Database |
Qualifying Standards for MWC Iceland |
Post Reply |
Author | |
K Rogers
Postaholic Joined: 7/27/10 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1256 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: 8/30/16 at 6:45pm |
Hey-
Here's what its looking like to me for using median values for guidance for QS2017; starting with Heavy Hammer, using data from MWC 2001-2016: HH age group - Median distance - QS2016 - notes M40-44 72' 6" 75' - drop to 74' M45-49 71' 4" 70' - no change M50-54 66' 65' - no change M55-59 60' 9" 60' - no change M60-64 57' 5.5" 55' - no change M40<200 65' 6.75" 65' - no change M50<200 60' 11" 60' - no change W40-44 49'3.5" 50' - no change W45-49 51' 5" 45' - no change W50+ 47' 9" 40' - no change W40<200 49' 1" 40' - no change -K
|
|
K Rogers
Postaholic Joined: 7/27/10 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1256 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
and then the Light Hammer:
LH age group - Median distance - QS2016 - notes M40-44 89'3" 90' - no change M45-49 87' 8" 85' - no change M50-54 83' 2" 80 - bump to 81' M55-59 76' 7" 75 - no change M60-64 73' 8.5" 70 - bump to 71' M40<200 85' 10.5" 85 - no change M50<200 78' 8" 75 - bump to 76' W40-44 60' 7.25" 60' - no change W45-49 66' 8" 50' - bump to 55' W50+ 58' 50 - no change W40<155 62' 10.5" 50' - no change -K
|
|
K Rogers
Postaholic Joined: 7/27/10 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1256 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Heavy Weight Throw Qualifying Standards notes:
HWD age group - Median distance - QS2016 - notes M40-44 37' 40' - drop to 39' M45-49 35' 6" 35' - no change M50-54 31' 7" 30' - no change M55-59 28' 6" 28' - no change M60-64 26'5" 26' - no change M40<200 30' 10.5" 30' - no change M50<200 30'11" 30' - no change W40-44 25' 11.5" 25' - no change W45-49 34' 11.5" 25 - bump to 30' W50+ 29' 7.5" 25' - no change W40<155 35' 9" 25' - no change
|
|
K Rogers
Postaholic Joined: 7/27/10 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1256 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Light Weight Throw Qualifying Standards notes:
LWD age group - Median distance - QS2016 - notes M40-44 54' 3" 55 - no change M45-49 52' 7" 50' - no change M50-54 47' 1" 45' - no change M55-59 42' 4" 42' - no change M60-64 39' 38' - no change M40<200 46' 10.5" 45' - no change M50<200 45'3.5" 45' - no change W40-44 47' 3" 47' - no change W45-49 42' 11" 42' - no change W50+ 41' 1" 40' - no change W40<155 54' 1" 40' - no change
|
|
K Rogers
Postaholic Joined: 7/27/10 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1256 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Big Stone Throw Qualifying Standards notes:
BS age group - Median distance - QS2016 - notes M40-44 28' 9" 30' - no change M45-49 28' 3" 28' - no change M50-54 26' 9" 26' - no change M55-59 24' 7" 24' - no change M60-64 23' 22' - no change M40<200 26' 6" 25' - no change M50<200 25' 1.5" 25' - no change W40-44 20' 11" 20' - no change W45-49 20' 7" 20' - no change W50+ 20' 3" 20' - no change W40<155 24' 2" 20' - no change
|
|
K Rogers
Postaholic Joined: 7/27/10 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1256 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Open Stone Throw Qualifying Standards notes:
OS age group - Median distance - QS2016 - notes M40-44 35' 35' - no change M45-49 33' 7" 33' - no change M50-54 32' 31' - no change M55-59 29' 8" 29' - no change M60-64 27' 8" 27 ' - no change M40<200 32' 5" 32' - no change M50<200 30' 6" 30' - no change W40-44 26' 3.5" 24' - no change W45-49 25' 11.25" 24' - no change W50+ 24' 6" 24' - no change W40<155 29' 4" 24' - no change
|
|
grasshopper
Postaholic Joined: 8/29/04 Location: Berwick, Maine Status: Offline Points: 3324 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Hey Kev. Just a question. Looking at the numbers
Why are the M40-44 new Q #'s all at or ABOVE the Median Distance but all of the other age, weight and gender groups are below the median distance? Not that any of this applies to my young supple 38 year old chiseled physique.......
|
|
"Breathe deeply. Refuse to be weak. Refuse to be sick. Refuse to die. Think strong and you will be." -The Mighty Atom (Yoselle Greenstein)
|
|
Sammy68123
Senior Member Joined: 6/15/08 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 735 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
How do the median distances compare to the mean distances in each group? If the distributions are negatively skewed
because a majority of the data points (perhaps a vast majority in some classes) come from repeated performances of world champions, the qualifying distances selected may well end up excluding many who competed at MWC in the past under previous guidelines. How would the distributions look if only the best performance from each repeat competitor was included? Those original guidelines were throwing in at least 5 games in the calendar year preceding MWC; later was changed to be throwing in at least preceding games ever.
|
|
Teresa Merrick
Bellevue, NE |
|
K Rogers
Postaholic Joined: 7/27/10 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1256 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Grasshopper-
It could be neatly explained by Teresa's idea, that repeated performances of world champions in the competition helps to raise the new median over the previous median and QS. The medians should creep upward as competition performances improve and that's what we see in a few situations when looking at this dataset. I could also look at the distributions using only the best performance from each thrower and compare it.
