Blog

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

#8 Lansing Catholic
#11 Leslie

Projected Individual Qualifier Cutoff

In a very front-loaded region, 22^nd place.

Projected Place	Team	Avg. Place	Avg. Score	Win %	Qualify %
1	Lansing Catholic	1.3	31	73	95+
2	Leslie	1.7	36	27	95+
3	Rochester Hills Lutheran NW	3.0	106		95+
4	Wixom St. Catherine	4.3	136
5	Madison Heights Bishop Foley	5.0	145
6	Stockbridge	5.9	157
7	Algonac	6.9	173
8	Charyl Stockwell Academy	8.2	209
9	Clawson	9.2	226
10	New Haven	9.6	233

Projected Place	Grade	Name	Team	Avg. Place
1	12	Tessa Roe	Lansing Catholic	1.0
2	10	Frances Melinn	Lansing Catholic	3.2
3	9	Reagan Lees	Wixom St. Catherine	3.6
4	10	Hailey Creisher	Leslie	4.4
5	11	Erin Lubahn	Leslie	4.8
6	9	Grace Wonch	Lansing Catholic	5.7
7	11	Jaidyn Smith	Leslie	8.4
8	12	Jalynn Schmelter	Leslie	8.4
9	12	Abby Rice	Rochester Hills Lutheran NW	10.4
10	9	Avery Miller	Lansing Catholic	10.8
11	9	Mia Papendick	Leslie	11.5
12	10	Kaitlin Ludwig	Lansing Catholic	11.7
13	10	Jasmine Walker	Algonac	13.4
14	11	Kerith Short	University Liggett	14.6
15	9	Emily Satkowiak	Stockbridge	15.9
16	9	Makya Isham	Leslie	16.3
17	10	Jaylee Chapman	Stockbridge	17.2
18	12	Kendall Zaliwski	Rochester Hills Lutheran NW	19.1
19	11	Maddie Szlachta	Rochester Hills Lutheran NW	20.6
20	11	Ava Vaccaro	Stockbridge	21.2
21	10	Stella Lipinski	Lansing Catholic	21.9
22	12	Madison Juchno	Wixom St. Catherine	23.8
23	12	Carmellina Biafora	Madison Heights Bishop Foley	23.9
24	10	Ella Heffner	Charyl Stockwell Academy	24.1
25	12	Lovelyn Ketepa	Clawson	25.8
26	9	Amanda Ludwig	Lansing Catholic	27.4
27	11	Kate Bennett	Algonac	27.4
28	10	Cristina Wenderski	Wixom St. Catherine	27.6
29	11	Josephine Malysz	Madison Heights Bishop Foley	30.1
30	11	Grace MacDonald	Rochester Hills Lutheran NW	31.3

Any Intriguing Battles?

Leslie and Lansing Catholic appear to be neck and neck. Although the projections say one thing, results from this season say another. Just 10 days ago at Greater Lansing, the Blackhawks top-3 dominated the D3 crowd, competing with P-W for top honors among those teams. Though an advantage for LC might come in that their home course is filled with hills, as is the final mile at Possum Hollow.

BOYS

Ranked Teams

#21 Leslie
#25 Lansing Catholic

Projected Individual Qualifier Cutoff

19^th-20^th Place. The projections have Algonac as a bit stronger toward the front, which might open a spot lower if they’re able to pull off the upset.

Projected Place	Team	Avg. Place	Avg. Score	Win %	Qualify %
1	Leslie	1.3	49	75	95+
2	Lansing Catholic	1.8	56	25	95+
3	Dansville	3.2	114		81
4	Algonac	3.8	123		19
5	Charyl Stockwell Academy	5.5	156
6	Rochester Hills Lutheran NW	6.5	167
7	Stockbridge	6.6	168
8	University Liggett	7.3	176
9	Clawson	9.5	246
10	Madison Heights Bishop Foley	10.1	257
11	New Haven	10.4	264
12	Detroit Osborn	12.0	338

Projected Place	Grade	Name	Team	Avg. Place
1	11	Theodore Davis	Dansville	1.0
2	10	Julian Walker	Algonac	2.6
3	12	Anthony Urbaniak	Charyl Stockwell Academy	2.8
4	9	Kenneth Mangles	Leslie	5.7
5	10	Lucas Gates	Lansing Catholic	5.9
6	11	Michael Darlington	University Liggett	6.1
7	9	Cooper Schmelter	Leslie	6.8
8	9	Matthew Killeen	Leslie	8.9
9	9	Everett Beach	Lansing Catholic	9.9
10	9	Téo Krumm	Lansing Catholic	10.2
11	9	William Gancer	Stockbridge	11.0
12	10	Grason Weber	Leslie	12.2
13	9	Finn Korte	Lansing Catholic	14.9
14	10	Blaise Demko	Lansing Catholic	16.0
15	11	Kyan Isham	Leslie	17.8
16	12	Ethan Wright	Stockbridge	17.8
17	11	Jose Domecq	Leslie	18.5
18	10	Zach Witherspoon	Algonac	18.6
19	9	Clayton Gady	University Liggett	19.2
20	10	Owen Beindit	Algonac	19.8
21	9	Ayden Mayr	Dansville	20.1
22	9	Hayden Selesky	Lansing Catholic	20.8
23	10	Brody Urbaniak	Charyl Stockwell Academy	22.2
24	12	Logan Hile	Leslie	25.8
25	9	Preston Varnauskas	Rochester Hills Lutheran NW	26.1
26	12	Logan Fowler	New Haven	26.6
27	10	Hayden Richey	Lansing Catholic	26.8
28	9	Owen Windgaston	Clawson	27.1
29	10	Ryder Dayton	Rochester Hills Lutheran NW	29.1
30	12	Calvin vanHartesvelt	Dansville	30.0

Any Intriguing Battles?

Just as the girls, Leslie and Lansing Catholic will likely duel for the team title, but we could have some intrigue for the 3^rd qualifier. In late August, both Dansville and Algonac came over to the shores of Kent Lake for the Milford Invite. Dansville obtained a significant victory over the Muskrats. Since then, Algonac has had noticeable improvement from their freshmen and their frontrunner, but will it be enough?

SUMMER PREVIEW
MID-SEASON

GIRLS

Ranked Teams

#19 White Lake Lakeland
#24 Walled Lake Northern

Projected Individual Qualifier Cutoff

15^th or 16^th Place.

Projected Place	Team	Avg. Place	Avg. Score	Win %	Qualify %
1	White Lake Lakeland	1.2	58	81	95+
2	Walled Lake Northern	2.0	72	17	95+
3	Highland-Milford	3.2	103		73
4	Novi	3.9	126		27
5	South Lyon	5.7	166
6	Birmingham Seaholm	6.1	171
7	Royal Oak	6.4	177
8	Walled Lake Western	7.6	194
9	South Lyon East	9.0	241
10	Walled Lake Central	10.3	275
11	West Bloomfield	11.2	291
12	North Farmington	11.9	305
13	Berkley	12.6	318
14	Beverly Hills Groves	14.0	383

Projected Place	Grade	Name	Team	Avg. Place
1	11	Ava Alicandro	White Lake Lakeland	1.5
2	12	Alisia Olteanu	Walled Lake Western	3.2
3	10	Kayla Ward	South Lyon	4.5
4	12	Emma Hoffmeyer	Walled Lake Western	4.6
5	12	Madelyn Gordon	Walled Lake Northern	6.6
6	9	Jillian Broyles	Highland-Milford	6.7
7	11	Alena Tiernan	White Lake Lakeland	8.1
8	9	Maya Pletzer	White Lake Lakeland	8.7
9	12	Ava Kurczewski	Walled Lake Northern	8.9
10	9	Emily Alt	Walled Lake Northern	9.2
11	10	Macy Czelada	South Lyon	11.5
12	9	Claire Porinsky	South Lyon East	16.7
13	10	Lauren Bradley	Highland-Milford	16.8
14	11	Emily Bieniasz	Walled Lake Central	18.0
15	11	Natalie Joiner	White Lake Lakeland	19.0
16	9	Kareena Babu	Novi	22.2
17	10	Mya Tass	Novi	22.5
18	9	Katelynn Egli	Novi	22.5
19	12	Katherine Wischman	Royal Oak	23.3
20	9	Morgan Scally	White Lake Lakeland	23.7
21	11	Isabelle Krause	Walled Lake Northern	24.3
22	11	Macy Jenkins	Highland-Milford	24.5
23	11	Cora Liu	North Farmington	25.2
24	9	Paige Haller	Walled Lake Central	27.1
25	12	Mackenzie Hendry	White Lake Lakeland	27.2
26	11	Kerrigan Kennedy	Highland-Milford	27.3
27	9	Allie Gallagher	Walled Lake Northern	27.5
28	9	Jane Meinecke	Royal Oak	27.5
29	12	Elaine Burkmyre	Walled Lake Western	28.0
30	11	Ellie Nohovig	Highland-Milford	28.9

Any Intriguing Battles?

We’re blessed to be able to peek back 2.5 weeks ago, where the Lakeland girls survived the final hills in order to hold off Walled Lake Northern. We’re also blessed to have that highly-competitive LVC Championship, where Allie Gallagher showed much mettle, rising into the Knight scorers and displacing just enough White Lake girls. Now we get the rubber match!

