Compare rankings

[sjors]

Just corrected a bug, where the Slides and the Dynamic rower got swapped.

[sjors]

Thanks to Bjørn Johansen who pointed me out to https://de-maas.nl/correctiefactoren/be ... toren.html (In dutch language only), I think I have found the formulas I need to calculate a age-independend-score.

To clarify
They divide 2 groups of performances: short= < 4km and long > 4 km

Symbols used in formulas:
y= factor to calc max performance
x=age

For Men:
age: 13 -22, short and long:
y = 3,99843E-07*x^6 - 3,89632E-05*x^5 + 0,001508046*x^4 - 0,028884498*x^3 + 0,270552534*x^2 - 0,917594593*x

age: 23 - 26 short and long:
y = 1,000 *

age 27-91 short:
y = 4,67930E-12*x^6 - 1,58674E-09*x^5 + 1,80622E-07*x^4 - 9,14436E-06*x^3 + 1,62205E-04*x^2 - 5,95983E-04*x + 1

age 27-91 long:
y = 3,70323E-13*x^6 - 3,00914E-10*x^5 + 3,20403E-08*x^4 - 1,03748E-06*x^3 - 3,50846E-05*x^2 + 1,11544E-03*x + 1

For Women:
y = 0,9 * factor for men.

[MudSweatAndYears]

Thanks Dino.
I have taken noticed of how Nonathlon works. I assume they calculate with watts as well. And maybe also therefore as faster you get the more each second increases your points???
The problem I am/was? trying to overcome is the fact that when there are relatively less performances in a specific class the higher your score tends to be. It is seldom you see a Heavy weight younger than 60 in the top 10 for years. (Probably some little personal frustration is coming up here. )

The Nonathlon seems to be skewed in favor of females: over the 19 seasons completed, 16 times a female won. So it should not come as a surprise that a specific male category (heavy weight younger than 60) is under-represented.

Also, the scoring mechanics in the Nonathlon is quite complex and therefore less transparant.

Despite its flaws, over a period spanning almost two decades, the Nonathlon continuous to be successful in stimulating C2 users to compete. But a better (fairer and more transparant) handicap system (like you are seeking) would be a big step forward.

[MudSweatAndYears]

Thanks to Bjørn Johansen who pointed me out to https://de-maas.nl/correctiefactoren/be ... toren.html (In dutch language only), I think I have found the formulas I need to calculate a age-independend-score.

To clarify
They divide 2 groups of performances: short= < 4km and long > 4 km

Symbols used in formulas:
y= factor to calc max performance
x=age

For Men:
age: 13 -22, short and long:
y = 3,99843E-07*x^6 - 3,89632E-05*x^5 + 0,001508046*x^4 - 0,028884498*x^3 + 0,270552534*x^2 - 0,917594593*x

age: 23 - 26 short and long:
y = 1,000 *

age 27-91 short:
y = 4,67930E-12*x^6 - 1,58674E-09*x^5 + 1,80622E-07*x^4 - 9,14436E-06*x^3 + 1,62205E-04*x^2 - 5,95983E-04*x + 1

age 27-91 long:
y = 3,70323E-13*x^6 - 3,00914E-10*x^5 + 3,20403E-08*x^4 - 1,03748E-06*x^3 - 3,50846E-05*x^2 + 1,11544E-03*x + 1

For Women:
y = 0,9 * factor for men.

I put these age-handicap correction factors in a spreadsheet and plotted the correction factors as function of age. These I compared with the plot available at the Nonathlon web page. The 'De Maas' correction factors are significantly more conservative compared to the corrections applied in the Nonathlon competition (higher ages receive less compensation). Not sure if the same applies to the correction factor for gender.
What is missing from the 'De Maas' tables and formulas is a rowers weight correction factor.

[hjs]

Thanks to Bjørn Johansen who pointed me out to https://de-maas.nl/correctiefactoren/be ... toren.html (In dutch language only), I think I have found the formulas I need to calculate a age-independend-score.

To clarify
They divide 2 groups of performances: short= < 4km and long > 4 km

Symbols used in formulas:
y= factor to calc max performance
x=age

For Men:
age: 13 -22, short and long:
y = 3,99843E-07*x^6 - 3,89632E-05*x^5 + 0,001508046*x^4 - 0,028884498*x^3 + 0,270552534*x^2 - 0,917594593*x

age: 23 - 26 short and long:
y = 1,000 *

age 27-91 short:
y = 4,67930E-12*x^6 - 1,58674E-09*x^5 + 1,80622E-07*x^4 - 9,14436E-06*x^3 + 1,62205E-04*x^2 - 5,95983E-04*x + 1

age 27-91 long:
y = 3,70323E-13*x^6 - 3,00914E-10*x^5 + 3,20403E-08*x^4 - 1,03748E-06*x^3 - 3,50846E-05*x^2 + 1,11544E-03*x + 1

For Women:
y = 0,9 * factor for men.

I put these age-handicap correction factors in a spreadsheet and plotted the correction factors as function of age. These I compared with the plot available at the Nonathlon web page. The 'De Maas' correction factors are significantly more conservative compared to the corrections applied in the Nonathlon competition (higher ages receive less compensation). Not sure if the same applies to the correction factor for gender.
What is missing from the 'De Maas' tables and formulas is a rowers weight correction factor.

Nonathlon is very much in favor for the oldies, which can’t be right. The olympic skiff champ could not win this competition. Its not for nothing that almost no younger people use this tool.

[MudSweatAndYears]

Some other interesting points you made, made me thinking: I.e. what about making age groups of 5 years. And just compare within that groups without compensating for age. Makes the whole thing very transparent and easy to code.

