CrossFit Discussion Board  

Go Back   CrossFit Discussion Board > CrossFit Forum > Competitions
CrossFit Home Forum Site Rules CrossFit FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Competitions Competitions, contests & challenges

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-01-2012, 08:15 PM   #1
Charles Applin
Member Charles Applin is offline
 
Charles Applin's Avatar
 
Profile:
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Yokosuka 横須賀  Kanagawa 神&#2
Posts: 437
Open results not reflecting Regional results: a possible solution

Last year, I was excited about the Open sectionals. It was an amazing experiment to test thousands to find a few hundred for regionals. My main interest was that this allowed a pseudo scientific way to compare the theory CrossFit HQ has claimed: that you can systematically gauge fitness.

Anyway, Open occured, we got data on about 8,000 men. Of those a few hundred went to Regional. When the regionals finished, a couple of people compiled the data for both the Open and Regional results for all people that participated. Sadly, the average placement for participants was about 27 off. It improved if you discounted the under represented Australian, Africa, Asian and Latin America regionals in addition to the two US regions that performed far below their Open results. Still, the correlation was not there.

Personal theory: The open tests one WOD a week which allows ample time to recover. At regionals, you have 2 WODs a day for three days. The athlete's short time recovery is a big part of the equation. The open as currently designed just cannot test recovery ability in athletes.

One solution: Do the open sectionals in a week's time frame, but allow six chances to do it. Select 8 wods and an athlete has from Wednesday to Sunday to do them all. For online submissions, every week CFHQ release a three to five word phrase that athletes have to say and have shown during each of the eight filmed WODs. Every week, release a new phrase but the wods stay the same.

Is it really that important? Probably not. You'll still get the top guys and gals. But if this year also reveals bad correlation between Open and Regionals then you can't claim the hopper model is the best manner to gauge fitness as the data doesn't support the theory.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2012, 08:40 PM   #2
Katherine Derbyshire
Member Katherine Derbyshire is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Seattle  WA
Posts: 7,596
Re: Open results not reflecting Regional results: a possible solution

Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles Applin View Post
Is it really that important? Probably not. You'll still get the top guys and gals. But if this year also reveals bad correlation between Open and Regionals then you can't claim the hopper model is the best manner to gauge fitness as the data doesn't support the theory.
I wouldn't say that.

In IQ testing, they use different tests for populations of known "outliers" than they do for the general population. The general population tests simply aren't sensitive (difficult) enough to differentiate among, say, physics students at MIT. I think it's the same effect here. The Open identified the top few competitors, but wasn't a sensitive enough metric to accurately differentiate among them.

I also wouldn't say that the Open (or Regional) workouts represent a true "hopper" screen. They're very carefully chosen, with constraints including time frame, judgeability, and equipment logistics, not random at all.

Katherine
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2012, 08:19 PM   #3
Charles Applin
Member Charles Applin is offline
 
Charles Applin's Avatar
 
Profile:
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Yokosuka 横須賀  Kanagawa 神&#2
Posts: 437
Re: Open results not reflecting Regional results: a possible solution

Quote:
Originally Posted by Katherine Derbyshire View Post
I wouldn't say that.

In IQ testing, they use different tests for populations of known "outliers" than they do for the general population. The general population tests simply aren't sensitive (difficult) enough to differentiate among, say, physics students at MIT. I think it's the same effect here. The Open identified the top few competitors, but wasn't a sensitive enough metric to accurately differentiate among them.

I also wouldn't say that the Open (or Regional) workouts represent a true "hopper" screen. They're very carefully chosen, with constraints including time frame, judgeability, and equipment logistics, not random at all.

Katherine
Sorry for the delayed reply. I'll disagree with comparing 1 test in reference to IQ to what was done with both the Open and Regionals last year. I'm not familiar on current approaches to mental tests, but usually it's one test and limited in the areas tested. The open and regionals tested many areas, and you were stacked in each individual test.

