Graphical Split Time Analysis

[PG]

The competition rules have become very fragmented and I'm not surprised the some event organisers may have missed that guideline A (http://www.britishorienteering.org.uk/images/uploaded/downloads/events_guideline_a.pdf) says that level A and B events should have

"Results published both by course and by age class at the event, and on a website by the next day offering post event route and graphical split time analysis."

Can I make a plea that event organisers do this using the current SplitsBrowser software? Winsplits users need to buy software to get all the graphs and the ancient SplitsBrowser/Splitalyzer versions sometimes available with Routegadget are very clunky, with some of the nice features (right and left clicks on race and splits graphs for example) not available. (Paul tells me Routegadget won't be upgraded)

[Adrian]

I like Winsplits because the splits tables show the positions on each split, shade the splits with errors, etc. So my plea is for every event to have Winsplits available.

[Paul Frost]

I prefer Winsplits, and whilst you can buy an advanced application to install on your own computer the web version has quite a few options.

[andy]

everyone is different and likes different tools. I personally think splitsbrowser is a bit rubbish so it goes below 'washing the dishes' on my list of things I want to do after an event.
what's wrong with the one that RouteGadget uses as standard?
If anyone is super keen for <insert other split analysis tool here> then perhaps they could ask the organiser for a file to upload?

[Gross]

I prefer the bit of paper we used to pass round in the pub with everyone filling their times in from Casio's.... and a good evening spent discussing the splits & routes.... much better for your improvement than looking at a computer screen

[Gnitworp]

I prefer the old days when we used to be able to call the guy who said he would have won if he hadn't messed up number 8 a liar

[roadrunner]

I personally prefer WinSplits, though looking at SplitsBrowser just now it does seem better than I remember it. I think the best bet is to provide both if possible, otherwise a WinSplits-compatible file that people can download; however, you can cut and paste the table from SplitsBrowser into WinSplits - and this worked a lot better than doing the same with the basic results from the SI web site. It's a bit tedious doing more than a couple of courses, though.

[Paulo]

I far prefer SplitsBrowser, and agree with PG's plea.

Particularly I find that Splitsbrowser it is remarkably accurate at calculating estimate time loss per leg (that's the figure which appears on the far right as you hover over each leg), presumably with some complicated algorithm that looks at how everyone else did on that leg compared to your own average speed etc - it always seems to give a very realistic figure (if enough people are on the course). I find it a very helpful way of seeing which legs you did better or worse than 'average' (rather than just looking at split time/position).

Also I find the downward sloping lines give a very good graphical representation of how the race progresses in terms of time loss etc.

I certainly get far more out of SplitsBrowser than I ever do from WinSplits.

[Paulo]

Also the 'Race Graph' option in SplitsBrowser is often fascinating (as long as organisers upload start time data), so you can see who caught up who / when people were running together etc (or at least punching together ). Good to see some interesting graphs to see from this weekends races...

[Angry Haggis]

Maybe British Orienteering could automatically generate the WinSplits/SplitsBrowser visualisations from the results upload data that result secretaries are making to the British Orienteering servers? This would not be hard to do. The format in which the results are uploaded is often identical to the format needed for the two visualisers.

Then only one action would need to be done after an event for results, and extra volunteer effort wouldn't be spent on independently catering for SplitsBrowser, WinSplits and [future results visualisation software] if it were centralised as such.

[Zokko!]

Speaking as a club results secretary I always post results in all the formats mentioned, where appropriate to the event type. e.g. score events don't make any sense in the splits analysers like Winsplits and Splitsbrowser, but RouteGadget works with just about every event. Adding Winsplits Online and Splitsbrowser takes about 5 minutes total, including adding links to our results page, so it's not a big ask. RouteGadget can sometimes take a little longer, and requires a bit of preparation in getting hold of a suitable map file and the courses file, but that's just a question of thinking ahead. Along with the age class and course results, and uploading to the BOF results page, maybe an hour's work in all for a level C or B event. Usually done as soon as I get home after the event to get it out of the way.

Personally I enjoy comparing routes on RG but the most interesting comparisons can come from Splisbrowser, especially as mentioned by Paulo the race graph which shows clearly who was towed around a course.

[andy]

The format in which the results are uploaded is often identical to the format needed for the two visualisers.

It doesn't take splits as far as I've seen so far, so they'd need to rewrite that in. which is when it gets a bit more tricky.

[Spookster]

In my experience (which admitedly is just from using MERCS and Colour results software) you use exactly the same results CSV file to upload to Routegadget, Splitsbrowser, WinSplits and BOF. That's partly why it's straighforward, and can be completed in about an hour, as Zokko says.

I don't think BOF would want to start writing code to effectively duplicate the Winsplits and Splitsbrowser systems. Those systems are good at what they do, and may be developed further in future, so I think the best approach would be to keep using them.

It might be good to give guidance to club results secretaries so that more events do get uploaded to these good analysis systems. E.g. "These are the systems we'd like you to upload your Level A/B/C events to, and here's a quick reference guide in case you don't know how to do that.

[Angry Haggis]

I don't think BOF would want to start writing code to effectively duplicate the Winsplits and Splitsbrowser systems. Those systems are good at what they do, and may be developed further in future, so I think the best approach would be to keep using them.

That's not what I meant. I'm not saying BOF should duplicate Winsplits/Splitsbrowser, but that it could automatically post uploaded results to these analysis websites. After all, it already has the results files, which do include splits (even if the splits parts of the files are not currently parsed or displayed.)

Club results secretaries being specifically mandated to post results to these third party websites is a new development and extra burden which did not exist before, and leaves them at the whim of external websites which may or may not be easy or familiar for them to operate. Getting everyone knowing how to post results to BOF alone is proving tricky enough.

On a related topic I'm hoping that BOF will soon provide an API to its results pages, so club websites can pull their uploaded data back in a consistent form, possibly automatically for displaying on their own website. (Either as an embed option, like embedding a YouTube video, or for power-users, the data itself). Then, once the result secretary uploads one set of results to one place, they appear on BOF, SplitsBrowser, WinSplits and their club website, with no duplication of volunteer effort.