Race data: Getting it, recording it and displaying it, etc.

[Alissa]

A discussion of (a) lack of sufficient “race” data, (b) whether the current display of race data is “good enough”, (c) why some race data isn’t getting incorporated into the database, and (I’m proposing) ideas about (d) how that could be made to happen was developing under the “Cheat” thread. Since it is off-topic there, and might be of interest to others, I thought I’d start a separate thread for it here, and quote the relevant posts in the discussion so far…

[quote="chgoss—Apr 12, 2006, 1:33pm (pacific time)""]The only answer is to have C2 have a separate ranking including only race results. When that happens, the credibility of the training times gets vastly diminished, thus discouraging "cheating" (if, in fact, anyone has actually cheated)
It will also serve to encourage more races to be organized..

Emphasis added.

The rankings are already set up this way. When you run a search, under "Source" in the right hand column, specify that you want to see only "Race results", and you'll have exactly what you're looking for. (The other options from the drop down menu are "individually entered results", "RowPro Direct Entry" and the default, "ALL.")

Remember that whatever the source you choose to look at, the result is only going to be from a stated "season".

To see "records" look under World Records, which has its own standards for inclusion and will allow you to looks at records from a particular season or from all seasons listed.

Alissa

I agree that its possible to sort what's posted, but it just isnt the same thing as having a separate list that you have to have been in a race to get on to..

If the "sort" resulted in a list where race results displayed first and the rest afterwards, I might understand (but not necessarily agree) with your concern (I'm not sure what your concern with such a result would be—the only thing that comes to mind, a concern that race results are somehow "contaminated" by having non-race results follow on the same list?). But that's hypothetical, since this isn't what is displayed.

Here, when one specifies "Race results", the resulting list is only race results—I can't see how that "just isn't the same" as a list of race results.

If I've understood correctly, "Race" results can only be entered by the race administrators. Are you proposing that entries be made differently to the database? If so, how? If not, then we're talking about how the race entries are displayed.

Is your objection that others can look at a list that include race results with other source materials (by specifying "ALL" as the source for the combined list they'd like to see)? If so, why is that a problem, if that is what others want to look at? As long as you still have the ability to see only the list that you want to see?

Alissa[/quote]

Here are a four additional responses:

Is your objection that others can look at a list that include race results with other source materials (by specifying "ALL" as the source for the combined list they'd like to see)? If so, why is that a problem, if that is what others want to look at? As long as you still have the ability to see only the list that you want to see?

Alissa

Alissa,
Unfortunately using "Race" results is only relevant for 2k's because there are so few "Race" results available for other distances.

The only solution is to include at least one additional distance at each certified C2 event (particularly BIRC, WIRC & EIRC) and thus increase the number of race times in the data base.

Certified Race World Records could then gradually replace IND_V at other distances.

Chris

And a second:

Chad Williams cheated, that's priceless!!

The only answer is to have C2 have a separate ranking including only race results. When that happens, the credibility of the training times gets vastly diminished, thus discouraging "cheating" (if, in fact, anyone has actually cheated)
It will also serve to encourage more races to be organized..

Emphasis added.

The rankings are already set up this way. When you run a search, under "Source" in the right hand column, specify that you want to see only "Race results", and you'll have exactly what you're looking for. (The other options from the drop down menu are "individually entered results", "RowPro Direct Entry" and the default, "ALL.")

Remember that whatever the source you choose to look at, the result is only going to be from a stated "season".

To see "records" look under World Records, which has its own standards for inclusion and will allow you to looks at records from a particular season or from all seasons listed.

Alissa

although true is this not very sue full ate the moment. Manny events are not included. So this list is not complete. And I would also not call it an separate list. It is just one list everything mixt up. Not clear at all.

A few weeks ago there was official marathon over here in Holland. You will not find the results in the rankings . A pitty I think

A third:

I did a 2K PB at Boston and I assumed that time would be automatically logged somewhere. I know it was not a WR or anything like but I am unclear how you actually get a race time shown on the online logbook. It should be automatic if you have entered a C2 run competition.

And a fourth:

Emphasis added.

