15:19 P.R this season (Peoria), 2nd at conference behind some Streator kid (15:54), seems to be coming right along, Pring by 20 seconds off of Sterling last week and forming into a suprising top runner this year. 1st year I believe as he is transferred, will look to break the top 5 come state, and by the way he keeps dropping time, its very likely. Good matchup this weekend at Rock falls regional.

8. Nick Lane, Grayslake North 15:24 P.R this season (conference), placing 4th this last weekend. Finally breaking out of his shell he’s been in all year and running well. Not much on his meets as it is, but hasn’t run particularly well when it has been covered. Definetly a dark horse, as he must come on strong towards the end of the season. Was close to 15 flat last year, so you never know what he could break out.

9. Hunter Mickow, Princton 15:23 P.R this year (Peoria), 3rd at conference behind his brother and some other dude (15:46), running strong this season but don’t know much about. 15:23 does speak for itself though.

THIS WAS THE PART WHERE IT GOT TOUGH!

10. Garrett McKnight, St. Francis 15:32 PR, don’t know much about either, although has deffinetly been improving this year. Only this high because of the inconsistency of other guys who I think would be number 10.

11. Brian Mcguire, Alleman 15:30 PR, this last week at Quincy, coming on strong and finally racing where he should be. Will be a good showdown between him, Gilmer, Ferrigan, Logan and Grimson coming up at regionals.

12. Matt Gilmer Sycamore 15:51, jumps way up in the rankings with a great race, coming in third at conference for sycamore and sounding quite strong. Also, don’t think he is this high but has beat Grimson recently and with the other guys underperforming, why not?

13. Peter Grimson, Sycamore 15:30 way back at woodruff. Although has had a tough stint of injuries, or whatever it was, is starting to make a comeback. I think he is top 5 talent, but only time will tell if he gets back to where he belongs, at the front. Good showing will be this week at regionals, if he can break the top 3, we know hes back.

14. Neil Anderson Chatham 15:49 but moving up up up. Beat Walmer, Osborne, and Frank head to head, and didn’t just beat them, but 20 seconds or more. Now, time hasn’t been that great but just like Nick Lane, he is a darkhorse who went close to 15 last year and is returning to form now.

15. TJ McMorrow, Metamora 15:36 PR but 15:40 this last weekend at Peoria. Althouhg I though he would be stronger this year, at least he has been consistent. 15:40 isnt too shabby but since he broke 15 last year, I was looking for more out of him. Still, 15th aint to bad and consistency is always good.

16. Matt Logan, Dixon 15:43 Pr (Peoria) and 3rd at conference behind Ferrigan. Also solid runner and don’t know much about besides Peoria and Sterling results. Could be a potential top 15 guy though.

17. Carson Sterchi, CLC 15:22!!! Pr this season but like the rest of the people around him, has deffinetly fallen off recently. A 15:50 for the last couple weeks does not help, and now his other teammates are also catching him or dropping off. Not a good sign for a team with so much talent.

18. Campbell Walters 15:46 no clue who this kid is, just told that he is decent and 15:46 aint too shabby. Heard though that hes run a couple mid 15:45s so not to bad, and must be more consistent then the rest of these guys.

19. Scott Tanis 15:39 doesn’t deserve this after the last couple weeks, especially after getting beat by what was it, 4 sycamore guys? 15:39 is good, but dropping off the last couple weeks is not.

AND NOW FOR THE RISERS AND FALLEN
20. Aaron Osborne springfield 15:50 I though these 3 had top 10 potential but neither have managed to break 16 recently, last 3 meets, including Metamora and other courses. Falloff not good but at least their hanging in the top 25
.
21. Brad Walwer springfield 15:42 and not running sub 16? Quite crazy but true. Idk if it’s a traning fallout or what but they three Springfield guys need to start running better or their teams wont do as hot as everyone thinks they will

22. Chris Frank shg 15:49 but blew up this week at conference (17s?). Look for a comeback but still, a big iffy question on whether these guys will climb back up again.

