Comparing Times With Others

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » June 19th, 2004, 11:21 pm

Top 14 Nonathlon places compared to the Predicted Age Times Notice this comparision gives a very even distribution across age, weight, and gender. There would likely be an even more level distribution, were this comparison to be carried to the rest of the Nonathlon. The rankings adjusted a bit, but Ole Granny and Big D are still well in position to be 1st and 2nd when they complete the 10th event. I'm very happy to find this method does indeed work very well, and has solved the problem of equalizing the age, weight, and gender performance standards over distance. 500m - 1k - 2k - 5k - 6k / 30mi 10k 60mi HM M 1- David Miller 9199 17 M L - 1:35.9 PAT 1054 997 944 903 882 / 873 855 832 818 804 = 8962 2- Toddler 8739 39 M H - 1:27.6 PAT 1033 963 926 870 857 / 845 841 810 801 767 = 8713 3- Ole Granny 9470 68 F H - 2:07.9 PAT 1128 1042 1003 945 923 / 923 915 907 904 000 = 8690 ( 9 ) 4- Big D 9237 39 M H - 1:27.6 PAT 1159 1063 989 918 894 / 898 899 876 853 000 = 8549 ( 9 ) 5- Rocket Roy 8443 53 M H - 1:33.2 1008 951 903 865 815 / 832 807 800 779 691 = 8451 6- Blackman 8601 32 M L - 1:32.5 PAT 872 872 872 872 872 / 872 809 809 809 775 = 8434 7- Terminator 8690 33 M H - 1:24.7 PAT 1061 979 889 846 806 / 823 794 764 734 698 = 8394 8- carole 8618 41 F H - 1:42.5 PAT 966 907 862 827 810 / 808 798 798 791 730 = 8297 9- Ash 9062 19 M H - 1:24.6 PAT 1037 908 883 814 795 / 794 777 758 747 726 = 8239 10- Snappa 8635 56 M L - 1:39.8 PAT 1027 955 929 880 871 / 865 859 844 819 000 = 8049 ( 9 ) 11- grams 8856 61 F L - 2:02.7 PAT 996 941 894 888 884 / 863 858 843 826 000 = 7993 ( 9 ) 12- PeteM 8821 26 M H - 1:24.2 PAT 1006 957 882 829 821 / 809 808 787 786 000 = 7685 ( 9 ) 13- GrahamP 8591 33 M H - 1:24.7 PAT 1010 950 893 834 812 / 795 811 777 781 000 = 7663 14- balbers 8444 19 M H - 1:24.6 894 825 787 780 783 / 783 783 732 727 000 = 7094

[old] PaulH · Post by **[old] PaulH** » June 20th, 2004, 2:58 pm

I'm not sure this "solves" the problem - you say it returns results pretty close to the Nonathlon, and we know that the Nonathlon is flawed (but improving I hope!) And of course there's nothing to say that your differences are in the right direction, because we don't really know where each person "should" be. But it's a very nice method, there's no denying that! Cheers, Paul

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » June 20th, 2004, 3:28 pm

Hi Paul, Thanks for your comments. Results are similar to Nonathlon scoring in that the same people are at the top. However, there is a considerable variation in points. Also the Predicted Age Times are based on where rowers are "now", rather than trying to guess where they should be, which has helped to make this determination much simpler and more accurate. Here is a comparison of the PAT and current Nonathlon scoring: 1- David Miller 17 M L - 8962 / 9199 2- Toddler 39 M H - 8713 / 8739 3- Ole Granny 68 F H - 8690 / 9470 4- Big D 39 M H - 8549 / 9237 5- Rocket Roy 53 M H - 8451 / 8443 6- Blackman 32 M L - 8434 / 8601 7- Terminator 33 M H - 8394 / 8690 8- carole 41 F H - 8297 / 8618 9- Ash 19 M H - 8239 / 9062 10- Snappa 56 M L - 8049 / 8635 11- grams 61 F L - 7993 / 8856 12- PeteM 26 M H - 7685 / 8821 13- GrahamP 33 M H - 7663 / 8591 14- balbers 19 M H - 7094 / 8444

