2023 Regional Projections: Clarkston Regional

Finally, the start of the season we’ve all been waiting for. Throw out all the fast times from September, but apply all the lessons learned through the summer and fall. Regional week is here and with it comes the many projections and previews I’ll write.

Just as last year and throughout the season, I’m projecting these using race simulations. Through a season’s worth of speed ratings, one can determine a runner’s average rating and the variability of those ratings. Both those factors are then weighed towards more recent meets, which are then simulated thousands of times using a Monte Carlo analysis (also described by TullyRunners here). Over those thousands of race simulations, one can determine a team’s average place and average score, a runner’s average place, odds on winning, and odds on qualifying.

These are useful in cross country scenarios, where you have consistent runners and those who are a bit more up and down. For example:

Tanner Time	Tanner Rating	Tanner Avg.	Tanner StDev.
15:30	210
15:45	205
16:00	200
16:15	195
16:30	190	200	7.91
MIXCSR Time	MIXCSR Rating	MIXCSR Avg.	MIXCSR StDev.
16:09	197
16:12	196
16:15	195
16:18	194
16:21	193	195	1.58

Jacob at his best might be faster than I in four of the five races during the season. I’d almost never be All-State in Division 1, but he might contend for a top-5 spot or place 60^th.

If we did 20 simulations, this is how it might turn out:

Race	Tanner Avg.	Tanner StDev	Tanner Rating	MIXCSR Avg.	MIXCSR StDev	MIXCSR Rating
1	200	7.9	202.1	195	1.6	195.6
2	200	7.9	196.2	195	1.6	194.1
3	200	7.9	190.0	195	1.6	199.2
4	200	7.9	193.4	195	1.6	192.5
5	200	7.9	206.8	195	1.6	195.7
6	200	7.9	201.8	195	1.6	196.1
7	200	7.9	171.6	195	1.6	194.9
8	200	7.9	189.2	195	1.6	195.9
9	200	7.9	205.5	195	1.6	197.0
10	200	7.9	203.8	195	1.6	192.6
11	200	7.9	192.3	195	1.6	196.5
12	200	7.9	196.9	195	1.6	196.4
13	200	7.9	198.5	195	1.6	195.6
14	200	7.9	203.2	195	1.6	194.1
15	200	7.9	193.9	195	1.6	192.6
16	200	7.9	199.3	195	1.6	193.2
17	200	7.9	208.7	195	1.6	194.2
18	200	7.9	213.7	195	1.6	194.6
19	200	7.9	212.6	195	1.6	197.1
20	200	7.9	206.3	195	1.6	193.9

I’d win four times, but I’d never have the ability to win a title like he had in Race 18. He’s usually All-State, but may cost his team a title through his effort in Race 7.

The simulations give the possibilities of those scenarios and all the various scoring scripts. A sixth girl that can pop off on any certain day, a reliable boy who always runs 17-flat, you name it. Hopefully, they better elucidate our contenders, qualifiers, and how these races play out over the weekend.

But always remember, races aren’t run on paper or on a computer. These projections are meant to better our sport, give more attention where little is given. Although I take pride in their accuracy, this endeavor would be quite boring if it were always perfect. I look forward to these being proven wrong and I expect to hear about it as well.

SUMMER PREVIEW
MID-SEASON

GIRLS

Ranked Teams

#11 Oxford
#17 Clarkston
#18 Utica
#23 Rochester
#26 Lake Orion

Projected Individual Qualifier Cutoff

18^th place. Seems the contenders for qualifying have plenty of runners in that 5^th to 15^th range.

Projected Place	Team	Avg. Score	Avg. Place	Win %	Top 3 %
1	Oxford	56	1.1	94	95+
2	Clarkston	78	2.5	5	90
3	Utica	81	2.8		90
4	Rochester	99	4.2		13
5	Lake Orion	103	4.5		7
6	Rochester Adams	147	6.4
7	Troy	157	6.7
8	Bloomfield Hills	192	7.9
9	Utica Ford	309	9.5
10	Troy Athens	314	9.6
11	Sterling Heights Stevenson	348	11.0
12	Waterford Mott	376	12.2
13	Warren Cousino	392	13.2
14	Warren Mott	405	13.9
15	Waterford Kettering	415	14.7