23. $tefan Huebers sycamore 16:20, but On the rise! Should be much higher, but without a substantial PR, I couldn’t. Look for a top 20, possibly top 15 jump after regionals, as he has been running awesome lately, close to Grimson and Gilmer, and will drop below 16 at this meet. The dollar sign is for a reason, because if he stays healthy, this gives syacmore 4 in the top 25, a super hard feat to accomplish

Sorry for ending it on 23 but besides a Peoria Notre Dame dude who looked decent, it all was a bit too clustered, and too many guys running inconsistent week in and week out. Plus im tired and going to bed but wanted to get these up Thursday nite like promised.

[qcyrunner]

Nice job!

[cyron10k]

"with that 14:24 (I converted to 14:39 cause of how fast that course was"

Just a thought when adding time: If the course is three miles, which we know it is, then 14:24 is worth exactly 14:24.

Nobody added time to Gebs marathon world record because of "exceptionally good weather."

I can see estimating a subtraction of time for course difficulty or excessive heat. I can see adding time for a short course.

I don't get adding time to Nicks performance especially since he practically repeated it a month later solo.

[oldskool]

I'm also curious about the adding/subtracting time. What is the rationale? I'm not debating the ranking order, just that I've seen finish times adjusted before and didn't know how that fit in. I guess I can see that Detweiller Park is the "ultimate equalizer" on here, as everyone runs there at least once before the state meet, but that's all that needs to be said. I'm simply curious, that's all.

[qcyrunner]

I recall he did this to offset the advantage of hard surface and cool conditions so as to attempt to equalize to other state conditions. There's still nobody close to Nick Holmes, even when "equalized"!

[moocher]

Moe Bahrani Vernon Hills?
He ran 14:38 at Palatine and I think 14:58 at peoria.
He has to be considered a top 5 guys unless something has happened to him?

[centralillinoisrun]

we will see

[oldskool]

I understand what the intention is, but like cyron said--Detweiller is Detweiller, there is no need to compensate for weather or course conditions because the distance is the same. Reminds me of how people are saying the Laverne Gibson course is short because of all the fast times at pre-nats, when in actuality there are permanent fences around the course. It never changes, so how can it magically be short on a perfect day for running?

Sorry, I'll get off my soapbox

[qcyrunner]

I don't disagree, just was pointing out what I believe his intent was. You are 100% correct that anyone knows the caliber of a runner by their Detwieller times. It's been a fairly constant benchmark for close to 40 years.

[runningmuth]

Xcrunner15 again thank you for your rankings and time spent putting this together. Just wanted to bring up some points about Scott Tanis your number 19 ranked runner. He has a personal best of 15:22 not 15:39 and the last three weeks he has run at the Lisle Mane Event (3.18 distance) time 16:47, not a great meet, West Aurora (cancelled due to heat) and Conference at Kaneland 16:21, one second off your number 13th ranked Grimson and only beaten by 3 Sycamore kids all of whom are ranked in your top thirteen and on the number one ranked team. I think he is very deserving of this spot and will have a great test this weekend against the Princton Mickow twins at our Regional. I am bias because I coach him, and I understand it is hard to gauge our team because we don’t run at Detweiller Park at all during the year, but Tanis and Max Sliwa, who is close behind him will really start coming on this week and next when it really counts. Again thanks for the time you have put in on this, it leads to some great conversations and debates. My opinion is there are a lot of individual guys that could make all-state or compete for the team trophies at state and I can’t wait to watch this AA state series progress in the next three weeks.

[800man]

cyron10k said:

"with that 14:24 (I converted to 14:39 cause of how fast that course was"

Just a thought when adding time: If the course is three miles, which we know it is, then 14:24 is worth exactly 14:24.

Nobody added time to Gebs marathon world record because of "exceptionally good weather."

I can see estimating a subtraction of time for course difficulty or excessive heat. I can see adding time for a short course.

I don't get adding time to Nicks performance especially since he practically repeated it a month later solo.

I also added time to the runs from Peoria Notre Dame so as to compare to Peoria Woodruff which is exactly what I think he did. The conditions were much better at PND and for comparison sake that is why times were adjusted. There were several runners who ran in both races and a 10-15 second difference is right on with those runners.

Also since P-Woodruff ran an only AA race it lets you calculate in where everybody would line up.

[runningfan]

My first post to this message board starts with:

First of all, XC has done a great job considering what is known , posted or published. It doesn't seem to be much information for any AA runners north of I-90 unless you do a lot of research. For that matter there aren't very many.

However I agree with mocher, where is Moe? He has been awesome lately. Got to be top 5.

