Long Distance Running
Long Distance Running, including Open and Masters LDR
New Bedford Half Marathon – March 16, 2014 – Grand Prix Race #2
Plc Name ClubName GunTime SAge DvPlNEMChipTime AG % AGPl Bib Town 1 Ruben Sanca Whirlaway Racing Team 1:05:52 M27 1 Y 1:05:50 89.95% 5 3322 2 Nick Karwoski Whirlaway Racing Team 1:06:10 M25 2 Y 1:06:09 89.52% 11 3313 3 Dan Vassallo Central Mass Striders 1:07:10 M28 3 Y 1:07:08 88.21% 16 2920 4 Robert Gibson Janji(non-renewed club) 1:07:14 M24 4 Y 1:07:13 88.10% 17 1767 Brookline, MA 5 Eric Ashe BAA 1:07:25 M25 5 Y 1:07:24 87.86% 19 2824 6 Nicolai Naranjo Western Mass Dist Proj 1:08:00 M25 6 Y 1:07:59 87.10% 28 2989 7 Brad Mish BAA 1:08:08 M26 7 Y 1:08:07 86.93% 29 2855 8 Wisley Ochoro Team RUN 1:08:26 M35 8 Y 1:08:25 87.50% 23 2656 9 Philip Shaw Millennium Running 1:08:43 M29 9 Y 1:08:43 86.18% 35 2116 10 Eric Blake Unattached 1:08:47 M35 10 Y 1:08:46 86.80% 31 2333 11 Chase Pizzonia 1:09:13 M28 1:09:12 85.57% 39 758 Bronx, NY 12 Jesse Regnier Western Mass Dist Proj 1:09:36 M26 11 Y 1:09:36 85.08% 46 2984 13 Sean Duncan Western Mass Dist Proj 1:09:36 M24 12 Y 1:09:36 85.08% 46 2986 14 Jonathan Joyce Western Mass Dist Proj 1:09:40 M23 13 Y 1:09:39 85.02% 48 3380 15 Eric Macknight Non-New England Club 1:09:49 M25 1:09:47 84.86% 51 952 Ballston Lake, NY 16 Jason Ayr Western Mass Dist Proj 1:09:59 M26 14 Y 1:09:59 84.62% 54 2988 17 Ryan Gough GLRR 1:10:21 M30 15 Y 1:10:20 84.19% 62 3020 18 Jeff Howley RMH of Providence RC 1:10:22 M34 16 Y 1:10:22 84.53% 55 855 19 Michael Burnstein 1:10:27 M24 1:10:26 84.07% 64 2296 Brookline, MA 20 Andrew Chalmers Greater Boston TC 1:10:31 M24 17 Y 1:10:29 84.02% 67 2819 21 David Johnson Western Mass Dist Proj 1:10:40 M25 18 Y 1:10:39 83.82% 69 3357 22 Francis Cusick Unattached 1:10:44 M27 19 Y 1:10:42 83.76% 70 1288 23 Mike Galoob 02-0099 1:10:45 M40 1 Y 1:10:44 87.29% 27 1996 Peace Dale, RI 24 Adam Goode Dirigo R.C. 1:10:45 M30 20 Y 1:10:42 83.76% 70 1176 25 Scott Mcgrath Whirlaway Racing Team 1:10:51 M27 21 Y 1:10:47 83.66% 74 3317 26 Andrew Messer Western Mass Dist Proj 1:11:00 M28 22 Y 1:11:00 83.40% 75 2987 27 Jonathan CharlesworthGreater Boston TC 1:11:02 M29 23 Y 1:11:02 83.36% 77 1968 28 Kim Smith TEAM NEW BALANCE 1:11:09 F32 1:11:08 92.77% 1 2651 29 Stephen Polito NB Boston 1:11:17 M24 24 Y 1:11:16 83.09% 81 1818 30 Christopher Magill BAA 1:11:17 M41 2 Y 1:11:15 87.45% 25 2850 31 Louis Saviano Millennium Running 1:11:22 M23 25 Y 1:11:17 83.07% 82 2115 32 Alexander Taylor BAA 1:11:24 M34 26 Y 1:11:23 83.35% 78 2871 33 Ryan Mccalmon BAA 1:11:24 M38 27 Y 1:11:24 85.25% 41 3388 34 Sean Hyland BAA 1:11:25 M29 28 Y 1:11:22 82.98% 85 2844 35 Adrian Macdonald Greater Boston TC 1:11:26 M25 29 Y 1:11:24 82.94% 86 2816 36 Ethan Brown Team RUN 1:11:28 M26 1:11:28 82.86% 87 3248 37 Chris Mahoney Central Mass Striders 1:11:30 M36 30 Y 1:11:28 84.06% 65 2919 38 Jonathan Baker BAA 1:11:32 M30 31 Y 1:11:29 82.84% 88 2825 39 Brian Mcnamara Greater Boston TC 1:11:37 M31 32 Y 1:11:36 82.71% 91 1520 40 Ian Nurse BOSTON ATHLETIC ASSOCIA 1:11:37 M36 1:11:36 83.73% 72 2858 41 Gregory Picklesimer Somerville Road Runners 1:11:40 M47 1 Y 1:11:36 91.71% 2 1017 42 Jon Korhonen 1:11:42 M31 1:11:40 82.63% 92 791 Somerville, MA 43 Robert Espinosa Greater Boston TC 1:11:44 M29 33 Y 1:11:41 82.61% 93 2820 44 Manuel Gonzalez Greater Boston TC 1:11:47 M24 34 Y 1:11:45 82.53% 96 1762 45 Patrick Rich CENTRAL MASS STRIDERS 1:11:48 M37 1:11:46 84.03% 66 2923 46 Richie Spitsberg Millennium Running 1:11:50 M28 35 Y 1:11:48 82.47% 98 2114 47 Eric Mendoza Greater Boston TC 1:12:00 M29 36 Y 1:11:57 82.30% 102 2809 48 David Brooks BAA 1:12:15 M29 37 Y 1:12:12 82.02% 108 2830 49 Andreas Heilmann BOSTON ATHLETIC ASSOCIA 1:12:19 M29 1:12:19 81.89% 111 2880 50 Claton Conrad Dirigo R.C. 1:12:31 M31 38 Y 1:12:27 81.75% 112 1230 (more…)
