Points ranking

Gary Fluitt · Post by **Gary Fluitt** » Fri Mar 07, 2003 12:18 am

ABC Points Rankings

There will be a worldwide slalom points ranking system this season called the ABC slalom points ranking.

This system will be used to acquire points from many races, not just the FCR series.

Racers out East and across the pond will be able to acquire points toward their ABC ranking.

Trophies, respect, and big bragging rights. And you don't have to live on the left coast to play.

Details shortly.

Gary

[ This Message was edited by: Gary Fluitt on 2003-03-06 18:29 ]

Wesley Tucker · Post by **Wesley Tucker** » Fri Mar 07, 2003 1:45 am

Gary,

Interesting concept. My only suggestion is that whoever develops this (I'm assuming you?) also is certain to have two dozen different kinds of tie-breakers.

With racers competing for points but not against one another, there will be a very good chance of a points tie. As an example, let's say a racer on the West Coast (we'll call him "PD") dominates racing this year. By the same token, a fictitious racer on the East Coast (say, "JG" for argument's sake,) also racks up the wins. Furthermore, some guy we don't know who has the strange nickname "Clingfilm" wipes out the competition in Europe. Now, through no one's fault, at the end of the year there's a three-way tie for the points leader.

As I said, I think you've got a great idea and I wanted to express my only caveat to your program

Let us know more as it develops.

Eric Groff · Post by **Eric Groff** » Fri Mar 07, 2003 6:41 am

How does a race qualify for points?

Will the same points be awarded at a race where say 7 Amatuer type racers race, as would a race where 64 racers includeing 4 world champs and the top 10 racers in the world race?

Lets say for example,

Scabs wins 4 races in Florida were 7 racers on average attend each race. and there is no top 20 racer in attendance, no world champions, not even a top 20 open racer?

PD wins 4 FCR races where 58 racers attend on average. and there is 20 top 20 racers in attendance including 4 world champions.

Stride wins 4 in the UK where 23 racers attend on average, and there is 1 top 20 racer in attendance and 1 world champion.

C-money wins 4 races in the midwest where 13 racers on average attend, and there is 1 top 20 racer in attendance.

Would these 4 racers tie at seasons end?

Will Bank slalom races be included in these points as there was last year for FCR events.

Will there be City, County, State, Regional, National, World Points?

Brady Mitchell · Post by **Brady Mitchell** » Fri Mar 07, 2003 6:49 am

Arab,
I`ll just ignore your ever ending digs on me but if y`all just take a gander over on ncdsa as to my suggestions, maybe it can be done easily, without ties as the points only earn you a chance to qualify at the worlds.

Eric Groff · Post by **Eric Groff** » Fri Mar 07, 2003 7:15 am

Brady-No dig at you, just trying to figure out how they plan to make it fair to everybody. I dont think awarding you and PD the same points for a win is right.

What is the purpose for Fluitts point system?

Is it for an Overall World Series Title?

Is it for qualifying for the Worlds?

I seen yer post elsewhere, I agree that at the Worlds there should be seperate qualifying, the rest you talk of makes no sense at all though.

Jack Smith · Post by **Jack Smith** » Fri Mar 07, 2003 7:15 am

Arab, Brady and everyone else,

Fluitt and I are working together on the ABC Slalom Rankings program. The details will follow soon. We have thought this thing through, and it's pretty dang fair.
The ABC Rankings have nothing to do with FCR.

As for FCR, watch for a major announcement tomorrow.

Over and out.

Brady Mitchell · Post by **Brady Mitchell** » Fri Mar 07, 2003 7:30 am

First off, I want to clarify that my post "over there" was only an idea. I may have prematurely stepped on Gary`s and Jack`s toes for what they may have coming out. I apologise immensley if thats the case.

Arab, what part of that post did you not understand? I thought it was right in line with your contentions.

Anyhoos, it was just a passing idea. I look fowrad to what Jack and Gary propose and also the news of FCR,,, you guys RRRRRROOOCKK!!!!

Hans Koraeus · Post by **Hans Koraeus** » Mon Mar 10, 2003 1:46 pm

This will be very interesting. ISSA has actually been working on the same thing since August last year. This has been done behind the scenes because we wanted to update the old ISSA ranking rules that was used for this purpose during the early 90's. We wanted to have a good as possible document to base the final discussions on, here in this forum, before we posted it publicly.