The rankings are already set up this way. When you run a search, under "Source" in the right hand column, specify that you want to see only "Race results", and you'll have exactly what you're looking for. (The other options from the drop down menu are "individually entered results", "RowPro Direct Entry" and the default, "ALL.")

Remember that whatever the source you choose to look at, the result is only going to be from a stated "season".

To see "records" look under World Records, which has its own standards for inclusion and will allow you to looks at records from a particular season or from all seasons listed.

Alissa

although true is this not very sue full ate the moment. Manny events are not included. So this list is not complete. And I would also not call it an separate list. It is just one list everything mixt up. Not clear at all.

A few weeks ago there was official marathon over here in Holland. You will not find the results in the rankings . A pitty I think

A separate list isn't going to change the speed at which C2 USA enters race entries in "the list". Nor will it cause there to be more races at distances other than 2k. It also won't do anything about race organizers who don't go through the necessary steps to provide the data for C2 USA.

A new governing body won't do anything about these problems either, unless it has funding. Remember, C2 does this to drum up interest in rowing, which leads to more sales. How many hard-core rowers are going to be buying more ergs if the race results are posted faster? Hard to imagine that it will influence sales to fitness clubs or recreational types.

Bill

which I think is everything from the other thread on this topic...Note that I think I've got the cross-links right, so anyone should be able to look at each of the original posts if they want.

This seemed worth continuing...

Alissa

[edited to put this back--a disasterous edit deleted the initial post]

[Alissa]

Is your objection that others can look at a list that include race results with other source materials (by specifying "ALL" as the source for the combined list they'd like to see)? If so, why is that a problem, if that is what others want to look at? As long as you still have the ability to see only the list that you want to see?

Alissa

Alissa,
Unfortunately using "Race" results is only relevant for 2k's because there are so few "Race" results available for other distances.

The only solution is to include at least one additional distance at each certified C2 event (particularly BIRC, WIRC & EIRC) and thus increase the number of race times in the data base.

Certified Race World Records could then gradually replace IND_V at other distances.

Chris

I don't know what the standards are for having a certified C2 event...but it sounds like a good idea to require an additional distance. I don't know what the logistics are in trying to organize an event, but I assume that adding a distance would be a complication, but how much?

Would the additional distances added tend toward the shorter ones? (so that the ergs would be available for other events?)

To whom would such suggestions need to be made? and who would make such a decision?

When you say "Certified Race World Records could then gradually replace IND_V at other distances" are you suggesting that the standards for the World Records (but not the rankings list) be modified so that to get a world record for other distances, they (like the 2k distance) would need to be in a race? If so, how many races would need to be available before that is a reasonable approach?

Alissa

[johnlvs2run]

Any world records are not really world records when the only place you could do them would be in Boston or Phoenix.

Now if Santa Maria was the only place, I could go for that.

[chgoss]

This is going to sound off, but my idea would be to allow people to post their race times themselves.. All that is needed is to supply a pointer to a posted USIRT sanctioned race result.

That way, we dont require race officials to format results in some compatible form, and the forum polices itself because you have official results to refer to... There is no real argument of a time being valid or not. Results get posted as certified, end of story.

That way, people would pressure race officials to include other distances, and there would also be increased pressure to organize more races. AND it doesnt require any (great deal of ) additional work from C2 or USIRT. And, in theory, race organizers should see bigger attendance.

[Alissa]

Is your objection that others can look at a list that include race results with other source materials (by specifying "ALL" as the source for the combined list they'd like to see)? If so, why is that a problem, if that is what others want to look at? As long as you still have the ability to see only the list that you want to see?

Alissa

Alissa,
Unfortunately using "Race" results is only relevant for 2k's because there are so few "Race" results available for other distances.

The only solution is to include at least one additional distance at each certified C2 event (particularly BIRC, WIRC & EIRC) and thus increase the number of race times in the data base.

Certified Race World Records could then gradually replace IND_V at other distances.

Chris

I don't know what the standards are for having a certified C2 event...but it sounds like a good idea to require an additional distance. I don't know what the logistics are in trying to organize an event, but I assume that adding a distance would be a complication, but how much?

