maptalk.co.nz Forum   |   Links    

  Forum

Forum Home   Start New Topic   Edit Profile   Register  

1   2   3  

AOA OY Points

Show Profile  Paul I Posted: 26 June 2012, 6:50 PM  
What about an alternative where the maximum points you can score drops for each decending length course.
ie, max points for R1 may be 20pts, R2 15pts, R3 10pts etc. Somewhere there will be a cutoff where a runner would have to feature in the top ??% of the higher course results to get more points than winning a lower chosen course. It may stop the roques from benefiting so much. However I'm not sure how it could work for someone who may try running up to gain more points as they would most likely fall way down the placings... might need a mathematician to figure out the ideal point spread.

Show Profile  Dwayne Posted: 27 June 2012, 4:28 AM  
Hey Paul - you mean just like last year. Maybe we could do that.

Show Profile  Michael Posted: 27 June 2012, 5:22 AM  
The more I read about this Whanau Aora scheme the more I like it. Adds a delicious new strategic element to the competition - which course shall I run, and how fast can I go to just avoid being classed as an outlier. Should I run last so I can see what the other times are? But then my rivals might do the same. Should I form a team to bridge the gap and prevent me being classed as a rogue. The possibilities are endless.

Show Profile  John P Posted: 27 June 2012, 8:42 AM  
You will find all you will want to know about statistical outliers and more on the Wikipedia website. Enjoy the read and test your math skills with one of the formulas for testing the statistical significance of an apparent outlier actually being one.

When I last looked at the OY2 results this morning after an email query I found that they are not what I sent for display. In particular, they have the winners with less points than the second place person. This is not a highlight of the Whanau Ora scheme.

Show Profile  AllanJ Posted: 27 June 2012, 3:20 PM  
As per Wikipedia:"
There is no rigid mathematical definition of what constitutes an outlier; determining whether or not an observation is an outlier is ultimately a subjective exercise."
You've found a reason to conclude that Toby and/or Marquita are not outliers and that's all there is to it. To the 'normal' person they look like outliers.

I agree with Jeff, you weren't open to ideas from the OY discussion group. Thanks for what you are doing this year but let's hope there is something far better next.

Show Profile  pete s Posted: 28 June 2012, 3:35 PM  
Im not sure about outliers, but I've seen a few rogues out there on occasion - Rob Garden is a great example of one. If we take Rob as an example, should he get points deducted every time he displays roguish behavior (typically when he's drunk)? What if he were to run up a course, but still with a bottle of rum in hand, would he get points deducted in that situation. Or what about if her were to run down a course, but without the rum?? It's all a great connununundrum, and all I can say is thank god for people like Jeff who can talk sense!


Show Profile  John P Posted: 2 July 2012, 3:30 AM  
I agree Allan, I should have tested them. I can't recall even looking at them! Slipped up there and will do better next time.

Show Profile  John P Posted: 2 July 2012, 7:49 AM  
It took me some time to put that right so I won't be making that mistake (forgetting to check for outliers) again. Of particular interest is Marquita's outlier as it is in her designated course. In parallel situations where I have met this it has been a data entry error, for example, 19 entered as 91, but this is not the case with Sport Ident. There is no plausible explanation for it being an outlier so even if it is statistically so it is not in fact so and hence, it stands as a bona fide result - a truly outstanding achievement. Toby's result was an outlier for the obvious reason and hence it was deleted from the data set to calculate the points and then his points calculated relative to the others.

Thanks, Allan, for your vigilance.

Show Profile  Michael Posted: 2 July 2012, 12:45 PM  
Apparently when someone's in the hot seat during a stuff-up you just (a) divide the organisation in two and (b) pay $1.75m, and that's the end of it.

Show Profile  nick Posted: 9 July 2012, 2:58 PM  
If I recall correctly, the reason we started tinkering with the OY points system was in an attempt to rescue it from a growing irrelevance. The competition as a whole was not well supported and few people seemed to care about the 'title'. People were treating OY's as events to go to, or not... whatever.

Overhauling points system was an attempt to inject some life into the thing. Hasn't really worked, IMO*. Nowadays we spend our time arguing over yet more changes to the OY points system instead of asking ourselves why noone cares about OYs. The fiddling is well intentioned, I'm sure, but in the meantime Rome burns.

Scrap OYs. Build a new competition(s).

*I admit I've not been at orienteering much in the last two years... but am I wrong?

Show Profile  jrobbie Posted: 9 July 2012, 3:17 PM  
Great Nick "Lets build a new competition"
Lets have age grades
Lets have place points 20 for first down to one for 20th
Lets have time points 20 for first down to 25% of the field
Now thats how it was before one person, who shall remain nameless, decided without approval from clubs, to change a competition which had a history dating back to the 70s.
I think its called progress!!

Show Profile  pete s Posted: 9 July 2012, 4:35 PM  
Hi Nick - the main reason the new points system was developed was to reduce the number of courses at each OY and hence some of the workload on the setter and controller. In effect it was meant to simplify and ease the burden of running OY's, which at that time were run to a reasonably high std.

Personally if I am setting an event, I don't think it is a ton more work to set 7-8 red courses (versus 4 in new system), and would rather revert to what Robbie has described as the old system. I would rather have fewer OY's - say 5-6 in a season, of good standard, and the other events can be a mix of promo's, score events etc.

Cheers

Show Profile  John P Posted: 10 July 2012, 4:17 AM  
The management systems we have for addressing these issues have not, in my opinion, worked well. Discussion and decisions on the number of events, their organisation ( for example, start procedures), the OYs calendar, the number and type of courses, the allocation of age-classes (if any) to courses, the points system and quality controls are better addressed through a working party or a standing committee, such as we had prior to the Andy Brewis inspired reforms of the AOA. Club committee meetings and this forum are inadequate.

Show Profile  Michael A Posted: 10 July 2012, 4:33 AM  
My view.......

Why the over complicated competition?

Why not keep it common sense simple!

Where are the outliers / rogues in the scenario below ?

Rule:
OY competition is for `A` division, age grades only.

`A` division competitors wishing to participate in an OY competition must run their age grade course or courses above.
`A` division competitors running courses below their age grade will not be deemed part of the OY competition.

Whoops, now for the flack, no `B' grades in an OY competition, let `B`grade courses be without the competition factor !

Orienteer Of The Year competition I feel should be about finding the best `A ' grade orienteer in an age group.

I would like to see 9 OY events per year in the right part of the season.
(emphasis on the right part of the season)

Keep weighting calculations out of the race results!

I also feel the number of courses we have at the moment is very efficient for the number of competitors attending events.

Cheers

Show Profile  NW Posted: 10 July 2012, 5:21 AM  
You should take that to your club committee Michael


1   2   3  


Ruffneck Productions © Ruffneck Productions maptalk.co.nz