There are quite some things to discuss concerning a World Ranking as seen already in the posts here. One of the major ones I think is the disciplines. We need once and for all try to document discipline names and what they mean. We have already started this discussion in the tight slalom topic in this forum under "Define tight slalom". Not the perfect place but...

We knew that this world ranking subject would sooner or later be approached by someone but we wanted to wait as long as possible in hope that some major points could have been solved before. I.e. discipline documentation for example. Unfortunatly this is not yet done. And there are many others. It will be very interesting to see what rules suggestions that will be presented here. Maybe there are some new clever solutions to some of the problems.

I can't wait to have a look at it...

Gary Fluitt · Post by **Gary Fluitt** » Wed Mar 12, 2003 4:27 pm

Hans,
You raise a good point about awarding points to different styles of slalom (e.g. tight, GS, banked).

As for the awards this year there will be an overall winner of all disciplines.

If you want to do some interesting dice and slice of the points based on disciplines, we could do that as the points will be listed by discipline.

As for awards this year I'd like to keep it simple and significant and award a single overall category. Next year we'll look at awarding an "ABC GS Champion", "ABC Hybrid Champion", etc.

John Gilmour · Post by **John Gilmour** » Wed Mar 12, 2003 5:11 pm

IMHO Anyone who wants to try and put together a points system - should.

I think we should be able to compare the results using the differing criteria and see which system adequately reflects what is really going on.

In a good points system for what it's worth, I think the ranking should statistically reflect the ability level of the finishers to some degree. Say in some sigma statictical manner. So at least there is some accuracy.

If say Miko consistently beats Hamm in every race Miko attends- I would hope that Miko is ranked higher than Hamm. If Hamm attends more races and aquires more points then Hamm might be ranked above Miko despite never ahving beaten Miko. I also think that the more races Miko and Hamm race, and the more Miko consistently beats Hamm, the more it should reflect that Miko has a higher ranking.

I know that what is being promoted is a Points accumulation- but it would also be nice to see someone who trys to develop a ranking system where say the statistical probablity of the ordering is within say ...68% or higher.

Given that our sport is not unique in needing a ranking system as well as a points system- there are plenty of examples from toher sports to draw upon- we should try a few to see which one is the "best Fit".

Jack Smith · Post by **Jack Smith** » Wed Mar 12, 2003 7:36 pm

John, you are one of the smartest people who post on this site. You consistently have great ideas.

What I would really like to see is for you to actually do something, bring your ideas to reality. You are fond of saying things like, "what we should do" and "what I what I would like to see".

You have the ability to make slalom racing better.

John, as the old Nike ad stated, "just do it".

Wesley Tucker · Post by **Wesley Tucker** » Thu Mar 13, 2003 12:10 am

Jack Smith said, "What I would really like to see is for you to actually do something, bring your ideas to reality. You are fond of saying things like, "what we should do" and "what I what I would like to see".

Let's see: John organized one of the first East Coast events with his race on Storrow Drive in Boston, which he then repeated in 2002. He travels constantly to races all over the East Coast at his own expense. This past winter he travelled to Florida to spend a couple of weeks riding with the crew down there.

John probably has more transcontinental air miles than any other skater in the past two years just to attend West Coast Events. Maybe Chaput is close, but I really don't think so. Not only FCR, but the Cambria event, the 2001 World Championship, Hamm Slam and probably a few I don't know.

John single handedly saved one of the greatest names in slalom racing with his support and encouragement for Bob Turner's designs in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Let's not forget, that was John's money. He put up and he hasn't shut up since!

John also at his own expense made several trips to Europe to participate in the only slalom scene at the time anyone could find. What's more, is John doesn't participate in "discussion forums" and then criticize someone else for discussing ideas. I find it strange that Gary Fluitt put his ideas out there for comment and then Jack decides that John Gilmour has a lot of gall to comment.

Maybe saying "what I'd like to see" is not the best way to express a desire. Since John, though, is in no position to say what anyone else would like to see, then I'll just have to take his word for it that he's speaking for himself.