Also, Lane's PR was at the Warren Invite of 15:14. Also something else to consider is, that 15:05 at state last year was the first time for him to break 15 all last year, over a minute quicker than previously run. Peoria is defiantly faster than these hills up north. Don't think he will make this kind of jump. But it will not be a 15:xx.

[cyron10k]

800man said:

cyron10k said:

"with that 14:24 (I converted to 14:39 cause of how fast that course was"

Just a thought when adding time: If the course is three miles, which we know it is, then 14:24 is worth exactly 14:24.

Nobody added time to Gebs marathon world record because of "exceptionally good weather."

I can see estimating a subtraction of time for course difficulty or excessive heat. I can see adding time for a short course.

I don't get adding time to Nicks performance especially since he practically repeated it a month later solo.

I also added time to the runs from Peoria Notre Dame so as to compare to Peoria Woodruff which is exactly what I think he did. The conditions were much better at PND and for comparison sake that is why times were adjusted. There were several runners who ran in both races and a 10-15 second difference is right on with those runners.

Also since P-Woodruff ran an only AA race it lets you calculate in where everybody would line up.

I guess what I'm getting at is that there has to be a standard. I understand time adjustments for comparisons of times across the state. So in theory the best case scenario would be an absolutely flat course that is hard from no rain for 3 miles in 50-55 degree weather with good competition. So if PND was as close to that as anybody got all year, thats the "standard" and you adjust all other times compared to that. Nick physically achieved that time. He's now a 14:24 runner. Now if Runner-X went 15:15 at Woodruff I understand saying "He might have gone 15:00 at PND." But , in my opinion you can't add time to a runners performance unless A) The course was short or B) The course was downhill.

I know it may not seem like a big deal, adding or subtracting time, but I feel like it diminishes the peformance. Nick didn't take 14:39 to cover three miles, it took only 14:24.

And I also want to add, thanks for putting together the rankings. I know how much time that can take. Now that I live in Washington state, it gets harder to follow IL XC. And I apologize if I sound nit pickey, just throwing my opinion into the mix.

[800man]

cyron10k said:

800man said:

I also added time to the runs from Peoria Notre Dame so as to compare to Peoria Woodruff which is exactly what I think he did. The conditions were much better at PND and for comparison sake that is why times were adjusted. There were several runners who ran in both races and a 10-15 second difference is right on with those runners.

Also since P-Woodruff ran an only AA race it lets you calculate in where everybody would line up.

I guess what I'm getting at is that there has to be a standard. I understand time adjustments for comparisons of times across the state. So in theory the best case scenario would be an absolutely flat course that is hard from no rain for 3 miles in 50-55 degree weather with good competition. So if PND was as close to that as anybody got all year, thats the "standard" and you adjust all other times compared to that. Nick physically achieved that time. He's now a 14:24 runner. Now if Runner-X went 15:15 at Woodruff I understand saying "He might have gone 15:00 at PND." But , in my opinion you can't add time to a runners performance unless A) The course was short or B) The course was downhill.

I know it may not seem like a big deal, adding or subtracting time, but I feel like it diminishes the peformance. Nick didn't take 14:39 to cover three miles, it took only 14:24.

And I also want to add, thanks for putting together the rankings. I know how much time that can take. Now that I live in Washington state, it gets harder to follow IL XC. And I apologize if I sound nit pickey, just throwing my opinion into the mix.

Point well taken. We're not taking time away from Nick, he ran awesome that day. But for comparison's sake, Woodruff had an all class AA race so it's easier to convert back to that.

As for what Moocher and Runningfan have said, That's a big oops to miss Moe Bahrani. I guess he is skipped because they compete against mostly bigger schools up there so he doesn't stick out. He is definitely a top 10 if not top 5 contender in class AA.

I remember seeing somewhere guesstimates of what the time would be for AA all -state this year. Are people still thinking about the same. My guess was sub 15:25 ( of course assuming decent race day conditions ).

[badkarma96]

Neal Anderson from Chatham Glenwood ran 15:59 for 5k at Loyola Lakefront Invite. I always thought it was a 5k at least. It doesn't say on the results page but I know it was 5k last year. Also, his 15:47 at conference is on a pretty tough course.

www.illinoispreptoptimes.com/loyolavarb92907.pdf

As for Osborne and Walwer from Sprigfield High, I think they ran as a pack at conference but I could be wrong. I guess we'll find out how accurate your predictions are in a few weeks at State!

