Does anyone monitor the data in the concept 2 rankings? Does anyone correct errors?
I found that the average time for a 6000 M in the Mens 50-59 HWT section is anomalously high. The final entry is someone reporting a 6000M row in 32 hours! Ok, I would believe 32 min, but 32 hours is just not possible. It throws off the average time calculated by many minutes.
I would appreciate it if some official fixed the number. Is there someone I could contact, or do they watch this forum?
Thank you!
Bad data in rankings
Bad data in rankings
1 min: 302 M; 500M 1:40.9; 1K 3:42.0; 2K 7:51.6; 5K 20:46; 10K 42:45.6; 30 min: 7147M
Scott
59 Yrs, 5' 7" / 177 lbs (170 cm/80 kg)
Scott
59 Yrs, 5' 7" / 177 lbs (170 cm/80 kg)
-
lindsayh
- Half Marathon Poster
- Posts: 3640
- Joined: June 23rd, 2013, 3:32 am
- Location: Sydney, Australia
Re: Bad data in rankings
they may monitor but best to contact Concept2 directly as they are responsible for maintaining the rankings
Lindsay
73yo 93kg
Sydney Australia
Forum Flyer
PBs (65y+) 1 min 349m, 500m 1:29.8, 1k 3:11.7 2k 6:47.4, 5km 18:07.9, 30' 7928m, 10k 37:57.2, 60' 15368m
73yo 93kg
Sydney Australia
Forum Flyer
PBs (65y+) 1 min 349m, 500m 1:29.8, 1k 3:11.7 2k 6:47.4, 5km 18:07.9, 30' 7928m, 10k 37:57.2, 60' 15368m
-
johnlvs2run
- Half Marathon Poster
- Posts: 4012
- Joined: March 16th, 2006, 1:13 pm
- Location: California Central Coast
- Contact:
Re: Bad data in rankings
Send an email to ranking@concept2.com.
bikeerg 75 5'8" 155# - 18.5 - 51.9 - 568 - 1:52.7 - 8:03.8 - 20:13.1 - 14620 - 40:58.7 - 28855 - 1:23:48.0
rowerg 56-58 5'8.5" 143# - 1:39.6 - 3:35.6 - 7:24.0 - 18:57.4 - 22:49.9 - 7793 - 38:44.7 - 1:22:48.9 - 2:58:46.2
rowerg 56-58 5'8.5" 143# - 1:39.6 - 3:35.6 - 7:24.0 - 18:57.4 - 22:49.9 - 7793 - 38:44.7 - 1:22:48.9 - 2:58:46.2
-
Allan Olesen
- 5k Poster
- Posts: 548
- Joined: April 27th, 2018, 6:40 am
Re: Bad data in rankings
Why even bother looking at the average?
I look at the median and the percentiles. They are much less sensitive to such problems.
I look at the median and the percentiles. They are much less sensitive to such problems.
Re: Bad data in rankings
32 hour average time for 6k. What is wrong with that? 
I was feeling pretty good about my 6k time until this series of postings.
I was feeling pretty good about my 6k time until this series of postings.
Louie
-
Carl Watts
- Marathon Poster
- Posts: 4704
- Joined: January 8th, 2010, 4:35 pm
- Location: NEW ZEALAND
Re: Bad data in rankings
I don't look at it these days but it used to be okay and now you can filter the verified results only its way better.
The problems in the rankings are nothing compared to the problems in the challenges, the failure to move to verified rows or at least have a separate series of results for those that want all their rows verified makes it a crapshoot and not worth entering.
The problems in the rankings are nothing compared to the problems in the challenges, the failure to move to verified rows or at least have a separate series of results for those that want all their rows verified makes it a crapshoot and not worth entering.
Carl Watts.
Age:56 Weight: 108kg Height:183cm
Concept 2 Monitor Service Technician & indoor rower.
http://log.concept2.com/profile/863525/log
Age:56 Weight: 108kg Height:183cm
Concept 2 Monitor Service Technician & indoor rower.
http://log.concept2.com/profile/863525/log
Re: Bad data in rankings
Thank you for the suggestion. They fixed it.
1 min: 302 M; 500M 1:40.9; 1K 3:42.0; 2K 7:51.6; 5K 20:46; 10K 42:45.6; 30 min: 7147M
Scott
59 Yrs, 5' 7" / 177 lbs (170 cm/80 kg)
Scott
59 Yrs, 5' 7" / 177 lbs (170 cm/80 kg)