New 2007 NASGA Rankings ideas

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

   Kurt (and all) - I'm anxious to see how the consistency approach works.  Similar to Ryan, I look at averages and use that as a mark to beat at every games (it gets really tough, but is usually more realistic than expecting to PR at every games).
My personal opinion is that the decathalton per game system SHOULD be the ranking system.  This takes away the potential of light implements and specific field conditions from blowing the current ranking system out of proportion... how many times do we see a 135' hammer throw or a 55' stone toss show up, and then see the same guy hit 125 and 48 every game after that.  This happens in the all the events (unfortunately).  On caber, I really don't have comment beyond the need to have it decathalon as well (option 2 was fine).  
The current system does have flaws (in my mind) and I recall saying the same comment in Portland several years ago... the bonus points for caber tweak the scale towards guys that throw the caber well.  An athlete could get 11:55 at every comp and never get a caber point bonus... BUT, in a decathalon scoring, this is equaled out and the 12:00 toss whether it's a 1st place or 5th place, is considered the same... great idea - in the distance, if two guys throw 45 feet in the 56, we don't award bonus points for one over the other.
The system that is, and has been in place is great as a tool and has gotten a lot of mileage.  The level of athlete has risen to fill in the gaps that used to be there in various events.  The result is there is always a 'pack' of athletes around the same general marks or scores and this pack usually stretches from #5 to #11 (I think the current pack is #6 to #10 where 100 points makes all the difference).
My two cents - add the ranking system that shows decathalon... and let's see how it goes... is this the same system that was mentioned a few months ago as the "World Ranking System"?
Dave

Author	Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic
dave brown Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Add to Buddy List Senior Member Top 10 in the USA - �02-�07 Joined: 8/30/04 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 170	Post Options Post Reply Quote dave brown Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 2/07/07 at 3:52am
	Kurt (and all) - I'm anxious to see how the consistency approach works. Similar to Ryan, I look at averages and use that as a mark to beat at every games (it gets really tough, but is usually more realistic than expecting to PR at every games). My personal opinion is that the decathalton per game system SHOULD be the ranking system. This takes away the potential of light implements and specific field conditions from blowing the current ranking system out of proportion... how many times do we see a 135' hammer throw or a 55' stone toss show up, and then see the same guy hit 125 and 48 every game after that. This happens in the all the events (unfortunately). On caber, I really don't have comment beyond the need to have it decathalon as well (option 2 was fine). The current system does have flaws (in my mind) and I recall saying the same comment in Portland several years ago... the bonus points for caber tweak the scale towards guys that throw the caber well. An athlete could get 11:55 at every comp and never get a caber point bonus... BUT, in a decathalon scoring, this is equaled out and the 12:00 toss whether it's a 1st place or 5th place, is considered the same... great idea - in the distance, if two guys throw 45 feet in the 56, we don't award bonus points for one over the other. The system that is, and has been in place is great as a tool and has gotten a lot of mileage. The level of athlete has risen to fill in the gaps that used to be there in various events. The result is there is always a 'pack' of athletes around the same general marks or scores and this pack usually stretches from #5 to #11 (I think the current pack is #6 to #10 where 100 points makes all the difference). My two cents - add the ranking system that shows decathalon... and let's see how it goes... is this the same system that was mentioned a few months ago as the "World Ranking System"? Dave

Ryan Vierra Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Visit Members Homepage Add to Buddy List Senior Member World Champ - ’96, ’97, ’98, ’05, ’06 Joined: 8/30/04 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 700	Post Options Post Reply Quote Ryan Vierra Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 2/07/07 at 5:31am
	Kurt, I think we should look into the possibilities of adopting the best system that shows the most consistent athletes...like someone said on here before, we probably wont see much shuffling in the current athletes, but it will keep things more honest and legitimate. Can you send me an example of what the World Rankings would look like with this averaging system in place? I like to entertain the idea that we can implement a �Better� system that can ensure that we have the best athletes on the field for the major Championship events. If change is necessary, then I am for change. Thanks
	Highland Games Training Visit: www.IHGFTV.com My email: ryanvierra@worldheavyevents.com

The Jayster Members Profile Send Private Message Find Members Posts Visit Members Homepage Add to Buddy List Postaholic Joined: 10/29/04 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1115	Post Options Post Reply Quote The Jayster Report Post Thanks(0) Quote Reply Posted: 2/07/07 at 4:56pm
	DECATHALON SCORING, MAYBE THERE IS A PLACE FOR IT IN HIGHLAND GAMES.