Discussion: O-scores view of the WIOL Champs

Speed Chart

and Analysis List (Flip View: List/Table drop down)

Age classes might be screwed up as I have no idea what actual age of the runner is.
Enjoy
P.S. Previous years are here

The "WIOL Champs" is a single annual event. These analyses cover entire WIOL seasons (including the Championships),

What is the logic for including or not including a number in the "Place" column?

The "WIOL Champs" is a single annual event.
Should I change it to WIOL Series results?

What is the logic for including or not including a number in the "Place" column?

At this page and overall through the Database, place is given to those who are "qualified" = "4 or more events of chosen kind", unless otherwise mentioned. F.e. BAOC Sprint is qualified with 5 events or 4 + Course setter award.
This is done with intention to be similar with USOF standards and provide more or less reliable rankings.
Flipping "Qual ranking" allows to show only those who qualified.
P.S. In the Ranking Score column after each unqualified score there is a number in () showing how the person would rank if everybody were qualified.

Should I change it to WIOL Series results?

I suggest "WIOL Champs" --> "WIOL Events"

Since WIOL is primarily interscholastic competition, plus public courses, perhaps there should be a filter for students, i.e. people who run at least one WIOL course.

In most cases the columns are too narrow to read the Ranking Score / overall place.

> people who run at least one WIOL course.
There are no empty lines there, so this requirement is satisfied...

In most cases the columns are too narrow to read the Ranking Score / overall place.

Let me guess: you are using Internet Explorer and didn't upgrade to IE8 ?

I'm sorry, I don't know how to fix column widths, everything is OK under Firefox (any) and IE8

The public courses are not really WIOL courses, so there are many non-students in the mix.

I am using IE8.

Perhaps "COC Winter O' Series" would be a more appropriate name. Especially since that's what it's been called in the past.

The public courses are not really WIOL courses, so there are many non-students in the mix.

Excluding non-student on the "registration" basis is not possible by design... I insist on counting all people running same course being treated equally.

Separation would be possible on the age basis. It is possible now with side-note that I do not know ages and had to guesstimate it for those who shows some age class now.

"COC Winter O' Series" only applies to the public courses -- and maybe only the top two.

What are the color / number course equivalencies you are using?

There is no need to use a registration basis to filter students. The student/WIOL and public courses are always reported separately. In fact, on the COC website, the WIOL participant on WIOL courses results are not reported at all. They are only reported on the WIOL website.

1- white :through: 6 red
I grab the data from WinSplits and join the actual courses not as they reported but per actual course. This, I repeat, must be done by the concept of the method. I don't want to replicate the results which are on the web page already, I want to predict and evaluate relative "o-speed" of the runners and relative GV of the courses.

F.e. you see (from GV) that recent event (#2) red was as difficult(gnarly) as green while at previous event red was ~20% gnarlier

Also, your (GuyO) expected time would be 2300/78 ~ 30 minutes on each of them. Which would make you winner on Green and ~4th on Red
And If you run along Mike Heath (arbitrary course), you will probably be behind by couple of seconds, at least in COC settings, where he is good.

Enjoy.

I appreciate the rankings... but I find the points system a little confusing. They are similar to the USOF ones, but a little different. Do you take course length relative to time into play, or just course difficulty (e.g. brown, red)?

Hi Devon. Glad to be helpful, local clubs and Champs are my main target group as they have no way to compare themselves to the "Big guys" otherwise.

Difference in value with USOF points is because USOF normalizes each color so that top runner has ~100 points, and 100 blue point are not the same as 100 Brown points.

The points of the O-scores database are "absolute" OR "color-blind" along the database. This means your 70 points on Brown can be compared with other 70 point on Blue, Red or White.
To get absolute value, I normalize points to AVERAGE RUNNER = 50. So runner with score 150 is 3 times faster than average runner in the database. Runners with score 70 is 40% faster than average.

Points, similar to the USOF point are proportional to your "O-speed" - combination of navigational and running abilities.

> Also, what are the "Power" Rankings, (Estim), and the ??, ! marks?

Power is simple average of all your scores during last year. If you compare your current score with your power you can derive whether you are better of worse than yourself on average. This number need to be treated carefully. It is not measure of your performance (like there is no average patient temperature over the hospital), but rather reference point only. F.e. some people perform constantly above "power" while running Sprints and below "power" while running longs and ultra-longs

Score - is GV of the race divided by your time in minutes.
Ranking score is average of your best 4 scores + tail ( same as USOF)

Estim = Estimated time - is GV divided by "power" and again need to be treated only for reference. if you were performing very stable this would be your finish time if you did better or worse - here is the price of your mistakes.

I find this number entertaining. It happens sometime that you run and make a lot of mistakes and come to the finish very disappointed. After race analysis shows most of the runners did mistakes and you end up being sometime even above the average. So the answer would be not in blaming yourself, but say :"test was tough, everybody failed and I was the not so bad relatively" - in a way this is similar to "grading on a curve" in the college.

:))

(!), (!!) and (?), (??) help you in making such lame excuses as described above.

(!) means your score in current race is 7.5%+ better than your power (or your finish time is 7.5% faster than estimated, which is the same)

(!!) doubles the effect to 15%
?,?? has same but negative evaluation.

Enjoy

Thanks for the age corrections, I corrected couple persons you mentioned.

Thanks a bunch for the clarification. This is a really good rankings system, but I don't think you need to take it from me :).

(Deleted 1 old comment to keep information relatively private.)

I suggest "WIOL Champs" --> "WIOL Events".
Perhaps "COC Winter O' Series" would be a more appropriate name. Especially since that's what it's been called in the past.


I made a compromise correction. Enjoy.

Can anybody propose other series to include under menu item SERIES