Big change at top of nonathlon

[Cyclingman1]

Anyone keeping up with the C2 rankings in the 60+, HWt div, already knows that one person dominates that age as no one does in any other group. Of course, that person is TJ Oesterling of Hawaii.

Now, with only three weeks left in the Nonathlon 2013 season, he has posted all of his times in one fell swoop. He has shot to the lead by 200 points with his lowest scoring being 1030 pts for 5K, the highest being 1101 for the FM. Obviously, he will win the competition, hands down.

I suppose the posting could or does engender some reaction. First, why post now? Everyone usually posts their times at the time of doing it. It is a competition of sorts. Let others see what you are doing. Give others a chance to shoot for your marks. Secondly, once committed to posting, why the absence of any personal info: pic, statement, etc. Obviously, there would be interest in anyone shooting to the top overnight. It is a COMMUNITY of rowers. You might as well fully join.

And then there is the, perhaps, petty reaction. TJ is is a large, physically superior, ex-professional athlete who has many years of experience of rowing in the waters of Hawaii, who seems to have escaped the duress and limitations of chronic physical conditions. There are probably very few individuals who can even come close to matching his background. NO one is at fault here; these are just facts. It is not exactly a level playing field. The person, who is land-locked, not an ex-athlete, who has ramped up on a indoor rower over a couple of years and managed to achieve in the neighborhood of 8500-9000 pts in nonathlon or the equivalent might feel a bit swamped in TJ's wake as he rushes past. How would that person be doing if he or she had the same opportunities of a TJ?

Regardless of any such reactions, the accomplishments of TJ are pretty amazing. He does deserve a lot of credit.

Any thoughts on any of this?

[hjs]

It is what it is, he has done the rows, the more people would enter the better.
Everybody knows he does those rows. How and even if he enters them is his bussines.
I do think though that it very difficult to get a honoust point system. Now even a new overall Wr in the 2k would not score among the highest scores. To me that is a flaw, 1000 points should be the max, never higher. Now the 20/40 yesrs old never could reach the top, nomatter how fast.

But, it still is nice that it excists, but its a thing for seniors mostly.,

[djh]

Regarding "its a thing for seniors mostly":

I didn't agree until I looked at the top ten listings. Why is that? Is there some bias in the data?

It should be as "easy" for one age group to dominate as any other.

Don't look me up in nonathlon, to avoid my embarrassment. Still looking to "sharpen" (gag! gag!) my scores before year-end.

[PaulH]

The person, who is land-locked, not an ex-athlete, who has ramped up on a indoor rower over a couple of years and managed to achieve in the neighborhood of 8500-9000 pts in nonathlon or the equivalent might feel a bit swamped in TJ's wake as he rushes past.

I hope that our hypothetical person would feel justly proud in their achievements, and recognize that TJ is the sort of weirdo who gets to the top in their chosen sport

hjs - what do you think the criteria for that 1,000 points should be? I think it needs to be smoothed to cope with oddities in the data. For example, the best times recorded for HWT Women 30-32 are 6:43.2, 6:32.3, and 6:56.4 respectively. If we take those as the targets for each age, clearly the 31 year old has a much tougher target. But there's nothing inherent in 31 year old women that means we should expect them to be faster than 30 and 32 year olds. The downside of that smoothing is that some people will be able to score more than 1,000 points, just as some who set a new world record will get less than 1,000.

djh - There is a bias, of sorts. The target scores are determined based on the best recorded times for each age, weight and gender. Because there are 100 22 year olds contesting the 2k for every 80 year old (not real numbers, but you get the idea), on average the best time for 22 year olds will be much closer to a theoretical maximum than for 80 year olds. Hence a good score is tougher for the young than the old, and similarly for men than women, and HWTs than LWTs. The good news is that over time that difference should even out, if gradually, because it's easier for the easier times to be improved upon!

[hjs]

Paul, for me the criteria should be the Wr for a given distance. (Thinking a bit out loud here)
Say if the wr for a 30 year old is 6.00, and for a 31 year old 6.05 and again for a 32 year old 6.00, the 6.05 should not be 1000 points. For them it should also be 6.00.
Maybe it is already that way, looking at the 2k for man, between say 20 and 40 it should be roughly a flat line not much above the 6.36.
If we plot the best times ever done, the 1000 points line should lay on top of the most outstanding times.