[old] grams · Post by **[old] grams** » June 20th, 2004, 3:47 pm

Very interesting number crunching from all of you. John, I believe that I am correct in assuming the current world records are from competitions? I got lost in the explanations somewhere. This will prevent times done on slides from being used. I know there isn't supposed to be any difference, however I belive that numbers used as a base for a method should all be generated the same way. John, in your method do we get to move up a year in the calcs as soon as we have our birthday? If not, what is the 'fiscal year'? I believe that the competitions go with the age you are at the time of the competition, yes? The Nonathlon is May to May, so your comparison to Nonathlon scores could be slightly off depending on birthdays. Or am I confused as ususal?? I wouldn't want to cheat. I do like your method, as I didn't drop disastrously in your standings. Now, if I can just do the marathon I have been putting off, I might just move up to #1 lightweight lady. I promised myself a new Model D if I could pull it off. grams

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » June 20th, 2004, 4:20 pm

Hi Grams, Thanks. Yes, the current world records used are the official C2 world records for the 2k. All of the PAT reference points were taken from these official C2 world records. To the best of my knowledge, all the records have been generated the same way, i.e. on the standard erg without slides. The PAT scores are calculated to be at the time and age the event is performed. They would be slightly off if a different age was used, but still close. You will move up quite a bit when you complete the marathon. The Nonathlon counts 9 events, plus 100 points for the 10th event. The PAT method simply counts all events completed. However, even taking quite a long time for a marathon would be at least 500 points.

[old] PaulH · Post by **[old] PaulH** » June 21st, 2004, 10:29 am

John, I guess the issue I have is your use of the phrase "more accurate". I don't know what order the rowers in the Nonathlon should appear if the system were perfect, and I assume neither do you. So how do you know that your method is "more accurate"? I agree it's probably as accurate as the Nonathlon, and certainly simpler, but I don't claim to know how accurate the Nonathlon is. Perhaps if you could quantify how accurate PWR is that might help me? Cheers, Paul

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » June 21st, 2004, 2:26 pm

Paul, Note the acronym PWR has been changed to PAT, Predicted Age Times. I was using "more accurate" in general terms, not as comparison to current Nonathlon scoring. Perhaps a better terminology would be "more precise", again speaking generally as regards statistical comparisons between times in athletic events. Rowing is unique from other sports, in that one event, the 2k, is "the" standard event for all age, weight, and gender classes of rowers. This has greatly simplified the process. The reason I feel the PAT method is more precise or accurate than other methods, is because there are only two steps to the process, and both steps are based precisely on the current 2k world records. Step #1 was calculation of the PAT from the current 2k world records. The 2k world records are precise, and the calculations between them are also quite precise. Step #2 is comparing each rower's time, for each event, to the PAT for that age. Again, this is precise to 1/10 of 1 second. Very close. I don't know of any other method that has this level of accuracy and preciseness, through all ages, weight and gender. The Nonathlon is superb. I was curious to combine PAT with the Nonathlon to see how well they would work together. It looks like they do work together very well. I'm happy about this and feel the experiment was successful. It would be nice to see PAT used in some constructive way, though I don't have any plans to do anything else with it.

[old] PaulH · Post by **[old] PaulH** » June 21st, 2004, 3:29 pm

Thanks for the explanation John. I think the word I would use is efficent, as there is a very limited dataset required, and very little 'magic' performed And things that are efficient generally only depend on a few assumptions, which helps with transparency of course. But accurate suggests that we know what the 'right' answer is, and while methods such as PAT and the Nonathlon are handy tools to fuel such discussion, we'll never know what 'accurate' really is. That's part of the fun! Cheers, Paul

[old] John Rupp · Post by **[old] John Rupp** » June 21st, 2004, 5:00 pm

Paul, Yes, I agree. The terms accurate and precise refer to the PAT relationship with the current 2k world records. The Predicted Age Times are quite accurate and precise in regards to this comparison. This is a comparison that is probably not made with other methods. My endeavor has been to make PAT as objective as possible. I feel this has been accomplished.

Concept2 Forum

Comparing Times With Others

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions

Competitions