Would the additional distances added tend toward the shorter ones? (so that the ergs would be available for other events?)

To whom would such suggestions need to be made? and who would make such a decision?

When you say "Certified Race World Records could then gradually replace IND_V at other distances" are you suggesting that the standards for the World Records (but not the rankings list) be modified so that to get a world record for other distances, they (like the 2k distance) would need to be in a race? If so, how many races would need to be available before that is a reasonable approach?

Alissa

[Alissa]

Emphasis added.

The rankings are already set up this way. When you run a search, under "Source" in the right hand column, specify that you want to see only "Race results", and you'll have exactly what you're looking for. (The other options from the drop down menu are "individually entered results", "RowPro Direct Entry" and the default, "ALL.")

Remember that whatever the source you choose to look at, the result is only going to be from a stated "season".

To see "records" look under World Records, which has its own standards for inclusion and will allow you to looks at records from a particular season or from all seasons listed.

Alissa

although true is this not very sue full ate the moment. Manny events are not included. So this list is not complete. And I would also not call it an separate list. It is just one list everything mixt up. Not clear at all.

A few weeks ago there was official marathon over here in Holland. You will not find the results in the rankings . A pitty I think

A separate list isn't going to change the speed at which C2 USA enters race entries in "the list". Nor will it cause there to be more races at distances other than 2k. It also won't do anything about race organizers who don't go through the necessary steps to provide the data for C2 USA.

A new governing body won't do anything about these problems either, unless it has funding. Remember, C2 does this to drum up interest in rowing, which leads to more sales. How many hard-core rowers are going to be buying more ergs if the race results are posted faster? Hard to imagine that it will influence sales to fitness clubs or recreational types.

Bill

Henry, here's an image of the Women's 60-69 2000K race results for 2006:
.
I can't think how this list could be any more "separate" than it is. That such lists are missing many data points (for some distances there are no race data points), is apparently quite a problem... And I think Bill is correct that changing the list won't get the data created (more distances at races), provided by race organizers more quickly, or incorporated any more quickly. Here are a couple of ideas (all of which would require cooperation and agreement by at least a couple of constituencies:

1. Require an additional distance be included in each event in order to be certified. BTW, what are the current requirements for getting a race "certified"? This would require the cooperation of event organizers and their agreement that this is a good idea. If it is made too difficult to have a certified event, you might end up with fewer events, not more distances at the events you have--which isn't the result desired.

2. Get the data from race sponsors. Does the venue racing software make this easy? or do they have to fill out forms and send them in for data entry? I don't know what the current process is...or how time consuming/difficult it is. Assuming that the powers that be (PTB) are willing to require it, the only stick I can think of is that next year's event can't be certified until the results of the prior year are in. Again, this "stick" would only get you results within a year...and if too onerous, might result in fewer events instead of more data. Race sponsors would need to sign on for this approach, as well as the PTB that do the race "certifying."

3. Get the data entered, once supplied. In what form is the data supplied to C2? Is it hand-written or typed forms that have to be processed for data entry? If so, that's a fairly time-consuming/expensive process. If it's in excel spreadsheets or another data format that can simply be added to the database, that's another thing (and presumably not so expensive). Does the data have to be verified in some manner? If it's an expense thing, then would C2 be willing to promise to get the data entered within some stated timeframe if the race sponsor paid an additional fee so that they could advertise that they would have a quick-data-posted event (presumably it would need to be enough, for example, that C2 could hire a temp or whatever to get the data in promptly--instead of leaving it until an employee has sufficient time to do the entry process--whatever that is? Would sponsors think that would make their event more popular (even though they would presumably pass those costs along in entry fees?)? Here, C2, race event sponsors and participants would all need to sign-off on this approach.

4. While I was writing this, chgoss suggested that people be allowed to post their own race results--as race results. Presumably other competitors would be the best monitor of the correctness of such posts. This is really an elegant solution...although an individually entered race time (ID'ing the race & date) should be ID'd as individually entered so that it can be scrutinized by others. And those others will be encouraged to enter theirs if the venue/C2 don't get it done!