Teresa - Those original guidelines were adequate during the early growing years of the MWC but proved to be very difficult to enforce when the event became larger than your own personal knowledge of the Midwest games and Midwest throwers. The methods to quantify athletic performances from around the world and compare them to our dataset of historical throws and rankings is the new method that we're using and it worked well in the first real test - the competition at MWC Buffalo. Qualifying Standards based on the medians of our historical dataset is a much more dependable process for evaluating an athlete application to participate at the MWC than all previous methods. Its a real quantification of the Masters Athlete population throwing in competitions by age groups and that's a more powerful and trustworthy set of benchmarks than asking for a list of references or names of myriad world games. -K |
|
swollenknuck
Senior Member Joined: 2/20/09 Location: Canada Status: Offline Points: 395 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Kevin a question came up this weekend at the games I was at. Do you have to have exceeded the qualifying marks before the January 1 registration date or if you are close can you register then and hit the marks at a early season games before the competition in Iceland?
|
|
Ray Siochowicz
AD Victoria Highland Games Association www.victoriahighlandgames.com |
|
K Rogers
Postaholic Joined: 7/27/10 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1256 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Ray-
Sorry for the delay. You need to have qualifying performances before you submit an application for the MWC. The performances will be used to rank the athletes in January and the top-ranked will make up the Start List on February 1st. However, we've often used a Standby List in the past to keep track of athletes who don't quite have qualifying performances yet but want to continue to try to qualify in spring training and get lucky enough to find an open spot in their age group. If you want to be considered for the Standby List, we can work something out (put a note on your application) or something but I want to get out of the business of tracking a big standby list and refunding application fees when guys don't make throws. -K
|
|
Bill Boyd
Groupie Joined: 10/13/08 Location: Baconland Status: Offline Points: 52 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
It appears that to qualify if you are a male over the age of 55, the qualifying standards are greater if you are under 200 pounds. I don't see why that is.
|
|
mrbtours
Newbie Joined: 6/05/16 Location: Chattanooga, TN Status: Offline Points: 5 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
When do you expect the location for MWC 2018 to be announced?
I'm new to the games (Aug 2016 was my first games) and qualifying for 2018 is my goal.
|
|
dWood
Postaholic Joined: 8/29/04 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 5110 |
Post Options
Thanks(1)
|
It should be annouced June 23rd,2017 at the 2017 MWC in Iceland(as has been practice in the past)
|
|
JUST BRING IT /
SPEED KILLS..BUT STRENGTH PUNISHES |
|
MrPeanut
Senior Member Joined: 7/04/14 Status: Offline Points: 233 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Wow.
I'm not that far off the 55-59 numbers in a few of the events. Will have to train extra hard this coming year. Maybe by the time i'm 60 I can do one. :) |
|
Even a broken old man can learn to throw a hammer. I ain't dead yet!
|
|
BookThrows
Newbie Joined: 9/13/12 Location: Twin Cities, MN Status: Offline Points: 3 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Actually, the situation is much worse than I thought when I first read this. But then that makes the situation even easier to understand. Take the extreme case: A 64-year-old man weighing 199 pounds. If he wants to compete open, he would have to throw 55' in the heavy hammer. If he wants to compete <200 lbs, he would have to throw 60'. (The biggest discrepancy for men I can see is light weight. 38' vs. 45'. Although women's have even more extreme examples because there is no lightweight >50 division.) So, the question is, why is there such a discrepancy? There appear to be a few answers to this. 1. The most obvious is that there is no lightweight division for 60-64 year olds, so if this person wants to compete lightweight, they would have to be in the >50 division. Obviously, this holds true for someone between 55 and 59, but to a less extreme extent. 2. The standards are based upon a historical, statistical calculation. It's not that the organizers decided to discriminate. They set the standards based upon past results. This thread details how this was done. 3. The older we get, the lower the 'optimum' weight is for throwers. The main reasons for this would appear to me to be obvious. You can see it in the numbers. Using the data from this thread, by my calculations, if you compare M40-44 vs M40 <200, the M40-44 performances are about 10% better. This drops to 5% if you compare M50-54 vs M50 <200. And when you consider that the lightweight division includes people on average 2.5 years older (assuming an even distribution, and none > 59), then the question becomes, is there any difference at all between open and lightweight at this age group? Should there even be a lightweight division at this age group? And if there should be, perhaps the threshold should drop. Instead of 200 lbs, perhaps it should be 150? Here's a thought experiment: Instead of a lightweight division at 60+, perhaps there should be a heavyweight division, where you have to weigh *at least* 200lbs. (I'm not actually suggesting this, it's just an extrapolation of the analysis. I actually favor less divisions, or age and gender-graded calculations. I also think that the current system is just fine.) |
|
Ali.G
Senior Member World Champ - 95 Joined: 8/29/04 Status: Offline Points: 569 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Haha the only way you won't qualify for Iceland is if your nearly totally F@£ked and then you should go and spectate, this is a World Champs by the way not a Sunday school picnic.
|
|
grasshopper
Postaholic Joined: 8/29/04 Location: Berwick, Maine Status: Offline Points: 3324 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Professor Gunn for the Win!
|
|
"Breathe deeply. Refuse to be weak. Refuse to be sick. Refuse to die. Think strong and you will be." -The Mighty Atom (Yoselle Greenstein)
|
|
Post Reply | |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |