Percentage of World Records

[hjs]

There seems to be a general agreement that the system favors us codgers, but it was still neat to top Dwayne Adams recently. That was a pretty good incentive to keep at it.

Bob S.

yes I agree,

And in favour off this you could say, normally the senior athletes don,t get a chance at something like this so nice. But is it not to be taken to seriously this way.

If you think off it logicaly, people tend to train the hardest in there prime, the relative number of people who compeet is also the highest at that point. So the relative level will also be the highest around the prime age.

But fair and square: The nonatlon is for the oldies ,they rule.

[johnlvs2run]

When the system is equitable, then people are going to take it more seriously.

Dean Smith has 100 points in the PERathlon for his lightweight 2k WR of 7:29.3. Yet the Nonathlon gives him 1070 points, a full 7 percent above his world record performance!

Elia Luini would need to row a 5:38.9 for the 2k as a lightweight, or an open heavyweight would need to row a 5:15.0 for the 2k to get the same Nonathlon points as Dean Smith.

The 9 events that Dean Smith has completed average out to 95.3 in the PERathlon, as percentage of a World Record curve -- thus the possibility of others being within that same range.

[johnlvs2run]

Basing all times on this World Record curve, as the PERathlon does, makes the times equitable through gender, the two weight classes, all 10 events and all ages.

[PaulH]

Dean Smith has 100 points in the PERathlon for his lightweight 2k WR of 7:29.3. Yet the Nonathlon gives him 1070 points, a full 7 percent above his world record performance! Obviously this can not be taken so seriously.

If you can you point out where the Nonathlon states that 1,000 points is a World Record performance I'll happily delete it - I certainly don't remember saying that it does, but then I only created it so I may be mistaken.

Assuming for a moment that I'm not mistaken, then your statement, as with so many others, is no more meaningful than my saying that the PERathlon is inaccurate because it allows scores that are prime numbers. As I stated before, Nonathlon scores are a relative measure, not an absolute one.

As to the fact that Dean Smith gets 100 points in the PERathlon, well of course he does - you created the system so that he would! All of the world record holders should, because they provided the data you used to calculate the scores on. It's like me deciding that Salma Hayek is the very definition of gorgeous (which she is), and then discovering that according to my scrupulously rigorous marking scheme, Salma Hayek is the most gorgeous woman in the world!

[Citroen]

It's like me deciding that Salma Hayek is the very definition of gorgeous (which she is), and then discovering that according to my scrupulously rigorous marking scheme, Salma Hayek is the most gorgeous woman in the world!

At least you only need a web browser and http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000161/ to discover that.

Rather than needing the high-end super computer to calculate the PATT, PRATT, PWR scores (or whatever he's invented today).

[johnlvs2run]

[johnlvs2run]

As I stated before, Nonathlon scores are a relative measure, not an absolute one.

Yes, of course all scores are relative.

And some scores are more relative than other scores.

As to the fact that Dean Smith gets 100 points in the PERathlon, well of course he does - you created the system so that he would!

Yes, and because a World Record gets 100 points.

All of the world record holders should, because they provided the data you used to calculate the scores on.

All world record holders contributed to the curve, then the highest curve was used to calculate the PWR's for all ages. Thus, the top world record times get 100 points, and many world record times get 100 points but not all of them do.

[PaulH]

All world record holders contributed to the curve, then the highest curve was used to calculate the PWR's for all ages. Thus, the top world record times get 100 points, and many world record times get 100 points but not all of them do.

And on what basis did you make that decision? What proof do you have that those categories that don't hit the 100 point mark aren't yet worthy of 100 points? After all, by definition nobody in the world (so far as we know) has ever rowed faster in that classification, so you saying that someone could is pure speculation.

You should also look up the term 'relative'; I do not think it means what you think it means.

As a reminder, can you tell me where I said that 1,000 points on the Nonathlon was a world record performance? I'm really keen to edit the document to avoid giving that impression.