Lots of questions!

Alissa

[chgoss]

I think the key value of having a separate race ranking is due to basic human nature.. We want our names at the top of the list, what ever that list is. If we put all 3 types of times into one list, it doesnt really matter that it can be sorted to provide a particular view...
I bet >90% of the people that view the ranking, know that it can be sorted, but view with "all" anyway.. They want to see who's the fastest..

Having a separate "race only" ranking is going to push people to participate in races, to get their times posted, basic human nature, we want our names at the top. If organizers include other distances, they will get better attendance. You would also see additional races getting scheduled as people start asking for them.

It's the "pull" model.. Provide the carrot (the race only ranking), and let the rabbits (us) run after it. It doesnt require an additional expenditure of $ from C2 or USIRT, policies itself, provides additional revenue for organizers and manufacturers (hopefully), and more fun for us!


As far as the race result, I would have a USIRT official physically sign the results (whatever form they are in), take a digital picture of them, and post the picture. No arguments, no data format requirements, make it easy and foolproof.

[dadams]

Just a quick note on getting events sanctioned.

I'm in the process of getting approval from C2 to have the Arizona Indoor Rowing Championships become a sanctioned event. The criteria that I was given were the following:

- The event must have been held for at least five consecutive years (they want to see consistancy).
- The event must show growth (increased participation) over the first five years.

After these two criteria are met, then the event organizer would submit a request to C2 for approval of it becoming a sanctioned event.

So it's really not all that hard to have an event become sanctioned. You just need a little patients.

Dwayne

[chgoss]

[showing my ignorance here..]

Who/what are "USIRT Officials"? How does one get in touch with them to see if they will show up and certify race results?

[cbrock]

[quote="Alissa[/quote]
..
When you say "Certified Race World Records could then gradually replace IND_V at other distances" are you suggesting that the standards for the World Records (but not the rankings list) be modified so that to get a world record for other distances, they (like the 2k distance) would need to be in a race? If so, how many races would need to be available before that is a reasonable approach?

Alissa[/quote]

Alissa,
Congratulations on creating a seperate thread for this and for putting so much time into getting a sensible discussion started.

Race Listing
If each Race Organiser is obliged to list his race results on the WEB then
surely individuals should be responsible for entering their own race times.
It would be very easy to quote the race and date in support of that time. All C2 would need to do would be to modify their existing format to allow that information to be shown next to the listing of the individuals time.

Additional races
If we want to generate more interest from overseas competitors then I still believe that the major races (WIRC, EIRC, BIRC) should provide another distance (10K seems the logical choice)
These races should be the final race of the meet and limited by the number of competitors (say 50). If C2 provided some incentive for a new world record, it would encourage the top athletes to compete and some of the better distance athletes who are not as strong on the 2k.

World Records
If sufficient races are recorded then standards for the World Records (but not the rankings list) will eventually be modified for some of the other distances. These will most likely be the 5k, 6k or 10k dependant on which if any of these are included at future events.

Regards,
Chris

[Rockin Roland]

Whether the rankings consist of all venue race data or individual entries it makes no difference. It will never be an absolute list of C2 erg times.

There are so many people out there that row good times on C2 ergs that don't bother to rank their times. All the major on water rowing clubs in the world conduct time trials frequently for their elite rowers. Many of them row world class times but very few are recorded in the C2 rankings. C2 wouldn't even know most of those times rowed.

For example; there is a lightweight open category female down at our rowing club consistantly rowing under 7:08 on the erg. That's enough to get her a medal in the C2 world champs (Crash Bs). I've told her that several times but she couldn't give a stuff about ranking her times nor does she care for getting the free trip to Boston. She just wants to succeed on the water.

Then there are all the rowers from non-english speaking countries, Europe in particular, rowing fast erg times that aren't in the rankings (some of them in local erg races). Many of them don't get recorded in the rankings due to language barriers. Plus the Poms have their own rankings and some don't bother to list on the US site so there is NO WAY that the rankings for times can be ABSOLUTE.