BOYS

Ranked Teams

#12 White Lake Lakeland
#13 Walled Lake Northern

Projected Individual Qualifier Cutoff

17^th or 18^th Place.

Projected Place	Team	Avg. Place	Avg. Score	Win %	Qualify %
1	White Lake Lakeland	1.5	56	53	95+
2	Walled Lake Northern	1.5	57	47	95+
3	Highland-Milford	3.6	104		54
4	Novi	3.8	109		43
5	Royal Oak	5.3	127
6	Detroit Catholic Central	5.4	132
7	South Lyon	7.0	193
8	Berkley	8.5	283
9	Birmingham Seaholm	8.6	287
10	Brother Rice	10.1	316
11	South Lyon East	12.1	347
12	North Farmington	12.7	355
13	Walled Lake Central	12.7	355
14	Beverly Hills Groves	12.9	357
15	West Bloomfield	14.5	380
16	Walled Lake Western	16.0	434

Projected Place	Grade	Name	Team	Avg. Place
1	12	Sebastian Ramirez	Royal Oak	1.7
2	12	Ty Parker	Walled Lake Northern	2.3
3	10	Kyle O’Rourke	Highland-Milford	2.4
4	12	Pierce Grzymkowski	White Lake Lakeland	4.2
5	12	Evan Rice	Walled Lake Northern	5.6
6	12	Oliver Moss	Berkley	6.7
7	12	Braxton Sipes	Royal Oak	7.9
8	12	Ryan Ward	White Lake Lakeland	10.3
9	12	Lucas Karbel	Walled Lake Northern	11.2
10	10	Gavin Johns	White Lake Lakeland	12.9
11	11	Drew Abbott	Detroit Catholic Central	13.8
12	12	Noah Tiernan	White Lake Lakeland	14.7
13	11	Matthew Verellen	White Lake Lakeland	14.8
14	11	Nolan Till	Royal Oak	15.4
15	9	Nathan Bruss	Walled Lake Northern	16.5
16	12	Carter Lukas	Novi	16.9
17	11	Ryan Carrannanto	Highland-Milford	17.9
18	12	Julian Liang	Novi	20.3
19	9	Briggs Warren	Novi	20.6
20	10	Soma Sato	Novi	21.5
21	12	Brayden Mullins	Highland-Milford	22.1
22	12	Ryan Illikman	Detroit Catholic Central	22.6
23	12	Liam Collins	Brother Rice	25.0
24	11	Ayden McDonald	White Lake Lakeland	25.7
25	11	Chase Griffith	Walled Lake Northern	26.9
26	10	Finn Gammerath	Walled Lake Northern	27.6
27	10	Gavin Tisch	Detroit Catholic Central	28.1
28	12	Dylan Shoresh	Birmingham Seaholm	28.3
29	12	Skylar Jess-Isenegger	Highland-Milford	30.6
30	11	Thomas Watson	Detroit Catholic Central	32.1

Any Intriguing Battles?

Thanks to a clutch performance from sophomore Finn Gammerath, the Walled Lake Northern boys pulled off a minor upset in their win of the LVC. Personal bests were hard to come by last week, but dude broke into the 16’s for the first time ever in that championship race. Surely the Eagles are looking for revenge and this could go either way. Even though White Lake skipped out on the County meet, they have had positive experiences on this course, such as their win over Milford. If you can beat the Mavs on their home course, you’ve got a darn good team.

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, to 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

#15 Concord
#17 Kalamazoo Hackett

Projected Individual Qualifier Cutoff

Probably gonna be around 16^th place regardless if the 3^rd team is White Pigeon or Centreville.

Projected Place	Team	Avg. Place	Avg. Score	Win %	Qualify %
1	Kalamazoo Hackett	1.5	41	52	95+
2	Concord	1.5	42	48	95+
3	Centreville	3.4	91		56
4	White Pigeon	3.6	94		44
5	Battle Creek St. Philip	5.5	150
6	Athens	6.3	159
7	Three Oaks River Valley	6.6	161
8	New Buffalo	7.5	174

