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 02-24-2016, 01:26 PM   #71
Christopher Morris
Member Christopher Morris is offline
 
Christopher Morris's Avatar
 
Profile:
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Highlands Ranch  CO
Posts: 1,301
Re: Crossfit Open 2016

Here's how I imagine a scoring system that would exclude sandbaggers and quitters:

Let's say 200,000 people submit scores for 16.1. Your placement is 100,000th place. You're pretty proud to be in the middle of the pack.

150,000 people submit scores for 16.2. Your placement is 75,000th place. The 50,000 who didn't submit week 2 scores are now also eliminated from calculations on all weeks, including week 1. (Just for giggles, they can still see their score and placement when they log on to the Games website, but it won't be counted for ranking with any other active athletes who continue to submit scores.) Now your week 1 score is adjusted to 80,000th place when those 50,000 scores are eliminated (some scores were higher than your original score, some lower).

Week 3 has 125,000 people submit scores. You score 70,000th place. The 25,000 that didn't submit this week are also dropped from calculations of all weeks 1 - 3. Your week 1 score now improves to 75,000th place, and your week 2 score improves to 72,000th place.

This scoring system wouldn't really make a difference for the athletes winning their regions/categories, but in theory it could make a difference for an athlete on the bubble of going to Regionals or not.
__________________
Chris
http://www.drchristophermorris.com/ wfs
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2016, 03:46 PM   #72
Michael Capalbo
Member Michael Capalbo is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Annapolis  MD
Posts: 108
Re: Crossfit Open 2016

I don't think it is possible to devise a scoring system that doesn't have some weird things happen, even if there is only one score entered per week. For example:

Person A and Person B are in contention for the last spot in Regionals and are tied going into the last workout. Person A beat Person B in Week 1.

Then Person A *just* beats Person B in the last week, by a single placing. Person A is going to Regionals right? Not so fast. Meanwhile, (say) 6 people who beat Person B but not Person A in Week 1 drop out the final week. (Assume each of those 6 people did badly in WODS 2--4.) So now Person B's score in WOD 1 is 6 points better (from those 6 people ahead of him dropping out) while Person A's score in WOD 1 doesn't improve (because those people who dropped out were behind him in WOD 1.) So at the end of Week 5, Person B's score is now 6 -1 = 5 points better than Person A's, even though they went into Week 5 tied and Person A beat Person B in the Week 5 workout!
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2016, 04:00 PM   #73
Michael Capalbo
Member Michael Capalbo is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Annapolis  MD
Posts: 108
Re: Crossfit Open 2016

I don't think it is possible to devise a scoring system that doesn't have some weird things happen, even if there is only one score entered per week. For example:

Person A and Person B are in contention for the last spot in Regionals and are tied going into the last workout. Person A beat Person B in Week 1.

Then Person A *just* beats Person B in the last week, by a single placing. Person A is going to Regionals right? Not so fast. Meanwhile, (say) 6 people who beat Person B but not Person A in Week 1 drop out the final week. (Assume each of those 6 people did badly in WODS 2--4.) So now Person B's score in WOD 1 is 6 points better (from those 6 people ahead of him dropping out) while Person A's score in WOD 1 doesn't improve (because those people who dropped out were behind him in WOD 1.) So at the end of Week 5, Person B's score is now 6 -1 = 5 points better than Person A's, even though they went into Week 5 tied and Person A beat Person B in the Week 5 workout!
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-24-2016, 05:17 PM   #74
Victor J McQuaide
Member Victor J McQuaide is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Lakeside  CA
Posts: 1,543
Re: Crossfit Open 2016

225k + and gaining. Might hit 300k ? As I have found out in comps. X fitters are some late min larry's.
Me included
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2016, 06:42 AM   #75
Alex Burden
Member Alex Burden is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Stockholm  Sweden
Posts: 1,788
Re: Crossfit Open 2016

Well..... 11 hours remaining...

It's game on and good luck to everyone.

I hope you do you best and are happy at the end no matter what.

No injuries, keep safe...
__________________
Better than today, stronger than tomorrow.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2016, 10:42 AM   #76
Victor J McQuaide
Member Victor J McQuaide is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Lakeside  CA
Posts: 1,543
Re: Crossfit Open 2016

245k+ have signed up.. looks like they might do more than last year. 45+ might be two times as big as last year.. good on that.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2016, 01:53 PM   #77
Beth Martino
Member Beth Martino is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Leominster  MA
Posts: 56
Re: Crossfit Open 2016

New in the rulebook this year (WFS) is a "Sportsmanship" appendix. I have to imagine it was mostly written after all the 15.1/15.1a stuff last year. The second paragraph reads:
Quote:
All athletes agree to put forth suitable effort in every workout or event. Deliberately doing less work, or performing at a level less than one is capable of (referred to as “sandbagging”) in order to gain advantage in another workout or over another athlete or team is prohibited. Any athlete deemed by CrossFit to be “sandbagging” may be penalized or disqualified from competition, as CrossFit sees fit in its sole discretion.
This gives them the official justification for invalidating scores if a similar situation occurs this year. In practice though, I imagine they wouldn't bother doing so for any athletes that aren't in contention to qualify in their regions.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2016, 02:48 PM   #78
Steven Ngo
Member Steven Ngo is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Pasadena  CA
Posts: 848
Re: Crossfit Open 2016

i wonder if there will be a situation where it comes down to determining sandbagging vs. "pacing" yourself. should be interesting.

beyond all that, though -- can't believe we're just a few hours away from starting this all up again. off-season went by fast!
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2016, 04:31 PM   #79
Victor J McQuaide
Member Victor J McQuaide is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Lakeside  CA
Posts: 1,543
Re: Crossfit Open 2016

Some of the sand baggers were cited with working out too slow to get to 15A. The scores were deleted. Then they did the workout again.. maybe 10-20# less after a good effort on 15.1.

255k with a bunch of people left to sign up.. Hope my GF gives me back my credit card. Too much shopping on line #reebok
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2016, 06:38 PM   #80
Steven Ngo
Member Steven Ngo is offline
 
Profile:
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Pasadena  CA
Posts: 848
Re: Crossfit Open 2016

Is the announcement feed bogged down?
  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
What are you going to work on for 2016 Victor J McQuaide Competitions 8 04-25-2016 06:03 PM
2016 Games dates? John Matthew Ware Competitions 3 12-18-2015 11:04 PM
Is it possible for Crossfit to make it to Rio in 2016? Victor J McQuaide Competitions 7 02-04-2013 07:50 AM
2016 CrossFit Games Tristan Hoyle Workout Logs 88 12-24-2012 11:07 AM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:15 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
CrossFit is a registered trademark of CrossFit Inc.