If you come across any additional photo albums that we missed, feel free to link to them in the comments section on Facebook – thanks!
As we approach the second race in our Road Racing Grand Prix series this weekend — the New Bedford Half Marathon — we have two individuals leading the overall series.
The first and only race so far, the Jones 10 Miler, took place late last month in Amherst, MA. The challenging, hilly course didn’t stop Eric Ashe and Erica Jesseman from taking the top spots for the open male and female USATF-NE competitors. As your current Grand Prix leaders, we wanted to hear a little bit from these two local athletes about what it took to take the titles, and where we can expect to see them throughout the year.
Eric Ashe, B.A.A. — Male Open USATF-NE Grand Prix Leader
Eric chose to compete in the Jones 10 Miler because it’s part of the Grand Prix series and he wanted to score points for his team, the B.A.A. He also knew there would be some solid competition, and it would serve as a good preparation for the upcoming Boston Marathon he’s currently training for.
“I used the race as a good workout for Boston,” Eric said, noting he did a longer warm-up than usual (6 miles) and went right into a 4 mile cool down to get his mileage in. “It was definitely a good indicator of how training is going, as my legs weren’t too beat up after the race,” he said.
It’s the first time Eric is really focusing on the marathon and he reports that his training is going very well. He says he’s in the best aerobic shape he’s ever been, which clearly showed in his last race, where he completed the 10 mile course in 50:43 — that’s 5:04 per mile pace, and overall 7 seconds faster than second place finisher Ruben Sanca of the Whirlaway Racing Team.
We can expect to see Eric on the starting line at the New Bedford Half Marathon, where he plans to approach the race in the same manner as the first Grand Prix race, which is to go for the win but also use it as a workout for Boston. Looking ahead to April, Eric says: “I’m excited for what is to come at Boston as long as I can teach my body to hold up for 26.2 miles, and if I can stay healthy and consistent.”
For more on Eric’s training and racing, check out his NPR blog and this recent feature article on him at the same media outlet. Considering his early Grand Prix lead, it appears Eric may be the one to beat in the 2014 series.
Erica Jesseman, Dirigo Running Club — Female Open USATF-NE Grand Prix Leader
Erica joined the Dirigo Running Club in the summer of 2011 after graduating from the University of New Hampshire, attracted to the club’s fun and laid back environment — and living in Maine, it was most convenient for her too. For the Jones 10 Miler race, Erica had a similar approach as Eric, envisioning it as a great workout. She was most excited to compete with her Dirigo teammates Sheri Piers and Kristin Barry, who are Erica’s main training partners and mentors. Also training for Boston, she knew this race would serve as a nice preparation.
Her approach was to go out comfortably and controlled. “I knew I needed to run my own race; I didn’t focus on anyone but myself and my paces,” she said. Her approach obviously was the right one, as she came into the finish at 59:33, which is 5:58 per mile pace.