Projected Place	Grade	Name	Team	Avg. Place
1	9	Haley Stimer	Concord	1.4
2	11	Presley Allen	Mendon	2.2
3	9	Gabriella Siems	Kalamazoo Hackett	3.6
4	10	Cieara Barrett	Concord	4.1
5	10	Emma Riker	Kalamazoo Hackett	5.0
6	10	Katelyn Van Es	Kalamazoo Hackett	7.1
7	12	Riley Adams	Concord	9.5
8	12	Emma Gaylor	Heritage Christian Academy	10.8
9	10	Ellie Reed	Centreville	10.9
10	11	Jamielynn Delarye	White Pigeon	12.0
11	12	Gwen Bulko	Concord	12.6
12	12	Addie Curtis	Marcellus	13.4
13	12	Mimi Hibbard	Battle Creek St. Philip	14.3
14	11	Abigail Ulbrich	Kalamazoo Hackett	15.2
15	9	Harper Bowman	New Buffalo	15.7
16	12	Chloe Badger	Athens	17.4
17	12	Analiese Miller	White Pigeon	17.5
18	12	Emmy Pritchard	Centreville	19.6
19	12	Alexae Hall	Decatur	21.4
20	9	Angel VeenKant	Tekonsha	21.7
21	11	Rachel Schelstraete	White Pigeon	22.8
22	9	Ella Hendrixson	Three Oaks River Valley	23.0
23	10	Bethany Carpenter	Kalamazoo Hackett	23.9
24	12	Frances Mildenberg	Centreville	25.2
25	11	Hannah Stimer	Concord	25.9
26	10	Rachel Byler	White Pigeon	26.2
27	9	Helen Donner	Three Oaks River Valley	26.4
28	10	Julianne Mounce	Kalamazoo Hackett	27.9
29	10	Kimberlynn Lawson	Centreville	28.9
30	12	Ellie Miller	Centreville	30.7

Any Intriguing Battles?

Concord vs. Kalamazoo Hackett for the girls win. Concord had the upper hand earlier in the year at Portage, buoyed by quick efforts from Stimer and Barrett. Hackett had more bodies toward the back of the pack. Two aspects to watch: what sort of gap is there in place between the Yellowjackets’ top-2 and Hackett’s top-2 and if depending on the former’s significance, can the Irish pull through late?

BOYS

Ranked Teams

#6 Three Oaks River Valley
#8 Kalamazoo Hackett
#26 Battle Creek St. Philip

Projected Individual Qualifier Cutoff

22^nd Place. With two top-10 teams, this appears to be very top-heavy, with many spots up for grab later into the race.

Projected Place	Team	Avg. Place	Avg. Score	Win %	Qualify %
1	Three Oaks River Valley	1.3	38	72	95+
2	Kalamazoo Hackett	1.7	42	28	95+
3	Battle Creek St. Philip	3.0	88		95+
4	White Pigeon	4.5	146
5	Concord	4.7	148
6	Centreville	6.0	171
7	Eau Claire	7.3	198
8	Heritage Christian Academy	8.6	217
9	Mendon	8.8	219
10	Athens	9.3	228
11	New Buffalo	10.9	262

Projected Place	Grade	Name	Team	Avg. Place
1	10	Marek Butkiewicz	Kalamazoo Hackett	1.4
2	10	Landon Rogers	Three Oaks River Valley	2.5
3	12	Gavin Sehy	Kalamazoo Hackett	2.6
4	12	Austin York	Three Oaks River Valley	4.8
5	12	Luke Sprague	Battle Creek St. Philip	5.8
6	10	Charlie Gibson	Three Oaks River Valley	6.2
7	10	Sean Siems	Kalamazoo Hackett	6.3
8	10	Jesse Fielis	White Pigeon	7.9
9	11	Ben Iobe	Mendon	9.7
10	11	Adam Slavens	Three Oaks River Valley	11.1
11	11	Ryan Blankenship	Eau Claire	11.3
12	12	Max Shugars	Battle Creek St. Philip	11.7
13	11	Sean Driscoll	Three Oaks River Valley	14.6
14	12	Nick Doerr	Kalamazoo Hackett	14.8
15	12	Braiden Brooks	Three Oaks River Valley	16.2
16	11	Jerome Bastian	Battle Creek St. Philip	17.0
17	11	Alex Dumont	Kalamazoo Hackett	17.8
18	9	Kellen Siems	Kalamazoo Hackett	19.4
19	10	Ethan O’Connor	Athens	20.4
20	10	David Lane	White Pigeon	22.2
21	10	Maddox Hutchinson	Concord	22.2
22	9	Max Barron	Tekonsha	23.5
23	11	Owen Nofs	Battle Creek St. Philip	23.5
24	9	Keaton Smith	Concord	24.9
25	11	Lleyton Bauman	Concord	27.2
26	10	Brendan Sre	Centreville	27.7
27	11	Grant Schumm	Three Oaks River Valley	28.0
28	9	Elias Baldwin	Decatur	28.4
29	9	Oliver Mildenberg	Centreville	29.3
30	9	Seth Crown	Heritage Christian Academy	30.7

Any Intriguing Battles?

As with many of these Southwest schools, we can look to Portage and try to glean something from the River Valley vs. Hackett matchup. There, the Mustang pack laid a giant impact, in particular Adam Slavens through Braiden Brooks, placing six RV boys before Hackett’s fourth. In a smaller meet such as this, that significance gets toned down, so if kids such as Sehy and Siems can sneak up a spot or two, Hackett’s winning odds become larger.

