ranking list

[Red Adder]

Somehow by sitting on my *rs* since Christmas I've gone up 7 places. Another 70 years of that and I'll be challenging the top 100.

[EddieH]

[quote]I thought the most interesting point was that there are only around 4200 people on the list. [/quote]

Ah but there are quite a number of people who score zero points at events and when thall their scores are zero they don't feature at all - my mother for example has done must have done over 12 events but has failed to score. I can think of at least one member of our club who has run in over 6 ranking events yet fails to feature.

I am not clear if with the new system this will still be a possibility - points will certainly not be able to reflect any improvement or decline if this is so.

[greywolf]

have been told (so admitedly it's hearsay) that the new BOF database doesn't support second clubs - hopefully an omission that can be rectified subsequently by BOF

last year I wrote to BOF: "i would like to add a second club to my membership - but it doesn't seem to be possible to do this online - could you explain how please?"
the answer was: "This is not available as we no longer collect 2nd club information."

As the rankings runs off the BOF number, it can only cater for 1 club per individual. (note: it doesn't care what club that individual puts on an entry form, as long as the BOF number is right the points will be credited appropriately). So it seems that unless there is a radical restructuring of the BOF membership database, it won't possible to enable the rankings list to cater for second clubs. On the positive side, I am hoping for a nice prize....

When filtering by age, I had assumed that if, for example, you wanted to look at M45 then all M45 and older would be included. Not realistic if you're ranked 10th in M45 but there are 5 M50's above you....

I think the idea is that more complex filters (like your example) will be made available in due course.

[Nottinghamshire outlaw]

The comments about the new ranking list being motivating for the 'average' orienteer and the difficuties of 'local' orienteers being able to access ranking events in order to get onto the list link nicely with the thread about the 3 levels of events!!

I think that many people envisaged that the 'usual' club colour coded event (white to Brown courses) which is regionally based for regional clientele as it often forms part of a regional league (here in EM it does anyway) would become a level 2 event and so more poeple would be able to get onto the new ranking list. However for a number of reasons many clubs have decided that the CC events stay as level 3 - not least because of the ruling by Rules Group about controllers which has been mentioned elsewhere - thus making access to the ranking list less accessible than had been hoped for the 'local' orienteer.

Does this help with sustaining membership? Discuss!

[andypat]

It looks interesting. Just looking at our club, there are no blindingly obvious anomalies - and I wonder if the ability to filter by club will provide the possibility for a sort of fantasy league as well as a championships?

[greywolf]

...there are only around 4200 people on the list. ... so half of all National members have not participated in even a single ranking event in the past year..... Given that most clubs put on at least one ranking event a year....

There's less than 90 events contributing to the rankings at the moment (and that's counting the 6 days as 6 and the JK as 3 etc) - which means presumably that there are a number of L2 (and even L1) events where the organising club hasn't supplied the results.

As per Nottinghamshire Outlaw's post, one of the key objectives of the new system was to increase the number of events and thus the number of individuals involved in the rankings, but it requires the clubs to register their events at the appropriate level (which is easier now that some of the restrictions have been eased) and then submit the results!

[roadrunner]

...there are only around 4200 people on the list. ... so half of all National members have not participated in even a single ranking event in the past year..... Given that most clubs put on at least one ranking event a year....

I did 4 events last year, but all of them were city races (Cambridge, London, Oxford and Sheffield) and none of these seem to be included. Can't say I'm that bothered, and in any case I think the L2 city races should be included this year.

[DJM]

Eddie wrote:

But, by walking round my courses at the Scottish 6 days last year was I significantly inflating everyone else's points?

The answer is probably no, as the outliers at the end of the results are not counted in the pool of results which determine how points are awarded (see Appendix K 2.2.4). These outliers comprise the last 10% of the course finishers, plus anyone better than the last 10% who takes more than twice the winning time.

But, I suspect, Eddie, that your "walking" is quicker than many others' best pace ...

[graeme]

Seems to be some serious bias towards "S" courses. Three of my counters are from trotting round the 6-day with a dicky hamstring. No sign of my British Champs winning run, best ever BOC or SOL M21 victory. This is inevitable from using standard deviation/mean time on a short course, where there will be a long, heteroskedastic tail (yes, I did tell them, but what do you expect from woodcutters and classicists ).

Despite the weirdnesses of individual scores, the overall list looks at least as sane as the old one.

[pete.owens]

I think that many people envisaged that the 'usual' club colour coded event (white to Brown courses) which is regionally based for regional clientele as it often forms part of a regional league (here in EM it does anyway) would become a level 2 event and so more poeple would be able to get onto the new ranking list. However for a number of reasons many clubs have decided that the CC events stay as level 3 - not least because of the ruling by Rules Group about controllers which has been mentioned elsewhere - thus making access to the ranking list less accessible than had been hoped for the 'local' orienteer.

Well maybe the ranking list will provide an incentive for clubs to start registering their events at an appropriate level.

[awk]

Without wanting to get bogged down in the debate that has largely run its course on the 4 levels thread, that was the ERGs intention - level 2 largely ranking events (some like relays might not be included), level 3 non-ranking. And a one list scheme. Then the ranking list got referred to a review group.....

Hopefully, as pete.owens suggests, and as the guldelines are now much closer to what ERG originally envisaged, that'll start to shake down now. (If it's ever allowed to, with the AGM coming up. )

[Scott]

This is inevitable from using standard deviation/mean time on a short course, where there will be a long, heteroskedastic tail (yes, I did tell them, but what do you expect from woodcutters and classicists ).

Still, at least I was able to explain the etymology of heteroskedastic to the rest of the workgroup, which was the main thing.

[Mrs H]

what's wrong with us woodcutters anyway

[HOCOLITE]

I wasn't sure how many words were allowed for Nottingham Outlaws essay but I'd say, "I've never entered an event because it might give me points. I have occassionally looked at lists but unless clubs use them for fantasy leagues or competitions I don't think that which level gives ranking is an incentive to get more people in more positions on more podiums. It just gives the ranking lobby some satisfaction and the rest a passing interest."

[Adventure Racer]

Should also be easy to cut and paste a list of club scores for your club magazine too.

Particularly welcome this. Plus for the first time it is easy to produce a club ranking across all age classes. Very useful for handicapping our internal events.

Not necessarily - as KP mentions we already have an internal ranking which is used for these events, which is a far more accurate reflection of ability. If you used the official ranking list, some of our best runners are only ranked down in 83,84,85 and at least one club member who you'd expect to be fairly high up overall in the club champs isn't on the list at all!