Leading up to the race, Erica had been training through a tough winter like many of us, after suffering from IT Band Syndrome in the fall. Despite the conditions and bouncing back from the injury, she’s managed to hit 80-90 miles per week, many of them on the treadmill and hilly long runs outside on the weekends. “I haven’t been hitting my highest mileage during this marathon training cycle,” Erica noted, “it’s been more quality over quantity.”
Where else can we expect to see Erica in race results? Next on the calendar is the New Bedford Half Marathon, and in April she’ll be lining up for the Boston Marathon.
Congratulations to both Eric and Erica on their early leads in the USATF-NE Grand Prix series. Stay tuned for Sunday’s race results in New Bedford, to see how they fare as they look to continue their winning streaks while training for the Boston Marathon.
The 37th Annual New Bedford Half Marathon on March 16th marks the second race in the USATF-NE Road Racing Grand Prix series. But for Whirlaway‘s Sarah Prescott, the race signifies much more. In fact, once she crosses the finish line, she will have completed her 100th consecutive USATF-NE Grand Prix race.
A runner since 1978, Sarah started entering Grand Prix races in 2000 when the club team she was a member of participated in the team competition. Motivated by seeing her name in the standings, she never looked back. Throughout this time, not only has she been a consistent name in our race standings, but she’s even found her way to the top of the results page many times too. She placed sixth last year in the series for the women’s 45-49 year old age group, and finished fourth the year prior.
Showcasing her range, in 2013, Sarah ran 36:11 for the 5 miler, 1:36:14 for the half marathon and 3:53:49 for the marathon. Considering the variety of distances included in the Grand Prix, Sarah’s training must prepare her for all sorts of races. This is why she has tailored her training based on the Grand Prix race schedule each year.
In addition to the series typically offering some races in her neck of the woods in New Hampshire, Sarah also says the Grand Prix boasts a good combination of distances and locations, while fostering camaraderie and team competition, which she enjoys with the Whirlaway Racing team. While there are no official rankings for her streak, she says “Looking at available stats, next behind me is Christopher Chetsas (a fellow Goon Squad founder) with his streak of 6 consecutive Ironrunner years. My streak has been 14 consecutive Ironrunner years, plus one race in 2014.”
So what’s next for Sarah? “Just keep running!” she says. “I’ve done more than I ever imagined being able to do and feel incredibly fortunate for all the wonderful people I’ve become friends with… how could I ask for anything more?”
Reflecting on her favorite Grand Prix moments, Sarah adds: “There are so many wonderful memories, it would take a story itself! Cape Cod Marathon was always extra special, first time I qualified for Boston Marathon and some really fun post-race parties.”
We would like to extend our congratulations to Sarah for her dedication to and successes in the USATF-NE Grand Prix series, and wish her continued success, especially at the upcoming New Bedford Half Marathon!
40th Annual Jones Group Realtors 10 Miler – Feb 23, 2014
Plc Name Club GunTime S AgeDvPl NE ChipTime AG % AGPl Bib Town 1 ERIC ASHE Boston Athletic Assn 50:44 M 25 1 Y 50:43 87.51% 6 524 BOSTON MA 2 RUBEN SANCA Whirlaway Racing Team 50:52 M 27 2 Y 50:51 87.29% 8 570 DRACUT MA 3 DAN VASSALLO Central Mass Striders 51:31 M 28 3 Y 51:30 86.20% 12 413 PEABODY MA 4 BRIAN HARVEY Boston Athletic Assn 51:43 M 26 4 Y 51:42 85.85% 14 538 BOSTON MA 5 NEEL TARNEJA GBTC 52:18 M 31 0 52:17 84.93% 21 635 SHREWSBURY MA 6 BRAD MISH Boston Athletic Assn 52:34 M 26 5 Y 52:34 84.43% 25 550 DORCHESTER MA 7 BRIAN MCNAMARA Greater Boston TC 52:36 M 31 6 Y 52:34 84.52% 23 477 CAMBRIDGE MA 8 ANDREW ERSKINE NB Boston 52:38 M 22 7 Y 52:38 84.35% 26 620 SOMERVILLE MA 9 ERIC BLAKE Unattached 52:47 M 35 8 Y 52:46 85.17% 20 649 WEST HARTFORD CT 10 ERIC MACKNIGHT Fleet Feet Albany Racin 53:16 M 25 0 53:15 83.35% 35 366 BALLSTON LAKE NY 11 JESSE REGNIER Western Mass Dist Proj 53:29 M 26 9 Y 53:28 83.02% 40 604 NORTHAMPTON