I now see people scoring very high who are not even on top of there game due to injurees. In the higher age groups points are to easy to gain. Evening out those 1000 plus scores could correct that somewhat.

By the way its not that I don,t think its a nice tool, but the lack of younger people even bodering to enter must at least partly come from the current scoring method.

My idea is just a rough idea, but makes certainly some sence

[Cyclingman1]

Creating an age-neutral, weight-neutral rowing competition is a daunting task. The nonathlon setup comes pretty close. It is based on actual performances that are smoothed so that no one performance skews the standard. I would have to say that nonathlon is a definite success story.

Regarding the change at the top of nonathlon. TJ Oesterling has decided to, at least for now, take his name out of the nonathlon rankings. I'm not sure if that is the right thing to do. But it seems to corroborate his reluctance to really be involved. It seems like the participation of the best age-weighted rower on the planet should somehow be a more positive development. Now it has an out-of-whack feel to it.

[Ralph Earle]

Re: New World Best 6K, 60-69

by Cyclingman1 » November 20th, 2012, 1:16 am

Why hide the obvious. At this point in time Oesterling is the best indoor rower in the world taking into account age. Not posting is a misrepresentation of that reality. He represents the possible. He shows what big, fit, strong athletes can do on an indoor rower. I suspect that there are other Oesterling-type rowers out there who will be motivated by his times. For the most part, I don't think that indoor rowing attracts the best athletes. Pe0ple like Oesterling can change that. He should be encouraged to post his times. It is hard not to admire his kind of performance and excellence. The fact that he has no competition is not his fault. So, please, post your times. [Emphasis added].

Nonathlon Ranking 2013 as of ~21:30 GMT 09APR13:

Pos Name Total Stats 500 1k 2k 5k 6k 10k 30 60 HM M +
1 rowan 9345 F 65 H 979 998 1004 1011 1015 1033 1022 1015 1033 1114 100
2 steve roeddelwt 9203 M 58 L 1021 1016 1001 1000 1002 1016 1005 1011 1030 1001 100
3 cyclingman 9170 M 66 H 959 1014 1017 1031 1035 1026 1018 1022 1048 0 0

Happy now, Cyclingman1?

[Cyclingman1]

Ralph,

I knew that was coming when I wrote the first word in this topic. I went back and read all of my previous posts on the the TJ matter including the one you quote before I started the topic. I'm still in agreement with the quote. However, I also don't want to take back anything written here despite quite a bit of vagueness. Without repeating myself, somehow things don't feel quite right. Where is the personal aspect. the feel of wanting to participate? Why sneak in at the last minute? Etc? Etc?

[PaulH]

hjs - Where do you think the break points should be? To continue your example, if the time for 33 is 6:10, 34 is 6:15, 35 is 6:10, at what point does the target stop being 6:00? Are you using a standard of 'this age or older'? And if so when does that switch to being 'this age or younger'?

Don't worry, I'm not offended by any suggestions - I think the method I use is pretty good while still being understandable, but if there's a better way of doing it I'm all for it!

[hjs]

hjs - Where do you think the break points should be? To continue your example, if the time for 33 is 6:10, 34 is 6:15, 35 is 6:10, at what point does the target stop being 6:00? Are you using a standard of 'this age or older'? And if so when does that switch to being 'this age or younger'?

Don't worry, I'm not offended by any suggestions - I think the method I use is pretty good while still being understandable, but if there's a better way of doing it I'm all for it!

It should never stop, beyond say 25, if someone older pulles a time, say a 50 years old pulles 6.00, everybody between 25 and 50 should be able to reach that 6.00
And below look at the best times actually pulled, the jr wr is pretty sharp 5.47 18 years, so beyond that 5,47 is the min for 1000 points. And that should be untill roughly early / mid 40 ies, and ofcourse faster and below 5.40 for age 23/36 ish

The fact oesterling pulled out his times is a bad thing, I think even if he not enters those times himself they should be involved. After all, they are done.

[PaulH]

Why "say 25"? Looking at the stats just for HWT, the lowest 2k time is for a 34 year old, but the fastest 10k was a 29 year old, the fastest 500m at 38, and for marathons it's 32. Those figures vary for LWTs and for women, and in different proportions. Should there be a different inflection point for every event/weight/gender, or just for each weight/gender, or just one inflection point to rule them all?

