What does everyone think the new format?

[Skyin' Brian]

You still have to make a qualifying standard (considered elite anywhere in the world) to make the US nationals or Olympic games. Again, you can't compare track and field to other sports with regard to a playoff system. Like it or not, track (especially pole vault) is about the marks. The regional qualifying marks are so low that the potential is there to have people get into the NCAA's who jump 16'5". Does anyone see a problem with that? Or, have you guys not been around the pole vault long enough to realize that 16'5" in Divsion 1 is an average mark? When did the NCAA's become an average meet.
I agree with you Erica, the argument is tiring. It seems many of you pro-regional people are so blinded by the notion that just about any vaulter in Divison 1 track deserves to go to NCAA's.

the point here is that the so called elite vaulters need to perform well in regoinals. what good is jumping high once if you cant back it up. the best vaulter should have little trouble getting through the regioal system. sure everyone screws up occasionally, but that could happen at nationals as well. a 17' pr may be closer to average in d1, but on any given day that may be a decent mark. so if the elite vaulter fails in regionals and someone else does well it isnt the system that failed, it is the vaulter that didnt advance.

[rainbowgirl28]

and i competed at many meets last year where they still had the old longer pegs on the standards.

Me too. And square ends instead of round ones.

[VaultNinja]

Skyin' Brian wrote:[size=7]the point here is that the so called elite vaulters need to perform well in regoinals. what good is jumping high once if you cant back it up. the best vaulter should have little trouble getting through the regioal system. sure everyone screws up occasionally, but that could happen at nationals as well. a 17' pr may be closer to average in d1, but on any given day that may be a decent mark. so if the elite vaulter fails in regionals and someone else does well it isnt the system that failed, it is the vaulter that didnt advance.[/size]

I take it that your not a "so called elite vaulter". Do you think that there should be a regional system for USA's and the Olympic Trials?

[VaultNinja]

"HANDED TO THEM".......................

The qualifying process is the most reliable and realistic way to esablish a championship. Its the way you get to the US champs (qual round), the oly team (qual through the US champs), the oly games (qual round) to be the oly champ.

There is no qualiying round at USA's, there are only finals. There is one at the Olympic Trials but it is for like 30 people at best not even close to the 100 or more that are moved through the regional system. You really think that you can compare a one day qualifying round to the complexity of the regional system? Have you been to a regional meet? Cause I have, the Pole Vault competitions in the west region last year took over four hours for both men and women. And some of the other events were ridiculous, for example there were 5 women in the 200m. The regional system is not effective as of yet, it is flawed. The idea has a future, but they did not do the proper research to make it fair for all athletes in every region per event. The fact is that the new Division 1 track and field regional system is based off of a highschool system, not an international system, and it is just a way to get people to the NCAA's that aren't good enough to be there in the first place. Sure it might force some people to perform good on that particular day, but isn't that what they are supposed to do at the NCAA's, why should they have to do it three times a year instead of two? Plus the top five marks in the nation that didn't make it through the regional system go to NC's anyway, so if you are in the top five in the nation before regionals you are guarenteed a spot.

[PVJunkie]

There is no qualiying round at USA's, there are only finals. There is one at the Olympic Trials but it is for like 30 people at best not even close to the 100 or more that are moved through the regional system. You really think that you can compare a one day qualifying round to the complexity of the regional system? Have you been to a regional meet?

My bad, I was thinking of the WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS............

YES, the regional system is a way to weed out the one timers from the real athletes thus it has many similarities to the qual round in those events. A day to put up or shut up so to speak. Does it mean that there is a chance that a "good vaulter" might not make it........sure it does but that happens all the time in the "REAL WORLD" of track and field. Lets keep in mind that the US is nothing without the big $$$$ (as far as track goes) of the rest of the world for our sport and the rest of the world (the IAAF) works differently from the US system and the NCAA has no resemblence to the IAAF other than the actual events hosted. I was at the Ohio State Regional (we moved the vault indoors so dont cry about that region in the west) and got reports on every region in the nation. The primary problem with the system right now (thus the reason all of you who are against it should really have no opinon of it) is the fact that there IS an auto standard that still allows for a one timer to get to the nat championships. Once they drop the auto (not even in the works right now so settle down) THEN and only THEN will we hear the true cry of the mark chasers. Bottom line..............compete no matter what the conditions, who the competitors and prove that you are one of the athletes who DESERVE to go on for the opportunity to fight for the championship. Dont be the one running all over the nation (been there done that) chasing a mark to get in.


VaultNinja - hope that didnt come across the wrong way.........its tough to find a good debate about track more or less the changing face of our sport (right now that face is pretty ugly with the BALCO stuff).

[Cpvault]

You still have to make a qualifying standard (considered elite anywhere in the world) to make the US nationals or Olympic games. Again, you can't compare track and field to other sports with regard to a playoff system. Like it or not, track (especially pole vault) is about the marks. The regional qualifying marks are so low that the potential is there to have people get into the NCAA's who jump 16'5". Does anyone see a problem with that? Or, have you guys not been around the pole vault long enough to realize that 16'5" in Divsion 1 is an average mark? When did the NCAA's become an average meet.
I agree with you Erica, the argument is tiring. It seems many of you pro-regional people are so blinded by the notion that just about any vaulter in Divison 1 track deserves to go to NCAA's.

the point here is that the so called elite vaulters need to perform well in regoinals. what good is jumping high once if you cant back it up. the best vaulter should have little trouble getting through the regioal system. sure everyone screws up occasionally, but that could happen at nationals as well. a 17' pr may be closer to average in d1, but on any given day that may be a decent mark. so if the elite vaulter fails in regionals and someone else does well it isnt the system that failed, it is the vaulter that didnt advance.