Projected Place	Grade	Name	Team	Avg. Place
1	11	Lucy Cook	Rochester	1.1
2	11	Mallory Bigelow	Oxford	2.1
3	12	Braydee Elling	Oxford	3.9
4	12	Hannah DeRoeck	Lake Orion	4.8
5	10	Addison Herr	Bloomfield Hills	5.1
6	10	Audrey Hamilton	Troy	7.3
7	9	Emma Brown	Utica	8.2
8	9	Linda Lopez	Lake Orion	8.9
9	10	Siene Muraszewski	Utica	9.6
10	11	Taylor Brodeur	Oxford	10.4
11	12	Alexandra Brigham	Clarkston	12.2
12	9	Avery DeGrendel	Clarkston	15.3
13	12	Anna Reineck	Clarkston	15.6
14	10	Taylor Parsons	Rochester	15.9
15	9	Addison Brigham	Clarkston	16.1
16	10	Brooke McFarland	Utica	16.7
17	11	Norah Lesner	Utica	18.3
18	9	El McMahan	Rochester Adams	18.5
19	12	Aubrey Mery	Oxford	20.5
20	11	Jamie Patterson	Oxford	20.9
21	10	Sydney Fischer	Clarkston	21.3
22	11	Kaitlyn Kauppila	Rochester Adams	23.4
23	11	Stephanie Bulat	Rochester	23.5
24	11	Madie Miller	Troy	26.1
25	11	Mia Snellgrove	Rochester	26.3
26	9	Mary Graves	Lake Orion	27.4
27	10	Laila Bodell	Oxford	27.7
28	9	Olivia Jenny	Bloomfield Hills	28.0
29	11	Sophia Aquino	Utica	29.9
30	9	Annie Roraff	Rochester	32.5

Anything Intriguing?

I’ve been really impressed with Utica’s ability to handle adversity this season. Missing their top runner for the past two months may have derailed a weaker team, but these girls have come together stronger. They’ll face qualifying challenges from a Clarkston, who had the race of their lives at last fall’s regional and a young Rochester squad.

BOYS

Ranked Teams

#7 Oxford
#9 Troy
#16 Clarkston
#18 Utica
#26 Lake Orion

Projected Individual Qualifier Cutoff

15^th to 16^th place.

Projected Place	Team	Avg. Score	Avg. Place	Win %	Top 3 %
1	Oxford	69	1.7	54	95+
2	Troy	75	2.0	23	95+
3	Clarkston	82	2.7	22	76
4	Utica	97	3.8		26
5	Lake Orion	124	4.9
6	Troy Athens	174	6.8
7	Rochester Adams	175	6.9
8	Rochester	178	7.1
9	Utica Ford	252	9.6
10	Warren Cousino	254	9.6
11	Bloomfield Hills	280	10.8
12	Sterling Heights Stevenson	353	12.2
13	Waterford Kettering	367	13.0
14	Waterford Mott	391	13.9
15	Warren Mott	494	15.3
16	Auburn Hills Avondale	500	15.7

Projected Place	Grade	Name	Team	Avg. Place
1	12	Vishvaa Ravishankar	Troy	1.9
2	11	Taye Levenson	Bloomfield Hills	2.2
3	11	Kian Schneeweis	Troy	3.1
4	11	Alexander McArthur	Oxford	4.3
5	10	Harper Wesley	Utica	4.5
6	11	James Cusick	Oxford	8.0
7	12	Bryce Nowik	Clarkston	9.7
8	11	Raymond Lucero II	Lake Orion	10.1
9	12	Louis D’Souza	Troy	12.8
10	11	Cayden DeGrendel	Clarkston	13.3
11	12	Ethan Muraszewski	Utica	14.2
12	11	Max Myrand	Oxford	15.1
13	12	Jacob Esser	Troy Athens	17.0
14	10	Ryan Barnes	Clarkston	17.1
15	10	Nate Linden	Troy Athens	17.3
16	12	Aiden Janes	Rochester Adams	17.8
17	12	Lucas Ames	Oxford	19.6
18	11	Luke Morehouse	Utica	19.8
19	11	Napolean Lino	Rochester	21.0
20	11	Blake Peardon	Lake Orion	21.6
21	12	Cass Feeney	Oxford	22.2
22	10	Dylan Pascoe	Rochester	22.7
23	12	Andrew Floros	Clarkston	22.9
24	12	Oliver House	Lake Orion	23.0
25	11	Akshat Arora	Troy	24.2
26	12	Silas Smith	Utica	26.8
27	11	Joshua Ellingsworth	Clarkston	27.5
28	11	Reynold Wei	Rochester Adams	28.1
29	12	Dylan Esser	Troy Athens	28.8
30	12	Johnathan Mitchell	Utica Ford	28.9

Anything Intriguing?

You could make arguments for any combination of these top four teams to be the state squad. Utica pulled a major upset last year, Clarkston is on their home course, Oxford has stepped up to the plate in large invites, and Troy looks to capitalize on their potential shown at Jackson and re-write the wrongs of the County and OAA Red championships. Whatever it is, a top-15 squad is likely staying home and three other top-15 squads are moving on.