SUMMER PREVIEW
MID-SEASON

GIRLS

Ranked Teams

#10 Forest Hills Central

Projected Individual Qualifier Cutoff

A little light on the elite squads leaves many individuals in the top-15. Less depth in terms of spots, but a high possibility of more than 7 individual qualifiers.

Projected Place	Team	Avg. Place	Avg. Score	Win %	Qualify %
1	Forest Hills Central	1.0	53	95+	95+
2	Portage Central	2.5	122		89
3	Byron Center	3.4	134		70
4	East Kentwood	4.8	152		19
5	Grand Rapids Ottawa Hills	5.5	158
6	Kalamazoo Central	6.1	164		9
7	Caledonia	6.1	164		7
8	Forest Hills Northern	7.2	174
9	Battle Creek Lakeview	9.1	198
10	Portage Northern	9.5	206
11	Lowell	11.1	246
12	Kalamazoo Loy Norrix	12.3	285
13	Mattawan	12.4	290

Projected Place	Grade	Name	Team	Avg. Place
1	12	Selma Anderson	Grand Rapids Ottawa Hills	1.0
2	12	Clara James-Heer	Forest Hills Central	2.0
3	12	Izzy Fazio	Forest Hills Northern	4.1
4	10	Ava Lawrence	East Kentwood	4.3
5	11	Annie Alkema	Kalamazoo Central	5.0
6	11	Anna Sybenga	Forest Hills Central	6.6
7	11	Clare Mathison	Forest Hills Central	8.9
8	12	Alyssa DeFields	Caledonia	10.9
9	12	Emilee Rudlaff	Kalamazoo Central	11.0
10	12	Peyton Ludwig	Forest Hills Central	11.6
11	10	Lilamae Frank	Battle Creek Lakeview	12.7
12	11	Sydney Law	Byron Center	13.3
13	9	Roxanne Jorgensen	Portage Northern	14.4
14	10	Enna Wainer	Grand Rapids Ottawa Hills	15.5
15	10	Rhea Mouw	Portage Central	16.4
16	9	Olivia Storteboom	Portage Central	17.1
17	12	Lexi Hurst	East Kentwood	21.0
18	12	Julia Moxey	East Kentwood	21.8
19	11	Daphne Ball	Byron Center	21.8
20	10	Olivia Stacy	Portage Northern	22.6
21	11	Reese Hansen	Grand Rapids Ottawa Hills	23.4
22	12	Alyssa Hinton	Battle Creek Lakeview	24.6
23	11	Rachel Grice	Kalamazoo Central	25.4
24	11	Ella Harlow	Portage Northern	26.7
25	12	MK Elliott	Portage Central	26.7
26	10	Lilah Yoder	Forest Hills Central	26.7
27	11	Claire O’Boyle	Lowell	29.6
28	11	Sofia Bogard	Kalamazoo Loy Norrix	30.4
29	12	Addison Begeman	Portage Central	30.7
30	11	Mia Stibitz	Forest Hills Central	31.3

Any Intriguing Battles?

The many contenders for this third spot. Portage Central, slotted in second, may benefit from a home course advantage. But I wouldn’t be shocked with any order here. Byron Center is probably the favorite, a solid team all year that just recently won at Sturgis and placed 4^th in the notoriously tough OK White. A darkhorse and wild card could be Kalamazoo Central, who at this past weekend’s SMAC Championship, sent three girls under 20:00.

BOYS

Ranked Teams

#6 Kalamazoo Central
#10 Forest Hills Central
#21 Portage Central
#23 East Kentwood

Projected Individual Qualifier Cutoff

Likely around 15^th place even if the third team is Portage Central or East Kentwood. Tons of great individuals here that should push back those two top-10 teams.

Projected Place	Team	Avg. Place	Avg. Score	Win %	Qualify %
1	Kalamazoo Central	1.1	61	93	95+
2	Forest Hills Central	2.0	82	7	95+
3	Portage Central	3.1	106		83
4	East Kentwood	4.0	121		16
5	Byron Center	5.1	145
6	Caledonia	6.5	169
7	Battle Creek Lakeview	6.5	169
8	Kalamazoo Loy Norrix	8.2	203
9	Forest Hills Northern	8.6	212
10	Grand Rapids Ottawa Hills	10.1	248
11	Lowell	11.0	273
12	Portage Northern	11.9	295
13	Mattawan	13.0	327