A more fair comparison would be a variety of tests. Tests in various mathematics, sciences, culture, history, current events, spacial reasoning, logic would all be needed in addition to things I'm not able to come up with on the fly. From that, you can have a fair argument that once you rack and stack results, those that come out on top are among the most intelligent not only in the group tested but overall in our species. Just like CF, you have to be careful about tests that have an inbuilt cultural bias. Language used and the regions stressed in culture and history would be prime candidates here.

Anyway, we have another year so another world wide test. Again, as the CF Open is not testing short term recovery, we're not going to have a correlation between results in the Open and Regionals. I think others would argue that the main problem is the Open encourages slack scoring, so many people are posted higher scores than they would under the eye of an unbiased judge. Yet another arguement would be that six tests or even twelve should you merge the open and region wods is just not enough to rank fitness.

Perhaps I'm wrong and I looked at the data improperly. Again, what the spreadsheet did was compare only the Regional participants against themselves in both the Open and the Regionals using the same scoring model. I did not compare Region results to the CF Finals, so maybe there was correlation there.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2012, 08:28 PM   #4
Katherine Derbyshire
Member Katherine Derbyshire is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Seattle  WA
Posts: 7,596
Re: Open results not reflecting Regional results: a possible solution

Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles Applin View Post
Sorry for the delayed reply. I'll disagree with comparing 1 test in reference to IQ to what was done with both the Open and Regionals last year. I'm not familiar on current approaches to mental tests, but usually it's one test and limited in the areas tested. The open and regionals tested many areas, and you were stacked in each individual test.
The last battery of intelligence tests I took had five or six different components: spatial reasoning, verbal reasoning, mathematical reasoning, plus some others I don't remember. This was quite a few years ago, so I'm sure the state of the art has evolved.

Katherine
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2012, 09:15 AM   #5
Michael Capalbo
Member Michael Capalbo is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Annapolis  MD
Posts: 108
Re: Open results not reflecting Regional results: a possible solution

Ehh....

The Opens are as much about inclusion as anything else, and it's smart. Get even "average" CrossFitters like myself a format which we can compete, and we will be hooked. Which means I'll keep coming back to the affiliate and even talking CrossFit up to my friends and family, and getting some of them to join.

Now the current format isn't perfect. It does rely on the integrity of the community. There will always be non-uniformity in the judging at the different affiliates, and for the video submissions, someone could always just "cheat". I mean, I'm sure its possible to paint some hollow plastic blocks to make them look like 45-lb plates or something. But logistics-wise, how else could we do this?

Other than that, I think once a week for Opens is perfect. Several WODS in 5 days--that is too intense for most of us who will never end up going to Regionals. Besides the fact that many of us have jobs and can't take off work.

Last edited by Michael Capalbo : 03-15-2012 at 09:19 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2012, 09:40 AM   #6
David Larson
Member David Larson is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Seattle  WA
Posts: 35
Re: Open results not reflecting Regional results: a possible solution

Fascinating. I'd like to see that analysis. Is it available for review?
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2012, 09:12 AM   #7
David Larson
Member David Larson is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Seattle  WA
Posts: 35
Re: Open results not reflecting Regional results: a possible solution

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Larson View Post
Fascinating. I'd like to see that analysis. Is it available for review?
I found it some amazing analysis here: http://xfit2011.blogspot.com/

Last edited by David Larson : 03-29-2012 at 09:12 AM. Reason: grammer
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2012 Open, Regional and Games thread Sean Dunston Competitions 1527 11-30-2012 12:04 PM
2011 Open results Brett Talcott Competitions 3 02-22-2012 11:10 AM
Scoring for the open does not reflect a regional competition Matt Rainwater Competitions 4 04-17-2011 08:32 PM
need help w/ results Steve Richards Fitness 10 04-24-2008 03:09 PM
Results from the 2005 Midwest ICS Regional competition Kelly Moore Competitions 2 08-22-2005 09:00 AM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:07 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
CrossFit is a registered trademark of CrossFit Inc.