[xcrunner15]

my rankings seem to be taking a lot of heat so let me add some things:
have heard about moe, but didnt know he was AA sorry bout that.
I dont see why u are argueing about the nick holmes thing anyways, i pput his PR at the 14:29 he ran on peoria recently, I am biased against peoria notre dame, but w.e thats just how i thought i would do it. no matter what hes still number 1.
If u add in Moe (id put him at 5 behind brooks), bump everyone back 1 spot, and also add in the junior from Montini (Larson? is it) in the top 20 and thats the top 25.

Im sorry for not having everyone prs but i have limited resources, and along with school work and stuff (i am in high school as you know) that i just havent been able to get everyones exact stuff.

plus with everyone not running fast courses, it gets hard to really know whos running well or not so i apologize, but most of my rankings, i stick behind.

The guys who dropped like springfield guys, tanis from yorkville, grimson out of the top 10, and carson from CLC really dropped, is because i thought they had been underachieving. again thats only off times, but tanis got beat by sycamore's number 4 who i have him ranked ahead of, but he had to drop for that. the springfield guys havent broken 16 recently (last 3 meets) so they had to drop and grimson because the last couple races on fast courses theyve had, he hasnt run well.

sorry if you dont like em, their not projections either as i accidently put as the title. their more of rankings right now.
if we were doing projections statewise, the top 6 would remain the same, but grimson and other people like that would deffinetly jump

[badkarma96]

Well said. I know your list took a lot of work. Good luck at Regionals today.

[xcrunner30]

After this weekend I'd say that the top 3 of Holmes, Campbell and Hird will all run together and it will be whoever wants it most for the win. Moe Bahrani will try to hang on to those three as well. For fifth I think it will be a three-way competition between Brooks, Gilmer, and Grimson. Gilmer/Grimson may be ranked 12/13, but they both beat Ferrigan this weekend at Rock Falls. I also think McGuire should move up a few spots. With two weeks left, what does everybody else think?

[xcrunner30]

My predictions for top 10 are:

1. Holmes - slow race at regionals, but still one to beat
2. Campbell - lost to Hird at regionals, but still has 2-1 record vs. Hird
3. Hird - looked strong beating Campbell, explosive runner
4. Bahrani - just now coming to my attention, and he's very impressive
5. Brooks - off the radar, but still a very strong runner
6. Gilmer - running his best at the right times
7. Grimson - bringing it all together, could definitely be top 4
8. Forde - don't know a whole lot, but times don't lie
9. Lane - strong showing at regionals puts him up there
10. Mickow - i've heard real good things and again, times don't lie

[runningfan]

I suppose next weekend at belvedere will definitely bring this into better focus. Oh well here goes my try.

1. Holmes
2. Hird
3. Bahrani
4. Campbell
5. Brooks
6. Lane
7. Gilmer
8. Grimson
9. Forde
10. Mickow

[runninxc]

looks like the Hird-Bihrani-Campbell showdown at sectionals could be an exciting one. somebody film it!

[cygnus]

Thanks xcrunner. Excellent research.

I don't care if it's perfect - this is a nice summary. Great work.

[xcrunner4life]

i think that the runners from springfield are bein slightly underestimated.. i mean look at the last two races at conference @ Lincoln and regionals @ jacksonville. They have had their top five within 42 seconds at CS8 and within 35 at regionals.. Also not to overlook the dominate preformance by Neil Anderson who has won by a large lead the past two races. SHG seems to be falling off though..

[qcyrunner]

xcrunner4life said:

i think that the runners from springfield are bein slightly underestimated.. i mean look at the last two races at conference @ Lincoln and regionals @ jacksonville. They have had their top five within 42 seconds at CS8 and within 35 at regionals.. Also not to overlook the dominate preformance by Neil Anderson who has won by a large lead the past two races. SHG seems to be falling off though..

But they sure looked great pulling into regionals in those stretch limos!

[runningfan]

So when do the new Top 25 come out? Do we get an Official IPTT ranking?

[xcrunner15]

if you guys want me to, i will but if i do i probably wont write as much if i write anything for each guy

[neverstoprunning]

yes please do