Your last suggestion I don’t follow. Can you explain a bit more?

Using age groups of 5 years (of more) would work great provided you center these groups around the actual age of the rower. Taking you yourself (57 y, male, heavyweight) as an example: you should be competing against heavyweight males aged 55 - 59. Similarly, a 58 year old lightweight female should compete against 56 - 60 year old lightweight females.

To provide for competition across age, weight and gender categories one could define a ‘gold standard’ time for each category. Your ‘gold standard’ would be defined as the median of the fastest times for 55, 56, 57, 58 and 59 year old male heavyweights.

Perhaps a better alternative would be to compute the percentage of the rowers in your category who you beat. So in your case, if yourself included, 200 heavyweight males aged 55 - 59 compete, and you beat 180 of them (so 19 beat you), your score would be 180/200 = 0.90 or 90%. Note that this scoring algorithm suppresses anomalously high scores for groups with little or no competition: a 107 year old male lightweight who is the single competitor in the age bracket 105 - 109 and therefore competing against nobody, would end up with a score of 0%. Similarly, if there is 1 competitor (2 participants) in a category, the winner would score only 50%.

The score for each rower could be the gold standard time divided by the actual time achieved. (Slightly more refined would be to base the score on the Wattages: watts achieved divided by the watts for the gold standard.)

You will run into the issue of

[MudSweatAndYears]

Some other interesting points you made, made me thinking: I.e. what about making age groups of 5 years. And just compare within that groups without compensating for age. Makes the whole thing very transparent and easy to code.

Using age groups of 5 years (of more) would work great provided you center these groups around the actual age of the rower. Taking you yourself (57 y, male, heavyweight) as an example: you should be competing against heavyweight males aged 55 - 59. Similarly, a 58 year old lightweight female should compete against 56 - 60 year old lightweight females.

To provide for competition across age, weight and gender categories one could define a ‘gold standard’ time for each category. Your ‘gold standard’ would be defined as the median of the fastest times for 55, 56, 57, 58 and 59 year old male heavyweights.

Perhaps a better alternative would be to compute the percentage of the rowers in your category who you beat. So in your case, if yourself included, 200 heavyweight males aged 55 - 59 compete, and you beat 180 of them (so 19 beat you), your score would be 180/200 = 0.90 or 90%. Note that this scoring algorithm suppresses anomalously high scores for groups with little or no competition: a 107 year old male lightweight who is the single competitor in the age bracket 105 - 109 and therefore competing against nobody, would end up with a score of 0%. Similarly, if there is 1 competitor (2 participants) in a category, the winner would score only 50%.

[sjors]

Small update on why it so quiet from my side.
I was extremely busy doing other software-related work.
So the new ideas (which are still evolving) take some more time to get in place.

[bencoolb]

First: This is awesome. Thank you for making this.
For the USA, the concept2 database includes information on which state the person is from. Is it possible to include state as a searchable field in your database, so I could look up how I compare to people in my state?

Thank you,
Ben

[sjors]

First: This is awesome. Thank you for making this.
For the USA, the concept2 database includes information on which state the person is from. Is it possible to include state as a searchable field in your database, so I could look up how I compare to people in my state?

Thank you,
Ben

Hi Ben,
Ik will have a look at it. Thanks for the tip.
Regards Siebe

[sjors]

A small update.
During indexing all rankings that have been deleted/updated on the Concept2-site are now also getting deleted/updated on https://www.rankedworkouts.com/.
No more multiple records per person per distance per machine per season.

[sjors]

And if you are wondering about my other plans..concerning competitions over multiple distances. It's in progress.
But lately some other software-projects kept me from pulling thru. Hopefully I can find enough time before the start of next season.

[faach1]

Hi Siebe,

Fantastic website, I’ve directed it to my friends and not a single one has given any negative feedback to me.

I was looking at the Static Indoor Rower Lightweight Verified times for 1k (both “yes” and “race” separately) and I noticed that Max Röger’s WR of 2:53.4 isn’t listed. Therefore would you add all world (and eventually national records) that have not been ranked through C2 logbook to your fantastic website?

Freddie

[sjors]

Hi Siebe,

Fantastic website, I’ve directed it to my friends and not a single one has given any negative feedback to me.

I was looking at the Static Indoor Rower Lightweight Verified times for 1k (both “yes” and “race” separately) and I noticed that Max Röger’s WR of 2:53.4 isn’t listed. Therefore would you add all world (and eventually national records) that have not been ranked through C2 logbook to your fantastic website?

Freddie

Thanks Freddie, thats great to read.

And about your tip, I wil think about it. The hard part is to do it automatically without getting duplications.(no reference exits to the logbook-workout and only the name is tricky) Maybe it will a manual job, I very much dislike
And if I look at your performances , I suppose you like the extremes. Rower short distances, and SkiErg 100k. I fully understand.

[faach1]

Hi Siebe,

Fantastic website, I’ve directed it to my friends and not a single one has given any negative feedback to me.

I was looking at the Static Indoor Rower Lightweight Verified times for 1k (both “yes” and “race” separately) and I noticed that Max Röger’s WR of 2:53.4 isn’t listed. Therefore would you add all world (and eventually national records) that have not been ranked through C2 logbook to your fantastic website?

Freddie

Thanks Freddie, thats great to read.

And about your tip, I wil think about it. The hard part is to do it automatically without getting duplications.(no reference exits to the logbook-workout and only the name is tricky) Maybe it will a manual job, I very much dislike
And if I look at your performances , I suppose you like the extremes. Rower short distances, and SkiErg 100k. I fully understand.

Bang on there mate. I fully understand that if it is a manual job you will be less likely to do it. I’ll lend you hand if you like.