MA 12 ALEXANDER PALEY Fleet Feet Albany Racin 53:36 M 27 0 53:36 82.82% 42 360 ALBANY NY 13 JOSH STEFFEN Millennium Running 53:41 M 33 10 Y 53:40 83.24% 36 519 NEW LONDON NH 14 JASON AYR Western Mass Dist Proj 53:47 M 26 11 Y 53:47 82.53% 45 619 NORTHAMPTON MA 15 MIKE GALOOB 02-0099 53:59 M 40 1 Y 53:59 86.19% 13 175 PEACE DALE RI 16 SEAN DUNCAN Western Mass Dist Proj 54:02 M 24 12 Y 54:01 82.16% 50 623 ARLINGTON MA 17 JEFF HOWLEY RMH of Providence RC 54:07 M 34 13 Y 54:07 82.69% 43 671 PROVIDENCE RI 18 JONATHAN JOYCE Western Mass Dist Proj 54:10 M 23 14 Y 54:08 81.99% 53 370 HULL MA 19 MICHAEL BURNSTEIN Janji (not member) 54:11 M 24 0 54:09 81.95% 54 630 BROOKLINE MA 20 Andrew Messer Western Mass Dist Proj 54:14 M 28 15 Y 54:14 81.85% 55 592 WESTFIELD MA 21 TOM O'GRADY Willow Street 54:22 M 28 0 54:21 81.66% 58 112 LATHAM NY 22 MATHEW WEISSINGER Western Mass Dist Proj 54:31 M 27 16 Y 54:30 81.43% 62 495 NORTHAMPTON MA 23 RICARDO ESTREMERA Fleet Feet Albany Racin 54:36 M 27 0 54:34 81.33% 64 363 ALBANY NY 24 MANUEL GONZALEZ Greater Boston TC 54:42 M 24 17 Y 54:41 81.18% 65 424 ROXBURY MA 25 Louis Saviano Millennium Running 55:01 M 23 18 Y 54:59 80.73% 68 520 SANDOWN NH 26 Christopher Magill Boston Athletic Assn 55:06 M 41 2 Y 55:06 85.20% 19 547 CUMBERLAND RI 27 ADRIAN MACDONALD Greater Boston TC 55:09 M 25 19 Y 55:09 80.48% 70 639 ALLSTON MA 28 David Brooks Boston Athletic Assn 55:14 M 29 20 Y 55:13 80.38% 71 531 HOLDEN MA 29 Scott Leslie Central Mass Striders 55:17 M 32 21 Y 55:16 80.61% 69 414 RUTLAND MA 30 BRAD LEWIS Willow Street 55:24 M 27 0 55:22 80.16% 75 141 TROY NY 31 PETER OMAE Team RUN 55:29 M 35 22 Y 55:27 81.42% 63 614 LOWELL MA 32 MEGAN HOGAN Fleet Feet Albany Racin 55:30 F 26 0 55:29 89.55% 2 362 SARATOGA SPRINGS NY 33 ERIC MENDOZA Greater Boston TC 55:44 M 29 23 Y 55:44 79.63% 85 663 DORCHESTER MA 34 David METZGER GBTC (not member) 55:48 M 27 0 55:48 79.54% 87 682 MEDFORD MA 35 JONATHAN BAKER Boston Athletic Assn 55:49 M 30 24 Y 55:49 79.53% 88 525 CAMBRIDGE MA 36 CHUCK TERRY Willow Street 55:54 M 31 0 55:51 79.51% 89 483 ALBANY NY 37 BRIAN KEEFE Somerville Road Runners 55:55 M 24 25 Y 55:53 79.43% 90 167 WATERTOWN MA 38 ANTHONY WALSH GBTC (not member) 55:57 M 30 0 55:56 79.34% 92 678 BOSTON MA 39 MORGAN KENNEDY Central Mass Striders 55:58 M 26 26 Y 55:58 79.31% 93 408 GRAFTON MA 40 ANDREAS HEILMANN BAA (not member) 56:03 M 29 0 56:03 79.19% 96 539 BOSTON MA 41 ANDREW DOWNEY GLRR 56:05 M 29 27 Y 56:04 79.17% 98 207 LOWELL MA 42 ANDY MCCARRON Central Mass Striders 56:09 M 31 28 Y 56:09 79.11% 99 412 KEENE NH 43 JASON REILLY Boston Athletic Assn 56:21 M 31 29 Y 56:20 78.85% 101 552 CUMBERLAND RI 44 JAMES SULLIVAN GLRR 56:24 M 28 30 Y 56:21 78.76% 104 206 CHELMSFORD MA 45 BRYAN MAHONEY Boston United Track & C 56:24 M 30 31 Y 56:21 78.82% 102 47 SOMERVILLE MA 46 AARON LOZIER Willow Street 56:24 M 25 0 56:23 78.73% 106 113 CLIFTON PARK NY 47 CHRISTOPHER KLUCZNI Somerville Road Runners 56:30 M 31 32 Y 56:27 78.73% 105 381 SOMERVILLE MA 48 JASON GARRITY Greater Boston TC 56:36 M 27 33 Y 56:35 78.43% 112 681 TOPSFIELD MA 49 SONNY GAMBLE Western Mass Dist Proj 56:44 M 26 34 Y 56:44 78.23% 116 238 CARLISLE MA 50 SCOTT MCGRATH Whirlaway Racing Team 56:52 M 27 35 Y 56:52 78.05% 121 564 ANDOVER MA (more…)
UPCOMING RACES – Important Deadlines & Registration Details
The 2014 Road Racing Grand Prix officially kicks off tomorrow, February 23rd, with the Jones 10 Miler in Amherst, MA. The challenging race along scenic, hilly rural roads offers a total of $9,250 in prize money. $1,750 will be awarded to top individuals, $2,500 in age group prizes (no double dipping) and $5,000 for top teams. The event is rooted in New England history, having been founded by USATF-NE President Tom Derderian in 1975 as a tune-up race before the Boston Marathon. In fact, as the race website notes, “Bill Rodgers won Jones 10 Miler the first year it was held and used the race as a training run for his first Boston Marathon victory.” Past results for the race can be viewed here. If you’re still interested in racing and have yet to sign up, it’s not too late. Race-day registration begins at 9:00 am at Amherst Regional High School.
