I know these virtual meets are based on reginal times, but Wiregrass has a pretty solid 1m/2m girl!
Evans will stack both relays and you left off Matthews/Evans out of the HJ.
MNW looks extremely good, but I think it would be closer than your call.
An interesting discussion would be, "What algorithm should be used for a State virtual meet?" As bing28 mentioned, these appear to be from regional times. I'd like to seem these results include best performances over the prior four weeks. I think that would more closely approximate the finishes we'll see Friday. What do the rest of you think?
I am interested in that discussion too, Dean. I would love to develop some new options for crunching the numbers in more accurate ways maybe by next year. I've thought about anything from what you're suggesting... to doing some sort of consistency/average... to head to head factors... to even adding some randomness in so that it changes every time you do it. hah
Of course some of that stuff would be REALLY complicated and intensive on the server. However... season best, average, or perhaps average of last few weeks or best over past month... those might be a little easier to create. Definitely welcome ideas on what would be most effective.
For the State meet, maybe you could find the runner's top three times for the season in their respective event(s), and then display that for the virtual meet. I think that would be a more accurate representation of what they are capable of running rather than averaging every time for that running for the season (some coaches may have the top-ranked athletes take it easy at some meets they run in). That's just my suggestion, though.