Projected Place	Grade	Name	Team	Avg. Place
1	12	Aiden Moore	Battle Creek Lakeview	1.2
2	12	Jasper Cane	Kalamazoo Central	2.1
3	12	Liam Walters	Grand Rapids Ottawa Hills	3.7
4	11	Evan Nickoles	East Kentwood	5.7
5	9	Samuel Baker	Kalamazoo Central	8.4
6	12	Logan Begeman	Portage Central	9.0
7	9	Ben Romero	Forest Hills Central	10.0
8	11	Jonah Bills	Battle Creek Lakeview	10.5
9	11	Sawyer McCarthy	Forest Hills Central	10.7
10	11	Isaac Tanis	East Kentwood	11.2
11	11	Mitchell Jeruzal	Byron Center	11.4
12	10	Logan Westgate	Portage Central	12.6
13	10	Dylan Duguay	Kalamazoo Loy Norrix	15.6
14	10	Ty Billings	Kalamazoo Central	16.1
15	10	Jackson Lam	Kalamazoo Loy Norrix	16.7
16	11	Kort Thompson	Caledonia	17.1
17	11	Joseph Spada	Kalamazoo Central	18.2
18	12	Parker Ludwig	Forest Hills Central	18.2
19	12	Levi Green	Byron Center	19.0
20	10	Andrew Wright	Kalamazoo Central	20.3
21	11	Jacob Sanford	Forest Hills Central	20.9
22	12	Will Banfield	Forest Hills Central	22.1
23	11	Spencer Parker	Portage Central	23.2
24	11	Spencer Porter	Forest Hills Northern	23.8
25	9	Memphis Connor	Byron Center	25.7
26	10	Elijah Thompson	Kalamazoo Central	25.9
27	12	Hudson Kemperman	Forest Hills Northern	26.5
28	10	Eli Velting	Caledonia	28.4
29	12	Mark Millard	Byron Center	30.1
30	12	Reponse Shema	East Kentwood	31.0

Any Intriguing Battles?

A great aspect of athleticnet is being able to filter a meet’s results. For instance, three weeks ago on this very course, you can look at all the Region 3 teams from the Portage Invite. There, Portage Central had four boys sub-17, and when scored with only Region 3 teams, beat the Falcons by 14 points. But the Falcons just didn’t have a day. Portage is a fair course, ripe for PR’s when running in a massive, competitive field. And the Falcons didn’t obtain any from their varsity boys. Those PR’s came this past week at the OK Red Championship, where the Falcons placed 3^rd and six boys nailed sub-17’s.

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

#4 Hillsdale Academy
#16 Pittsford

Projected Individual Qualifier Cutoff

20th Place

Projected Place	Team	Avg. Place	Avg. Score	Win %	Qualify %
1	Hillsdale Academy	1.0	34	95+	95+
2	Pittsford	2.0	53		95+
3	Addison	3.0	77		95+
4	Adrian Lenawee Christian	4.0	89
5	Camden-Frontier	5.0	106

Projected Place	Grade	Name	Team	Avg. Place
1	11	Izzy Brooks	Adrian Lenawee Christian	1.0
2	12	Brooke Smith	Pittsford	2.1
3	11	Ella Walton	Hillsdale Academy	4.3
4	10	Ruth Brownlee	Hillsdale Academy	4.8
5	11	Ava Mallar	Pittsford	5.1
6	11	Stephanie Hernandez	Addison	6.7
7	11	Riley McCumber	Pittsford	6.9
8	11	Caroline Roberts	Hillsdale Academy	8.9
9	10	Abby Brownlee	Hillsdale Academy	9.2
10	11	Aubrey Appleman	Britton Deerfield	10.8
11	12	Leah Rorick	Morenci	11.3
12	9	Allie Miller	Hillsdale Academy	11.7
13	9	Grace Brownlee	Hillsdale Academy	12.0
14	9	Audrey Nehlsen	Hillsdale Academy	13.3
15	11	Priya Mericle	East Jackson	14.4
16	10	Emersyn Bachelder	Morenci	14.4
17	9	Lillian Jagielski	Pittsford	17.1
18	9	Kendalyn Perry	Addison	18.8
19	11	Taylor Lautermilch	Camden-Frontier	19.5
20	10	Grace Raymond	Petersburg-Summerfield	20.8
21	10	Ayla Hopkins	Camden-Frontier	21.8
22	9	Gigi Masters	Adrian Lenawee Christian	23.7
23	11	Allison Morris	Addison	24.7
24	12	Maggie Frost	Addison	25.2
25	12	Sayra Hernandez	Addison	25.3
26	12	Kariana Carpenter	Jackson Preparatory	25.8
27	11	Sophia Falater	Reading	25.8
28	12	Paige Santi	Reading	27.5
29	12	Faith Secor	Petersburg-Summerfield	27.8
30	11	Averil Miller	Camden-Frontier	28.7

Any Intriguing Battles?

The top three teams seem set, but I might look to what Izzy Brooks can throw down or how Hillsdale Academy’s pack appears. The Colts have seven solid girls that could play a role next week. Izzy had a nice rebound from the Lenawee County race, winning the Class D meet at Shepherd in 19:16. With its gradual downhills, Jackson can run fast. If she goes for it, I wouldn’t be shocked to see another low-19 (or faster) performance.