The full 2014 Grand Prix schedule is outlined below, but there are two races taking place just next month that we want to make you aware of. The 37th Annual New Bedford Half Marathon will be held on March 16, with registration closing on March 1.
Next up in the calendar is the An Ras Mor 5k in Cambridge, the shortest race distance in the series. Held on March 30, runners can enter up until race day; however, entry fees go up $5 after March 9. USATF members will receive a discount on the registration fee. Please note that there are are no special steps needed to do so — simply select the “USATF member” category and know your 2014 individual USATF member number, which can be looked up here.
2014 Road Racing Grand Prix Calendar
Updates to the 2014 Grand Prix Guidelines
There are a few notable changes to the Grand Prix Guidelines this year. Men’s and Women’s 70+ age group teams will be included in the scoring, as well as women’s 65-69 and 70+ individual age groups. Additionally, individuals winning their age group will begin with 10 points and those in second, third, etc, will be scored one point less for the top ten regardless of how many finishers are in the age category. Also in 2014, runners aging into a new category as individuals will still receive points in the age group in which they began the series. Their name will also appear in their new age group and they can accumulate points there as well.
Be sure to visit our website for the latest Grand Prix standings following each event. In 2013 Grand Prix standings, B.A.A. and Whirlaway Racing team took the men’s and women’s open team titles respectively, with Sean Duncan of WMDP and Stephanie Reilly of Team RUN coming in as the the top open individuals. To view the winning Grand Prix teams since 1986, check out that list on our website here.
Which teams and individual runners will take home the top Grand Prix titles and prize packages this year?
With several USATF championship events coming up, both at the regional and national levels, we wanted to make sure no important entry deadlines are missed. We’ve
outlined some key upcoming events below, with the deadlines bolded. Be sure to mark your calendars and check out each event link for more details. See you out on the track or the roads soon!
- USATF-NE Open Indoor Track & Field Championships, Feb. 23 at Harvard University – Entry deadline: Feb.19
- USATF Northeast Zone Youth Indoor Track & Field Championships, Feb. 22-23 at the Bennett Center in Toms River, NJ – Entry deadline: Feb. 19
- USATF National Masters Indoor Championships, March 14-16 at the Reggie Lewis Center – Entry deadline: Feb. 21
- USATF-NE 10 Mile Championship: Jones 10 Mile, Feb. 23 at Amherst Regional High School – Entries accepted until race day
Who, what, when, where:
While the USATF NE bylaws do not require the LDR Committee to involve the membership in decision making in regard to any event or activity it oversees, the Committee has chosen to invite input and voting from the LDR community in regard to the Road Race Grand Prix. The slate selection meeting for the 2014 USATF NE Grand Prix Road Race series date and time was announced at the bid presentation meeting on November 13, 2013 where over 60 people were in attendance. In addition, an ongoing LDR Committee of about 12 people meets sporadically through the year and had been meeting/emailing during the preceding months in regard to the bid solicitation process. At the presentation meeting, names were collected of those interested in attending the slate meeting. Those names combined with available LDR Committee members met on November 23rd in Waltham to review the bids and put together the slates for voting. A total of 11 people were present at the meeting. Clubs represented were: the BAA, CSU, GBTC, NSS, SISU Project, SRR, WRT, and WMDP. Transparency of the process includes: all meetings are open to all USATF members; voting privileges are extended to all club representatives (one vote per club); committee decisions are by consensus; bid and voting process guidelines are posted on the USATFNE website; and contact information including email addresses for the LDR Chairs is posted on the website. The road race Grand Prix is the only series that involves member input at USATF NE, all others such as Mountain, Track, and Cross Country are decided by Committees only.
