If anyone's prime motivation is to earn ranking points then the obvious answer is to enter a course that will (or is likely to) have more than enough competitors. With the downside that you might no longer be competing against your direct peers.
Alternatively would people prefer it if organisers were to say in advance that adjacent courses will be merged if one of them has fewer than, say, 20 pre-entries? People might end up running 10% further or shorter than originally anticipated, but the competition on the course would be better.
BOF Updated Ranking Algorithm - effect on older vets.
Moderators: [nope] cartel, team nopesport
Re: BOF Updated Ranking Algorithm - effect on older vets.
Snail wrote:If anyone's prime motivation is to earn ranking points then the obvious answer is to enter a course that will (or is likely to) have more than enough competitors. With the downside that you might no longer be competing against your direct peers.
I ran a half marathon last weekend. I didnt get a medal as the medal hander outer was dealing with some eejit who'd lost his shoe chip and I didnt notice.
Did I enter the race to get a medal - No. Was I disappointed - Yes.
As people have hinted - its the not knowing and the lack of transparency (unless you are a statistics boffin) regarding the situation of whether or not finishers get the ranking points.
Sort of an extension of that curious orienteering phenomenon of podium embarrassment -getting called up and then finding out there isnt a trophy for your class...
Now you dont even have to be any good to be disappointed
Orienteering - its no walk in the park
- andypat
- god
- Posts: 2856
- Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 9:58 pm
- Location: Houston, we have a problem.
Re: BOF Updated Ranking Algorithm - effect on older vets.
andypat wrote:I dont know.... I'm usually pretty pleased when I beat Baronmax!
Anyway my tuppance worth - I think the ranking points seem to work well; its always going to be a bit of a compromise but where I sit in the table usually seems right, much as I would like to be further up...
Reading the thread it seems some people are a bit confused about excluding erratic results - you still get your points (so long as there's enough non-erratic scores), they're just not calculated using these. Which seems perfectly reasonable to me.
Now if only I wasn't quite so erratic..... but I was winner of the Sprintelope dontchaknow! Ummm... did that get any ranking points?
-
baronmax - off string
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2014 10:53 pm
- Location: Auld Reekie
Re: BOF Updated Ranking Algorithm - effect on older vets.
Is it just me or has everybody just seen any ranking points from the Scottish 6 disappear. I think three of my days were in my top 6 and now none appear.
- tomgood
- off string
- Posts: 25
- Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 9:09 pm
Re: BOF Updated Ranking Algorithm - effect on older vets.
tomgood wrote:Is it just me or has everybody just seen any ranking points from the Scottish 6 disappear. I think three of my days were in my top 6 and now none appear.
All of my scores for S6D have disappeared.
It doesn't add up any more. My 6 listed scores add up to 7711, but my total points are 7729. There are other people in the top 200 who only have 1 or 2 scores listed and totals of 7000+.
I am guessing the total includes 6-days results and the individual event scores do not, but it's just a guess.
- frostbite
- light green
- Posts: 241
- Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 8:48 pm
Re: BOF Updated Ranking Algorithm - effect on older vets.
tomgood wrote:Is it just me or has everybody just seen any ranking points from the Scottish 6 disappear. I think three of my days were in my top 6 and now none appear.
Yup, the totals look to be correct as per today's email, but the 6D contributing scores don't appear.
AP
-
DeerTick - red
- Posts: 170
- Joined: Sun Apr 26, 2009 11:15 pm
- Location: Argyll
Re: BOF Updated Ranking Algorithm - effect on older vets.
frostbite wrote:All of my scores for S6D have disappeared.
Yes, as have everyone's.
For some reason, all of the S6D main results files have been re-uploaded to the BO website by Scott today (but not the Sprint race). That means they'll all get re-calculated tonight (I assume), and by tomorrow morning everyone will have their S6D scores back.
Martin Ward, SYO (Chair) & SPOOK.
I'm a 1%er. Are you?
I'm a 1%er. Are you?