BOYS

Ranked Teams

Boys

#1 Hillsdale Academy
#16 East Jackson
#25 Adrian Lenawee Christian

Projected Individual Qualifier Cutoff

20th Place

Projected Place	Team	Avg. Place	Avg. Score	Win %	Qualify %
1	Hillsdale Academy	1.0	27	95+	95+
2	East Jackson	2.1	78		95+
3	Adrian Lenawee Christian	3.3	94		74
4	Morenci	4.0	100		25
5	Jackson Preparatory	4.7	108
6	Britton Deerfield	6.4	173
7	Reading	6.6	177
8	Vandercook Lake	8.0	204
9	Addison	9.0	229

Projected Place	Grade	Name	Team	Avg. Place
1	12	Thomas Holm	Hillsdale Academy	1.0
2	12	Michael Allen	East Jackson	2.4
3	10	Grayson Rorick	Hillsdale Academy	2.7
4	11	Reece Poole	Hillsdale Academy	4.4
5	12	Javin Mericle	East Jackson	4.6
6	11	Joel Lange	Adrian Lenawee Christian	6.9
7	12	Nathan Daniels	Adrian Lenawee Christian	8.4
8	10	Henry Lindley	Hillsdale Academy	9.1
9	12	William Kennedy	East Jackson	9.9
10	9	Landon Wilkins	Morenci	11.2
11	11	Beau Shaffer	Morenci	11.3
12	9	Ryan Miller	Hillsdale Academy	11.4
13	10	James Rahe	Hillsdale Academy	11.7
14	12	Karol Schlueter	Hillsdale Academy	13.7
15	11	Zachary Martinez	Morenci	14.9
16	11	Jameson Watson	Britton Deerfield	16.3
17	12	Noah Blondke	Jackson Preparatory	17.3
18	12	Nathan Blondke	Jackson Preparatory	18.5
19	11	Diego BoCole	Jackson Preparatory	20.4
20	12	Kutter Vanaken	Reading	20.7
21	10	Dallas Swaenepoel	Vandercook Lake	21.1
22	11	Kaleb Richardson	Adrian Lenawee Christian	23.2
23	10	Pierson Cousino	Adrian Lenawee Christian	23.7
24	10	Corey Dubnicki	Jackson Preparatory	25.4
25	9	Noah Lucas	Addison	26.0
26	11	Ryan Good	Britton Deerfield	28.1
27	10	Brayden Wright	Reading	30.5
28	11	Logan Mishaw	Jackson Preparatory	30.7
29	12	Colton Raffensberger	East Jackson	30.9
30	12	Randy Reddick	East Jackson	31.7

Any Intriguing Battles?

These last few weeks, we’ve got a few examples of the impending Adrian Lenawee Christian vs. Morenci matchup on the boys side. Lenawee Christian took the first two battles at the TCC Final and the Lenawee County Championship, while Morenci came through up at Class D this past weekend. Beau Schaffer easily had his best effort of the year, coming in before any ALC athlete. Could that be enough to lead the Bulldogs into the 3^rd spot?

SUMMER PREVIEW
MID-SEASON

GIRLS

Ranked Teams

#1 Jackson Lumen Christi
#13 Hanover-Horton
#23 Onsted

Projected Individual Qualifier Cutoff

20th Place

Projected Place	Team	Avg. Place	Avg. Score	Win %	Qualify %
1	Jackson Lumen Christi	1.0	28	95+	95+
2	Hanover-Horton	2.0	70		95+
3	Onsted	3.0	99		95+
4	Hudson	4.4	142
5	Quincy	4.7	145
6	Bronson	6.3	172
7	Napoleon	6.6	175
8	Jonesville	8.3	214
9	Hillsdale	9.2	232
10	Homer	9.5	238
11	Sand Creek	11.2	277
12	Michigan Center	11.8	293