High Street Mile:
After reviewing the bids and the Grand Prix survey results that had been collected after the bid presentation meeting and before the slate selections, the first topic was the High Street Mile. Ranked high in the survey and of interest to Committee members, we discussed our concerns about the High Street Mile event: 1) the USATF rule of scoring by gun time only and High Street’s use of chip timing to determine winners; 2) road-width start area and its effect on gun time; and 3) multiple heats/races at High Street and how we could score teams. We decided to offer a Showcase status to High Street in 2014 where we would promote the race, offer some incentive to USATF members to participate other than with points and see how an increased field in size and in top competitors would affect the race before making a decision for inclusion as a Grand Prix event if they bid in future years.
Putting together the slates, we listed the most popular races as determined by the survey results. Our immediate goals were to give the runners what they told us they wanted, avoid conflicts with religious holidays and local major races/nearby USATF national championships that would detract runners from Grand Prix races and make the schedule doable in regard to the typical training regimes of participants. There were several races that polled so strongly (or had a competing bid of the same distance which had time conflicts) it was clear they could be a core group and appear on all slates. We first organized a slate where races grouped themselves with a few early in the year, had a couple month gap and then resumed later in the year. We were able to get geographic diversity with the slate (another goal) and also switch out a couple of the distances/races and keep the format. We gave them a working title of 1a and b. We could also put in more bidding races that were popular and have them fall on an almost monthly basis. This format’s working title was 2 a and b. Representatives liked 1 a and b as the gap time off could support a spring marathon or rest time and liked 2 a and b as it spread out the races (and paying entry fees) over the year more consistently. The LDR Committee always wants every slate to be an effective Grand Prix so it does not ultimately matter to the Committee which one is elected, they are equally good.
At the slate selection meeting, we discussed offering just two slates: 1 a and 2 a with the b options as pull down menus within the slate. This presentation of the information would highlight the format as the primary element to vote on and the dominate slate in the pair would determine the final line up. We wanted to avoid a situation which came up a couple of years ago when a slate that had garnered 26% of votes was declared the winner. The Committee received criticism of that decision as over 70% of the respondents made it clear they had voted against the line-up. After the meeting, putting the slates in Survey Monkey (cheap version) proved a challenge as mixing question types (pull down within multiple choice) could not be managed and in the case of 1 a and b, if one did a pull down of the 5 mi for a choice between Carver and Ribfest and chose Ribfest, then An Ras Mor would be the only 5km choice because the Hollis 5km is three days before Ribfest. The Committee member putting the slates into Survey Monkey decided to list the slates in their entirety and informed the Committee. Since using numbers and “a” and “b” can imply value, the slates were named in honor of LDR pioneers: 1a became DeMar; 1b, Kelly; 2a, Kuscsik; and 2b, Gibb. We hoped that one slate/format would resonate with voters and a clear preference would emerge.
Voting cycle 1:
While the listing of the four slates appeared equally online, many representatives who attended the meeting urged their club mates to consider DeMar and Kelly (or Kuscsik and Gibb) a pair and vote for one or the other indiscriminately as discussed at the meeting prior to implementation. They championed the idea of format 1 or 2, and the dominate slate within the pair format becoming the Grand Prix lineup. Voting was nearly a week long to accommodate the Thanksgiving holiday break and a blast email went out to USATF members noting LDR on their membership forms to open voting on Nov 26. Many participants commented on the formats and hundreds of votes were logged in just a few days.