-
Spookster - god
- Posts: 2267
- Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2003 1:49 pm
- Location: Sheffield
Re: BOF Updated Ranking Algorithm - effect on older vets.
frostbite wrote:It doesn't add up any more. My 6 listed scores add up to 7711, but my total points are 7729. There are other people in the top 200 who only have 1 or 2 scores listed and totals of 7000+.
I am guessing the total includes 6-days results and the individual event scores do not, but it's just a guess.
They do now! Given what Spookster said your guess looks good.
Andrew Dalgleish (INT)
Views expressed on Nopesport are my own.
Views expressed on Nopesport are my own.
- andy
- god
- Posts: 2455
- Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2003 11:42 pm
- Location: Edinburgh
Re: BOF Updated Ranking Algorithm - effect on older vets.
Spookster wrote:That means they'll all get re-calculated tonight (I assume), and by tomorrow morning everyone will have their S6D scores back.
And so they have. Whether they differ from the S6D scores everyone had previously, and by how much, I have no idea.
Martin Ward, SYO (Chair) & SPOOK.
I'm a 1%er. Are you?
I'm a 1%er. Are you?
-
Spookster - god
- Posts: 2267
- Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2003 1:49 pm
- Location: Sheffield
- paul
- yellow
- Posts: 88
- Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 10:57 am
Re: BOF Updated Ranking Algorithm - effect on older vets.
I wonder how much in a small field did the fact that, after a less than average run my headtorch died completely on the way to the last control and I spent 15 minutes wandering around with a key ring light hoping to find it (or for someone else on the same course to), affect the ranking.
- NeilC
- addict
- Posts: 1332
- Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2004 9:03 am
- Location: SE
Re: BOF Updated Ranking Algorithm - effect on older vets.
A nice illustration of why night-O shouldn't be included.
WOC2024 Edinburgh
Test races at SprintScotland (Alloa/Falkirk) and Euromeeting (near Stirling).
Test races at SprintScotland (Alloa/Falkirk) and Euromeeting (near Stirling).
-
graeme - god
- Posts: 4725
- Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 6:04 pm
- Location: struggling with an pɹɐɔ ʇıɯǝ
Re: BOF Updated Ranking Algorithm - effect on older vets.
NeilC wrote:I wonder how much in a small field did the fact that, after a less than average run my headtorch died completely on the way to the last control and I spent 15 minutes wandering around with a key ring light hoping to find it (or for someone else on the same course to), affect the ranking.
You're not the only one with a big time loss:
http://www.mvoc.routegadget.co.uk/rg2/r ... wser&id=57
The distribution of finishers times is unusual: AFAICS Paul Todd's time is ~3.8 standard deviations from the mean - probably just as well Mr Hammer isn't a BOF member.
graeme wrote:A nice illustration of why night-O shouldn't be included.
The potential for night events to produce unusual scores (because of the increased chance of very big time losses) was the main reason for excluding night-O when the new rankings system was introduced - it will be interesting to see if those who argued for the inclusion of night-O now use this result as a stick to bash the rankings system in general...
-
greywolf - addict
- Posts: 1416
- Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 12:45 pm
- Location: far far away
Re: BOF Updated Ranking Algorithm - effect on older vets.
greywolf wrote: The potential for night events to produce unusual scores (because of the increased chance of very big time losses) was the main reason for excluding night-O when the new rankings system was introduced:
So what you're saying is that we should design the sport to suit the ranking system rather than the other way round
greywolf wrote:graeme wrote:A nice illustration of why night-O shouldn't be included.
- it will be interesting to see if those who argued for the inclusion of night-O now use this result as a stick to bash the rankings system in general...
More like a nice illustration of why major events should be weighted.
To oblivion and beyond....
-
buzz - addict
- Posts: 1197
- Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 10:45 pm
- Location: Sheffield
Re: BOF Updated Ranking Algorithm - effect on older vets.
buzz wrote:So what you're saying is that we should design the sport to suit the ranking system rather than the other way round
Not at all, and it's difficult to see how you could come to that interpretation
-
greywolf - addict
- Posts: 1416
- Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 12:45 pm
- Location: far far away
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: oo_wrong_way and 164 guests