Projected Place	Grade	Name	Team	Avg. Place
1	12	Madison Osterberg	Jackson Lumen Christi	1.1
2	11	Emmry Ross	Onsted	1.9
3	9	Samantha Schroeder	Jackson Lumen Christi	3.1
4	12	Olivia Perrine	Hanover-Horton	4.8
5	10	Macy Fazekas	Jackson Lumen Christi	5.8
6	10	Ashlynn Harris	Bronson	7.1
7	12	Sophia Reynolds	Hanover-Horton	7.7
8	11	Chloe Stalhood	Hillsdale	8.4
9	11	Layla Lopez	Jackson Lumen Christi	8.8
10	11	Ava Hathaway	Bronson	9.0
11	12	Sydney Fazekas	Jackson Lumen Christi	9.7
12	11	Thia Tello	Jackson Lumen Christi	12.2
13	9	Kendyl Musielewiez	Quincy	13.1
14	12	Julianna Debozy-Crawford	Hanover-Horton	15.5
15	11	Jayla Bright	Hudson	16.6
16	9	Brynlee Swihart	Hanover-Horton	17.0
17	10	Brookelyn Parker	Quincy	17.4
18	11	Allie England	Onsted	17.6
19	10	Raegan Brosamer	Onsted	17.9
20	11	Karly Page	Jonesville	19.7
21	10	Annabelle Czeiszperger	Hudson	22.9
22	12	Sadie Miller	Quincy	23.5
23	10	Sophie Patrick	Homer	24.3
24	11	Lauren McLain	Napoleon	24.7
25	12	Lily Mason	Hanover-Horton	25.6
26	11	Mia Sanchez	Jackson Lumen Christi	26.6
27	10	Makenzy Lindemann	Napoleon	27.5
28	12	Madelyn Norman	Napoleon	28.7
29	9	Izabel Raglow	Onsted	28.8
30	11	Pierce Pibbles	Hudson	31.3

Any Intriguing Battles?

Not especially, as the top three girls teams appear to be heavy favorites to make it out. This region benefitted from the loss of Leslie, a school in the vicinity of Jackson that moved to Region 26. This opened the door for teams such as Onsted and Hanover-Horton to have a greater chance at qualifying.

BOYS

Ranked Teams

#4 Hanover-Horton
#8 Jonesville
#9 Jackson Lumen Christi

Projected Individual Qualifier Cutoff

18th Place

Projected Place	Team	Avg. Place	Avg. Score	Win %	Qualify %
1	Hanover-Horton	1.1	53	93	95+
2	Jonesville	2.4	71	7	95+
3	Jackson Lumen Christi	2.5	73		95+
4	Hillsdale	4.2	152
5	Brooklyn Columbia Central	5.9	177
6	Hudson	6.0	178
7	Onsted	7.8	196
8	Adrian Madison	7.9	197
9	Bronson	8.1	199
10	Homer	9.5	214
11	Napoleon	11.2	239
12	Sand Creek	11.4	240
13	Michigan Center	13.0	349
14	Quincy	14.0	405

Projected Place	Grade	Name	Team	Avg. Place
1	11	Isaiah Dinverno	Jackson Lumen Christi	1.1
2	11	Mitchell Hiatt	Onsted	2.1
3	11	Landen Boulis	Hanover-Horton	4.3
4	12	Evan Shepherd	Hanover-Horton	4.6
5	12	Gavin VanKampen	Jonesville	5.2
6	12	Nolan Grant	Hillsdale	6.1
7	12	Gannon Shore	Jackson Lumen Christi	6.9
8	9	Caleb Blonde	Jonesville	7.3
9	12	Alex Czeiszperger	Hudson	9.3
10	10	Zach Hassenzahl	Hanover-Horton	11.4
11	10	John Edler	Homer	11.4
12	10	Gibson Shore	Jackson Lumen Christi	14.0
13	10	Nicholas Fowler	Jonesville	14.7
14	12	Owen Brown	Hanover-Horton	14.8
15	9	Logan Youngman	Hillsdale	15.4
16	12	Kyler Pequet	Napoleon	16.3
17	9	Cooper Flick	Hanover-Horton	18.3
18	11	Jack Gorton	Brooklyn Columbia Central	19.9
19	10	Trenton Fetter	Adrian Madison	19.9
20	11	Isaac St. John	Hudson	20.5
21	12	David Fowler	Jonesville	21.9
22	9	Avery Morrow	Jackson Lumen Christi	22.0
23	9	Silas Daniels	Sand Creek	24.9
24	9	Collin Fucile	Jonesville	25.2
25	10	Paul McClure	Adrian Madison	25.9
26	10	Wyatt Vowell	Brooklyn Columbia Central	26.7
27	11	James Bayes	Onsted	27.0
28		Rocky Bolton	Jackson Lumen Christi	29.4
29	12	Caleb Dickinson	Homer	30.3
30	11	Owen Lambarth	Brooklyn Columbia Central	30.8

Any Intriguing Battles?

Another thing to add to the list of Michigan XC Maxims (St. Louis comes through at the end of the year, watch out for Pinckney at Portage, always believe in Sal’s Magic) is to always count on Hanover-Horton. Ranked outside the top-10 to begin the year, the Comets have been a steady presence in the upper echelon of the D3 rankings.But beware, Jonesville is living up to those rankings, winning the Cascades Conference thanks to a huge performance from David Fowler. Lingering a bit behind the two were the Lumen Christi boys, but I always feel like the LC teams live on the Sharp Park course.