At the conclusion of the first election cycle on December 9, a record 487 legitimate votes were cast. Names and USATF numbers were checked against the national database names of current members to determine legitimacy. Results: 2a: Kuscsik: 181 votes (37%); 1a: DeMar: 160 votes (32%), 1b: Kelly: 96 votes (20%); 2b: Gibb: 50 votes (11%). While Kuscsik (37%) had the most votes by 5% as an individual slate, going by format, slates 1a and 1b had 52% and slates 2 a and b 48%. The Committee split on whether to go with the format winner, DeMar or the popular vote winner, Kuscsik. Going with Kuscsik still meant that 63% of the respondents voted against it (and 68% against DeMar). The two dominate slates were close in percentage of the votes and declaring Kuscsik the individual winner was not fair to the groups who had been advised to vote for the 1 a or b or 2 a or b indiscriminately. Since the format vote was nearly same difference apart as the popular vote, essentially a tie between the two ways to view results, the Committee felt the best way to proceed was to put the dominate slate from both formats online for a run-off election based on the popular vote with a planned tiebreaker action if necessary. The slate selection process posted on the website stated “..Results will be announced at the conclusion of voting…” so no established rules were violated by the decision. Our political democratic process includes elections after a primary with two candidates emerging for final voting and the Committee thought the membership would understand this similarity and the close nature of the first vote.
The political analogy went way deeper than imagined. Inviting the membership to vote in the run-off was read by some people that there was something suspicious with the first vote and it spawned unfounded allegations of conspiracies, favoritism, and kickbacks to committee members as well as personal attacks on social media. Regardless, another voting participation record was set, nearly 500 people responded to the run-off vote invitation.
Run Off Vote:
The blast email to the membership went out December 12th and was voting was open for three days. The second round of voting had a definitive selection of the DeMar slate with 278 votes (57%) and Kuscsik received 213 votes (43%) for a total of 491 legitimate votes cast. It was easy to declare DeMar the winner and gratifying that it had a large margin of support.
The 2014 Grand Prix races:
D. H. Jones 10 miler, Amherst, MA, Feb. 23, 11 a.m.
New Bedford Half Marathon, New Bedford, MA Mar. 16, 11 a.m.
An Ras Mor 5 km, Cambridge, MA, Mar. 30, 10 a.m.
Ribfest 5 Miler, Merrimack, NH, Jun 15, 9:15 a.m.
GMAA Labor Day 15 km, South Burlington, VT, Aug. 31, 9 a.m.
Lone Gull 10 km, Gloucester, MA, Sept. 14, 9 a.m.
Manchester City Marathon, Manchester, NH, Nov 2, 8:50 a.m.
Join the LDR Committee:
While the membership is free to second guess the Committee, the meetings are open and those who attend try to make decisions that are fair to potential participants and the bidding races. We know we cannot please all members and the race directors that bid but we ask for respect for the volunteers who put in the time and energy to bring bids to the Grand Prix, make hard decisions and shepherd the process of voting to bring the best line up of races possible to those who want to compete. If you want your voice truly heard, join the LDR Committee.
Thank you to all who participated in the bid process and for attending meetings, voting and for putting these great races and the High Street Mile on your calendars to run them in 2014.
The LDR Committee recently set up a second round of voting as the first voting on four slates yielded results too close to declare a winner.
When the Committee met to form slates, we wanted to include the races that: 1) the runners had indicated as their favorites in the survey; 2) did not conflict with religious holidays; 3) did not conflict with major races that would detract numbers from Grand Prix races; and 4) would accommodate the average Grand Prix runner’s training plan.
In regard to slates, we have had voting in the past where multiple slates garnered almost equal amounts of votes. While this may be a tribute to the equality of the races on the slates, it resulted in a Grand Prix preferred by 26% of the runners voting. The Committee received criticism for declaring a winner with a 26% majority since it meant 74% of the runners were against the line-up but had spread their votes over three other choices. In an effort to have a more decisive slate, we discussed posting two slates with a core of races and variation within each grouping with races and distances the runners indicated they preferred. At first, we thought of a pull down menu within two separate slates so votes could be tallied for essentially two slates with the voters selecting the variable race(s). The two slate formats offered are popular races where one set of races group mostly into spring and fall dates, the other has races in almost every month beginning in March. We could not set up the survey site with pull down menus within the slates so listed all four slates thinking the runners would indicate through their voting the desired race groupings and a slate would emerge as the most preferred. A record 487 votes did not produce a favored slate or format: each format combination and dominate slate polled nearly the same as its competitor.
As indicated in our email asking for participation in the second round, the two formats represented were nearly equal in votes and the dominate slates were also nearly equal, though both had barely a third of the total amount of votes cast. While there is no written rule in our process as to how much of a percentage of a vote is necessary to indicate support, the Committee wants to ensure the races are chosen by the greatest number of responders. The best way to address the closeness of the first vote fairly and have a majority of respondents choosing the Grand Prix was to put the two dominate slates back before the runners for a more decisive vote and have a plan for a tie, which had not been discussed previously. We would rather break a 50%-50% tie from a second round of voting than a tie between slates in the first round which would have produced a winner that about 70% of the voters did not choose.