Actually, that's not the point at all (at least as far my argument goes). I don't care if somebody was a one-time-charlie and makes it to NCAA's. Yeah, it occasionally happens. My contention is: why should a 16'-5" to 17'2"ish jumper deserve to go to NCAA's? What have they done during the season to warrant the opportunity to go to NCAA's. At least the one time guy jumped a decent height (even though it maybe once). I don't care that the Elite Guys get in anyway via an at-large bid; why does the 5.20 pr guy (who had a full season to jump just like everyone else) deserve the opportunity? Last time I checked this wasn't Little League Baseball, where everybody gets to play.

[wacky274]

Not to be rude cpvault, but you you seem to be coming across close minded about this topic. I cannot say that I know which system I prefer, cause you have made some good points, as well as others have, and because of this I cannot for sure decide where I stand until i've been more directly involved with it. I'm just curious, why dont people each make a list of pro's and cons for either system. I feel this might help express ideas a little more clearly so that as a group, we might either be able to come up with some form of consensus (highly doubtful, lol), or possibly create some new ideas, based off the pro's of both....just a thought, not trying to attack anyone

[VaultNinja]

[quote="PVJunkie]
My bad, I was thinking of the WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS............

...the NCAA has no resemblence to the IAAF other than the actual events hosted.
...I was at the Ohio State Regional (we moved the vault indoors so dont cry about that region in the west)
...there IS an auto standard that still allows for a one timer to get to the nat championships.
...compete no matter what the conditions, who the competitors and prove that you are one of the athletes who DESERVE to go on for the opportunity to fight for the championship. Dont be the one running all over the nation (been there done that) chasing a mark to get in.[/quote]


So you are saying that there are Worldwide regional qualifying meets for Worlds? I was under the impression that most other countries choose who they send to the big show, rather than have a qualifying meet like the US.
If there is an auto standard for NC's then where is it, and what is it, I am curious?
http://ncaasports.com/outdoortrack/mens ... tory/21111
And I don't think I shed a tear over the west region meet, but I did shed one for the Ohio region after I compared the marks between the two .
I strongly agree with your phylosophy on "compete no matter what the conditions.................and prove yourself" that is something that all athletes should live by, and I feel that alot of elite athletes forget about. And I must agree with you about mark chasing, it sucks, but that is what you have to do when you are elite, so why shouldn't you do it in college?

....I love a good debate. If I offend, just read my quote

[PVJunkie]

There is a qualifying round @ the world championships...........that was what I was saying. And you are right..........there is not an auto stand. They take the top 15 (??) in each event at the end of the season (b 4 the regional) and there are at large bids that can be given to unusually strong events so more are in the event. So its a battle to NOT be # 16 or lower. Like I said the current system gets the EXACT same meet as before with more people in each event. A true regional would fix that. Should someone be rewarded, or better yet should someone be punished for competing on the up and up when there are a few out there chasing marks only to, not measure the bar, take a fourth attempt, have a quick second or third comp back to back..........etc etc. In short..........the CHEAT, or at least they dont follow the rules, it happens quite a bit. They cheat their way into the NC's, bump someone out who DESERVED to go. Then that cheater NEVER comes close EVER again to what they jumped to make it in.......HHHHMMMMMM makes ya think. On a side note I talked w/ one of the NCAA board members last weekend and marks set on the "long" pegs will NOT be accepted, so update your standards!!!

[rainbowgirl28]

On a side note I talked w/ one of the NCAA board members last weekend and marks set on the "long" pegs will NOT be accepted, so update your standards!!!

And how will they know which marks are being set on long pegs? I have been at meets with some of the top officials in the country, and the officials are not reporting it. Do you think the schools are going to report it? The coaches? The athletes?

The long peg/short peg thing is a joke. It's basically an honor system. Not only will athletes qualify to NCAA's this year on longer pegs, I would be willing to bet that a few sneak into the Olympic Trials

[ashcraftpv]

My contention is: why should a 16'-5" to 17'2"ish jumper deserve to go to NCAA's? What have they done during the season to warrant the opportunity to go to NCAA's. why does the 5.20 pr guy (who had a full season to jump just like everyone else) deserve the opportunity?

Because those are the guys who stepped up and made it count when it mattered. The NCAA champion isn't decided by how you jumped over the course of the season, it is decided by how you jump at a single meet. The vault is about competition and who was the best vaulter on that particular day. Look at the results from indoor NC's last year: in a field of 16, 4 guys jump 5.20 and 4 guys NH. Maybe they did not deserve to be there since they couldn't clear anything more than 5.20....

Track and field is competition based, not mark based. The new system encourages competition and consistency in our athletes. There are still ways for the "elite" vaulter to get in if he has a bad day. Do i think the 5.20 vaulter deserves to be a NCs by stepping up and jumping well enough to place in the top 4 at the regional? Absolutely!

[PVJunkie]

As we all know..........great midwesterners think alike...........right Ash!!!


Oh yea and the short peg long peg thing............well your right but there are enough schools (and athletes) jumping on the short pegs that when they get to a meet and the long pegs are there it would be highly likely that that site would be turned in to the NCAA and all marks set there challenged. Why take a chance. Yes that includes even if the vaulter clears the height by a foot and never comes anywhere near the bar............the facility is not legal to set a mark. Not that I agree with the shorter pegs but as a coach I would not want my athlete to suffer the consequences for the $6.15 cost of a crossbar pin.