Bay State League Indoor meets are already great! Why make any changes?
Well, because even great meets might benefit from improvements here and there. So let me acknowledge at the outset that Bay State meets are generally fun and exciting, and the meet management is generally efficient. Even so, here are a few suggestions that could make good meets even better:
1. Score the long jump
I hope that I am behind the times and the Bay State coaches or Athletic Directors or whoever decides these things have ALREADY decided to include the long jump as a scoring event. If not, why not? The long jump is contested and scored at the Class Meets, the State meets, the State relays... why not in the Bay State league? The argument that including it as a scoring event would lengthen the meets is weak. If every school is allowed three competitors, and every competitor is allowed two jumps, that's a total of 3x2x12 = 72 jumps per gender. At 30s a jump, that's 72 minutes total. Add a half hour of warm-up time and you can still fit boys and girls competition in under two hours.
2. Replace the JV 200 with a JV 4 x 200 relay
It is wonderful that the coaches provide JV runners with opportunities to compete. But the current JV 200s are ragged affairs. Why not replace them with JV 4 x 200 relays and move them after the 2-mile and before the varsity 4x400? They would be much more exciting (I think), and would be more fun. It would probably take a little bit longer to run them, but not a lot more time. In two minutes, you can have 24 athletes participate. furthermore, meets would end with the 4x400, which is the way all meets should end. What's not to love?
3. Limit the Field in the 2-Mile
I'm not so sure about this one, but I'll throw it out there anyway. The 2-mile is too congested in its current form, with up to 36 runners in a single race! How about adopting a policy that if there are more than 25 entrants, there will be two sections? The most obvious problem is that this has the potential to lengthen the meet. I'd be in favor of starting the two-mile while the sprints are going on (sometimes it is delayed for the sprint races).
4. Post hardcopy event results
Most leagues do this. Does the Bay State? I don't remember. It's great that the scoreboard is used, but frequently some results are skipped because of the large number of heats. Posting hard copies on the wall would be very easy, requiring one volunteer "runner" to take printed copies and post them.
5. Speaking of volunteers...
Every team should provide at least one helper who can work with meet officials, for example, a person to rake and mark at the long jump pit, a person to help at the shot put cage, someone to post results, someone to replace the HJ bar after misses, etc. I'm convinced that these little things make a big difference in how smmothly the meet runs.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
1. I've never seen a LJ competiton where there is a jump every 30 seconds. I'd love to have the LJ as a scoring event, but it's just not possible with the current time restrictions.
2. That would be fun, but I believe the league is already looking into upgrading the jv events.
3. A good idea, but could this be done and still have the meet finish by the 7:30 curfew?
4. Already done (usually).
5. Already done, though informally.
Thanks for the input!
Thanks for the comments!
A couple of years ago, I stood by the long jump pit at the Class A meet and timed the average wait between jumpers. It was about 35 seconds, including the break between rounds. I was surprised, since I was used to elite long jumpers spending a lot of time on the runway pysching themselves up. I would suggest timing the current BSL jumpers before assuming it would take too long. Of course, scoring the meet might make people take a little longer, but I doubt it would make much of a difference.
Post a Comment