runnerboy1510
Member
Not sure if it has been asked yet or not? Is there a reason some of the results from timing first are not populating in milesplit. The Joe Lenge Dublin Classic results are still not in milesplit.
Timing First results not in MileSplit
- Thread starter runnerboy1510
- Start date
EuclidandViren
Well-known member
Usually, the timing company did not submit the results or submitted the results in the wrong format.
Ok, just checked again... Joe Lenge results are in the Meet Results listing... format looks typical... however, results have not made into individual athlete profiles and don't seem to be in the rankings.
JAVMAN83
Well-known member
From experience, it is not an immediate thing that happens. Databases are updated periodically during the day, and so we have to be patient. The biggest concern I have with those databases is allowing bad data in to begin with. Several events on the girls side were including team relay marks as individual marks in the list leaders, and the current girls' LJ mark of 20' 6.5"on the girls' side is pure bunk.
College marks making onto the HS lists have also been problematic this year.
The Joe Lenge meet was on April 13, more than two weeks ago. Our Wayne results were in the dBase about the time I drug myself out of bed on the Saturday after. The typical time lag is not the problem in the case of the Joe Lenge results.
The Joe Lenge results were in Milesplit, just not populated into the rankings. And still not. These are not the only results in this state. Given that these all seem to be meets that did not use Milesplit for meet entry, I am inclined to apply Occam's Razor and just say Milesplit is trying to get people to use their software for entries.
Poor decision on their part if your theory is correct. A database is only as good/useful as it is complete. So they are limiting the quality and usefulness of their database ... and the inclination to use their database and site. I'm sure that would not be the outcome they want. Not very smart.
JAVMAN83
Well-known member
As a tool, I prefer MileSplit to AthleticNet for a number of reasons. However, I do need to check AthleticNet regularly for stuff that's missed or stripped from the reporting on MileSplit (such as relay member names on too many occassions to count). No one source is perfect.
Think this is a problem? Try the backlash over FloSports taking the broadcast rights for the Diamond League next year at the rate of $30/mo vs. the soon-to-be $8/mo for Peacock. Lots of anger over that move - which I predict will be a disaster.
Out of curiosity, why do you prefer Milesplit? Or maybe, what do you use Milesplit for that you prefer it?
The virtual meet feature is definitely a plus in Milesplit's favor, and the lists it generates by events look a little cleaner to me. But otherwise, as both a coach and as someone who teaches programming, I find Milesplit far more annoying than Athletic.net. Part of that is just the speed with which Athletic.net adapts and makes changes.
But for ease of use I find Athletic.net a far better platform for putting in entries (being able to see a continuous list of all athletes and the events they have entered, being able to enter athletes into event through the event page or through the athlete page, quicker navigation to and between our meets). I also think it is much better for getting our results. Honestly the lack of a team filter for results on Milesplit is baffling. But I also like how much easier it is to correct results (athlete's swapped, athlete name mistakes, typos in entering marks) in Athletic.net. It is also easier to set up and manage your own meets. Finally, I have found the speed of response for technical support to be better with Athletic.net.
I completely agree about the Flotrack debacle in the making.
There are basically two strategies companies use in a situation like this. (1) Make your product better so people want to use your product. (2) Try to get into a position where people have no choice but to use your product. Given that Milesplit is the OHSAA's and OATCCC's current choice for post season and indoor state meet meet entries, they have effectively gotten (2) in place.
JAVMAN83
Well-known member
My preference is from that perspective of a researcher, not one who enters/modifies information. MileSplit I've found far easier to find needed information.
I can see that, even though I haven't found much of a difference in how fast I can find particular meet results or particular athlete profiles between the two sites. Milesplit rose to its position largely as an aggregator of results, while Athletic.net's rise was as software for meet entries and management.
There is a team filter at milesplit.
Dub. Coffman Results at Gary Smith Worthington Invitational
MileSplits official Dub. Coffman results for the 2024 Gary Smith Worthington Invitational, hosted by Thom. Worthington in Worthington OH.
oh.milesplit.com
I should have been a little more clear. As near as I can tell, Milesplit is scanning results to get your team results. Athletic.net filters the results. This difference is likely why I often find small errors in the "one team only" results. Filtering the way Athletic.net does makes it easier to get scrape results rather than manually copying, pasting and formatting. I also like being able to compare us to other teams or subsets of teams.