The record number of voters is a tribute to the quality of the races and either Grand Prix line up of races should be very well attended and contested by serious competitors.
The 2014 Grand Prix survey results and the formation of slates:
The 2014 USATF NE Grand Prix survey conducted prior to the formulation of the slates was intended to guide the LDR Committee by providing information about the preferences of the membership. There were 301 responses and nearly every respondent had participated in some way in one or more Grand Prix races or series. To see the survey results, please click this link: Survey results for posting Nov 30 2013. The columns have been condensed to show the number of first choices in the ranking slates and the average numeric ranking (the lower the number, the more preferred the choice). The comments are being grouped for easier reading and will be available soon (Sorry, we went with the cheapest Survey Monkey package and the comment field data report is 17 pages long.)
First, the Committee drafted one slate of all the races which had garnered the most amount of first choices in the survey together, but quickly saw that the Hollis 5k and the Ribfest 5 miler are just days apart. The Committee then compiled two slates to accommodate the most first choices with our required distances but workable considering the dates. We also wanted to include some new races and new locations. In regard to distances, survey takers wanted the half marathon by a wide margin, followed by 12-15 km, 10 mile and mile races.
Next, we put together a slate for sustained racing over the year and what would work best without conflicts with National USATF events that are drivable for New England competitors and arrived at two slates to best accomplish this schedule. Throughout the process we considered the High Street Mile which was ranked high in the survey. The idea of a mile event appealed to many Committee members and survey takers, but there were also concerns expressed by members and in the survey comment section about timing and the USATF scoring requirements. We thought of a “Showcase” status where we would encourage USATF NE members to participate in the High Street Mile in 2014 and give Committee members, and runners new to the event, an opportunity to learn more about how the various categories of competitors could receive a gun finish time and how we could anticipate combining points for team scoring.
We understood that one reason some of the races were not ranked highly by runners was because of unfamiliarity. When contacting the races about our decision, the Committee offered to promote the nominated races for the slates during the year so they can convert more USATF members into fans of their event. Race Directors responding to this offer have been enthusiastic about its potential. Also, at the suggestion of one Race Director whose race was not chosen, we will be sending out online surveys after each Grand Prix race as well as the nominated races so there can be immediate feedback to both the LDR Committee and the Race Director.
The LDR Committee strives to put together slates that are equally strong. We know we cannot please everyone. The amount of people who would complain about not enough new races being added is the same as those who would complain about a favorite race with known amenities not being included and a new race taking its place. Races near and dear to some people are avoided by others.
The process of Grand Prix series selection, past and present:
The past method of Grand Prix series selection was an in-person voting system. Until a few years ago, the only voters were the people who could attend a weeknight meeting generally held a few miles outside of Boston. Over many years of attending this meeting in the past, I would say the Grand Prix could be decided by as few as 25 people to a high of about 75. The online voting in place for the past three years for the Grand Prix has experienced over 400 voters who have represented a greater geographic area within the Association. In the past, bidding races were randomly chosen by distance category to present their event to the assembled group. The Race Director would present their race and then there was an immediate vote on each distance or race category. That meant the selection of the first race could immediately nullify any other race that shared close proximity to its date and before ensuing Race Directors had a chance to present the details of their events. Some races failing to win a place in the Grand Prix in their distance group could get moved to another category and lose again. This process was extremely unfair to Race Directors as well as attendees who were not able to hear about event details of races that were not presented. We have tried to improve this system with a dedicated presentation meeting and a comparison spreadsheet posted to the USATF NE website. This way whether or not a race is chosen to be on the slate, the Race Director has had a chance to present their event and the membership is informed of the details. It allows for additional exposure of the event regardless of being included in the series or not.
The desire for straight up voting for the most popular races to be the Grand Prix also has its difficulties, as evidenced by the 2014 example of two of the most popular bidding races scheduled just days apart. Over the years, bidding races have had shared or close race dates happen fairly often. Most popular voting could also have a Grand Prix with six races before the end of May and then a gap until a fall marathon. If intervention is needed to sort this out, then we may as well do it with some deliberation and intention and that is how the idea of slates and voting online came about: to give choice to members but also try to fashion the most reasonable schedule of the best races for competitors and teams from across our region.
If you want to know more about the Grand Prix process feel free to contact any USATF NE Officer, LDR Committee person or Athlete’s Representative. All contact info is at www.usatfne.org under Administration. Each year, we have invited clubs who have had scoring teams to send a representative to LDR meetings and be involved with the slate selection process. Please let us know if you want to join the LDR Committee in 2014.
On behalf of the LDR Committee,
USATF NE Master’s LDR Chair