Nonathlon

Andy Nield · Post by **Andy Nield** » February 1st, 2008, 6:40 am

Appologies for the delay getting the Nonathlon back on line.

We have had to move it to a new site so that it could be re written in PHP, and the domain hosts are being a bit slow setting up forwarding to the new (temporary) server....

All sound too complicated... don't worry... just go to :

http://www.nielda.co.uk/nonathlon

Once the Server Hosts get their arses in gear and sort out domain transfer it will revert back to the usual www.nonathlon.com link (which should have happened 2 days ago).

Please note the site has been completely rewritten, and whilst it should all be working there may be some teething problems, so please don't throw your PC ouyt the window if something doesn't work properly, just drop me an email or post on the forum what the problem is and I'll do my best to get it fixed asap.

Hope you like the changes

ancho · Post by **ancho** » February 1st, 2008, 7:10 am

Looks nice to me, better than the pink one anyway!

How do you calculate the given "targets".
They seem absolutely unreachable to me...

Andy Nield · Post by **Andy Nield** » February 1st, 2008, 9:17 am

They are worked out from the C2 ranking data each year

There's a link on the site 'scoring' that explains it.

Paul is the best one to ask about the scoring. There's been a few discussions on the forum about scoring, so a search on nonathlon scoring might bring up something.

Nosmo · Post by **Nosmo** » February 1st, 2008, 2:44 pm

Andy Nield wrote:They are worked out from the C2 ranking data each year

There's a link on the site 'scoring' that explains it.

Paul is the best one to ask about the scoring. There's been a few discussions on the forum about scoring, so a search on nonathlon scoring might bring up something.

The data in the excel file looks like it is from 2002. Do you add to it each year or are you just using 2002.

Also it looks like some of the times is based on twice the distance. For example the 15 year old heavy weight men at 500m time is calculated as the 1000m time /2. Is this because the 500m time was more then half the 1000m time in that age group?

Andy Nield · Post by **Andy Nield** » February 1st, 2008, 4:38 pm

Yes the data shown is from 2002, but each year is calculated on the current data.

Not sure about the specifics, hopefully Paul will be along to answer the 1000/500 question. May have been a gap in the data, maybe it just turned out that way...

Nosmo · Post by **Nosmo** » February 1st, 2008, 5:09 pm

Andy Nield wrote:Yes the data shown is from 2002, but each year is calculated on the current data.

Not sure about the specifics, hopefully Paul will be along to answer the 1000/500 question. May have been a gap in the data, maybe it just turned out that way...

By "current data" I assume you mean the fastest ever not just the fastest from the current year.

There are blank fields for the very young and very old. The 46 LM has the 5K and 6K calculated from 30 minutes.

PaulH · Post by **PaulH** » February 2nd, 2008, 3:50 am

Hi All,

The spreadsheets show 2002, but we do use more up to date data (updating the spreadsheets is one of those tasks that keeps slipping down the list!)

One of the rules I use for an event is that a value can only be filled in if someone of that age has rowed that distance. If they haven't, it stays blank.

If someone has rowed, say, the 1k, but half of the record 2k time for that age would be faster then I use that as the faster time, and highlight it in orange to show it's not 'real'.

I also limit the lower and upper age limits that I use to calculate the curve; I note for each age how many of the ten events have been completed. The range of ages I use must then start with a complete 10, end with a complete 10, and never drop below 8 completed (it may be 7 - the spreadsheet shows me so I don't remember). That typically gives me a range of 15-70s, though it's bigger for heavy men and smaller for light women.

The current Nonathlon is running on slightly old data, but now we have the new one it's much easier for me to update it, so in the next few days it should be (almost) up to date.

Please ask any more questions!

Cheers, Paul

ckaiserca · Post by **ckaiserca** » February 4th, 2008, 4:22 pm

A 6:01.1 Target for 2000 meters for Men's Heavyweight 40-49? Come on! That's just not going to be possible.

PaulH · Post by **PaulH** » February 4th, 2008, 4:38 pm

Here are the record times for HW Men 40-49 from my spreadsheet (which is a little out of date, but I'm almost done!)

40 - 5:47.1
41 - 5:46.2
42 - 6:02.5
43 - 6:01.9
44 - 6:07.7
45 - 6:03.0
46 - 6:11.0
47 - 6:14.9
48 - 6:10.9
49 - 6:12.9

The Nonathlon doesn't measure against any specific value there, as it uses a curve drawn through all values, and a 40 year old is very unlikely to have the same target as a 49 year old, but it does show that the target you mention is hard, but not impossible.