One of my guiding principles was to limit the arbitrary decisions I had to make. I can't eliminate them entirely - for example the oldest person's time I included in calculations is 86, though there isn't a objective reason why it's not 85 or 87 - but I can't find a way to define the inflection points that doesn't rest on a lot more arbitrariness. Actually that's not quite true - somebody did suggest a method once that required a pretty advanced math package, and while it was probably more statistically sound it was sufficiently opaque to me that I wouldn't be able to explain or justify it to competitors.

I do think it's a shame that TJ has withdrawn, and if you want to pass that on to him you're very welcome to (though I do think it's more fun if he enters the times as he goes along!) But his influence will still be felt, as his awesome times from this year will make next year's targets for our more mature competitors that bit harder.

[Cyclingman1]

Paul, I for one think you have done an excellent job in constructing an age-weighted system. I don't think there are any real reasons why a 25 yr old could not be atop the standings. Younger poeple just don't have the interest in age-weighted competitions.

Look, all, I knew that I would set off unhappiness if I talked about TJ's postings. I tried to explain why it feels odd to me. However, even though I feel that way, I would still like to see his times posted. For me, there would a little invisible asterik by his name. While his talent is immense, he also has a very fortunate background that virtually no one can match. What kind of times would anyone have after rowing extremely long distances for 15-20 years in the waters off of Hawaii. Course, we'll never know, because none of us have had that opportunity. Still it is amazing what one can do with that kind of talent and experience. Again, I'm not faulting anyone; just stating realities.

I would like TJ to be more forthcoming; say who you are; post a picture; etc. Please, don't just sneak in at the last minute. That is an "in your face" move. Having said that, I'm actually not convinced that TJ himself even entered the times. I suspect that a surrogate did so. If so, not sure he/she was doing TJ a great favor because all that was not done as a part of posting times.

[PaulH]

I do understand your reservations (though I don't agree with all of them) - I've been involved in a few vaguely competitive things where there's a sudden entry from someone with outstanding talent (or depending on the event, perhaps a lot of spare time) and it does tend to take some of the fun out of things. And that's from someone who's never close to challenging for the leadership! I suspect it's a little more 'personal' for someone who is in your position - though I don't for a second think what you're saying is a case of sour grapes - than for me, as being bumped from 220th to 221st is pretty painless

Interesting idea that someone had 'ghosted' his entry - it's certainly not something we protect against.

[Cyclingman1]

I suspect it's a little more 'personal' for someone who is in your position - though I don't for a second think what you're saying is a case of sour grapes - than for me, as being bumped from 220th to 221st is pretty painless

Paul,

You're right, it is NOT sour grapes. It is as you say, "reservations." Just be like every one else in postings and revealing any other info. One wonders what swooping in at the last minute with a ridiculously high score is trying to convey. I can admire the score but not be enthused about it, if that makes any sense. I've gone back and forth with another person in the nonathlon standings this year who is now ahead of me, who is also a world record holder in some events, but I don't have any negative feelings.

[hjs]

Why "say 25"? Looking at the stats just for HWT, the lowest 2k time is for a 34 year old, but the fastest 10k was a 29 year old, the fastest 500m at 38, and for marathons it's 32. Those figures vary for LWTs and for women, and in different proportions. Should there be a different inflection point for every event/weight/gender, or just for each weight/gender, or just one inflection point to rule them all?

One of my guiding principles was to limit the arbitrary decisions I had to make. I can't eliminate them entirely - for example the oldest person's time I included in calculations is 86, though there isn't a objective reason why it's not 85 or 87 - but I can't find a way to define the inflection points that doesn't rest on a lot more arbitrariness. Actually that's not quite true - somebody did suggest a method once that required a pretty advanced math package, and while it was probably more statistically sound it was sufficiently opaque to me that I wouldn't be able to explain or justify it to competitors.

I do think it's a shame that TJ has withdrawn, and if you want to pass that on to him you're very welcome to (though I do think it's more fun if he enters the times as he goes along!) But his influence will still be felt, as his awesome times from this year will make next year's targets for our more mature competitors that bit harder.

Between roughly early 20 and late 30 we are at our best, I think everybody should be compared to the wr in their class. I think one curveline should apply for all, that would eliminate rare results.