Cheers, Paul

[johnlvs2run]

Hi Paul,

I used the Power (learning) curve, on a Texas Instruments BAII+ calculator.

Scores are proportional to the 100 point level on the curve. It's not a matter of worth, but of achievement relative to the 100 point World Record Curve.

I combined the 4 classifications, women's and men's lightweight's and heavyweight's, to come up with the 100 point World Record Curve. Each of these four classifications are highest at some point of this World Record Curve. The curve is based on achievement and times that have already been performed.

can you tell me where I said that 1,000 points on the Nonathlon was a world record performance? I'm really keen to edit the document to avoid giving that impression.

The 1070 points looks like 107 percent. I don't know what else it would be 107 percent of except a world record curve time. It looks like we agree the Nonathlon is not based on a world record performance.

[PaulH]

Thus the curve is based on achievement and times that have been already performed. Speculation has nothing to do with it.

But you are saying, are you not, that the PERathlon is measured against World Record performance? In your sig it says "Click here to calculate your Percent of World Record Times." So how could a World Record holder not get 100 points? The only way I can see is if you're using the figures you gathered to speculate on what the 'real' World Record ought to be. Or of course you could change your sig to read "Click here to calculate your Percent Of An Arbitrary Line Derived From Some World Record Times"

The 1070 points etc, looks like 107.0%

I don't know what else it would be 107% of except a world record curve time for that age, weight class, and gender.

Ah, now I see the problem. I'm trying to defend the Nonathlon not against its flaws (of which there are many), but against your ability to read. I concede, therefore, that the Nonathlon is horribly and irredeemably useless. Why its very name - "The Nora Ephron" - shows that it gives more weight to romantic comedies starring Meg Ryan than it does the hard science of rowing performance.

Cheers, Paul

[johnlvs2run]

The 100 point PERathlon curve is based on World Record times; performances that have already been achieved.

Not all world record holders get 100 points, because not all world record holders are at the top of the 100 point PERathlon curve. For example, I have the world record for all rowers who live in Santa Maria, California. However, my times are not on the same level as those at the top of the 100 point PERathlon World Record Curve.

Likewise, other's scores are based on the proportion of their times to the 100 point PERathlon World Record Curve.

By basing scores on the top of the World Record Curve as established by ALL World Record performers, we get a more accurate look at the true percentages for each age.

[slalomskater]

John,

I've been lurking for almost 2 years now. I think you are absolutely insane but have extreme passion for erging which is cool.

Why do you choose time as your yardstick when power output in Watts would likely be a better comparision?

[johnlvs2run]

Why do you choose time as your yardstick when power output in Watts would likely be a better comparision?

Update: I have created the Wattathon, which can be used concurrently with the Perathlon scores.

You can have scores for both the Perathlon and the Wattathon.

[TabbRows]

Okay so I'm 76.6% of the WR in the 2K. Now what?!!
guess I'll have to raid the kiddy's college fund and get Xeno to come out for a 2 day session on my Model B.

In all seriousness, I'd rather know how I'm stacking up against guys my own age bracket and weight class. It's like back in my running days trying to compare my marathon PR as being only 36% slower than the world record marathon time. Not going to put me in the invited runner category or get me hire as the rabbit for the NYC Marathon.

[JimR]

John,

I've been lurking for almost 2 years now. I think you are absolutely insane but have extreme passion for erging which is cool.

Why do you choose time as your yardstick when power output in Watts would likely be a better comparision?

Slalomskater -

To make an observation ... I would not say John has an "extreme passion for erging". His postings show an exterme passions for ...
> endless posting of nonsense
> repetitive arguements with others in a better position to comment on a topic
> cheerleading his new math approach to explain why slower is faster
> numerous trite "at a boy/girl" comments to questions other have about improvement
> advice generally guaranteed to decrease performance on the erg
> frequent references to the performance of others that have no basis in fact

None of which have anything to do with erging ...

JimR