Isn't that what a "discussion forum" is all about? I mean, Jack, I have to ask: what else do you want the guy to do?

Jack Smith · Post by **Jack Smith** » Thu Mar 13, 2003 12:54 am

Wes,

I did not mean to belittle John's past efforts.

Your comment about how he "single handedly saved one of the greatest names in slalom racing" is ridiculous or maybe just ignorant.
Dan Gesmer, Paul Dunn and Beau Brown were also encouraging and supportive of Bob Turner during that time period.

Wes, this is not the first time you have jumped in without knowing the facts, in your post you wrote:

"I find it strange that Gary Fluitt put his ideas out there for comment and then Jack decides that John Gilmour has a lot of gall to comment."

The fact is that I approached Gary Fluitt with the idea of creating the ABC Slalom Rankings. Gary and I started the ball rolling, and many others including yourself helped to develop the point system.
I even came up with the name for the dang thing.

What do I want John to do? As I said in my earlier post, "make slalom better".

Wesley Tucker · Post by **Wesley Tucker** » Thu Mar 13, 2003 1:16 am

You're right, Jack. No telling where I got my Turner facts. John's investment of over $3,000 of his own money in keeping the design alive probably pales in comparison to others efforts and intentions. I guess I should have said "ALMOST single handedly."

And as far as the ABC points schedule, all I can say is every post I've seen regarding its origination has Gary's name on it. Plus, all the web information for the points system is contained on Gary's Asphalt Playground. Plus, all the off-forum information regarding the points system came from Gary. Beats me how I ever got the idea the points system was Gary's idea.

As far as my "facts" being in error, they aren't. It's just that my interpretation sometimes differ from yours. As an example, you telling John Gilmour to do something for slalom that you will find acceptable. See, I consider that a criticism. You consider it something else. That is nothing more than a different in interpretation.

By the way, Gary and Jack, I did go back to the ABC website and reread the rules. I still couldn't find any information on possible tie breakers. Did I miss it, did you decide it's not needed right now or is it something we can review at a later date?

Keep up the good work.

Jack Smith · Post by **Jack Smith** » Thu Mar 13, 2003 1:44 am

Wes,

John's contribution was indeed major.

We do need to come up with some tie-breaker rules. Please email us your ideas.

John Gilmour · Post by **John Gilmour** » Thu Mar 13, 2003 3:52 am

I would have liked to do a lot more for slalom- but what I was lacking most was $$$.

$3000 was a crushing sum for me in the 90's and traveling to slalom events meant eating crap for a long time and flying on airlines like Air Pakistan where scores of immigrants intestines would explode in the bathrooms on the plane and overflow sewage into the passenger compartment- (I unfortunately am not kidding)- I mean- the stuff permeated your clothing...and for like 6 hours- nad lets not forget how much cigarette smoke there was on those flights.

I try to do what is in my realm of limitations to do.

Jack Smith has helped give slalomers a place to demonstrate their talents. This past season will likely be thought of as the best slalom season that the USA has ever had. The best locales- and likely some of the better racing. And though we bitch about the courses- the bitching was likely worse in the early years as were the courses.

In no place did I say we should change Gary's point system. I just said that we need a few people to try and make sense of the data and we should take an objective look at which formula seems to reflect what we expect to see. No egos here- just try and find a system that reflects the criteria we state we are looking for.

We could have a points system that rewards attendance.

We could have a points system that reflects skill and results.

We could have a points system that reflects a little of both. (but how much of each? It gets pretty confusing).

I'm no data base guy- that is Chaput's department. He loves those tables and crunching the figures. Me- it puts me to sleep.

I do think as skaters we have average days, good days, and bad days. What the system could try and reflect is how we do on our average days.

Perhaps a certain percentage of races should be tossed out. Perhaps toss out 32% of our races results to get a statistically significant 68% (I really am not a stats guy- but this number seems to come up as "sigma" something). So lets say that a certain percentage of the time everything is right..the wind works for you, you ate the right thing, you got a great nights sleep, your bearings are rolling perfectly, and you have no injury to nurse. I'd say this happens less than 10% of the time you race- even guys who place high consistently don't feel "on it 100%" more than 10% of the time. So lets call those results statistically insignificant- ie your top 10% of finishes.

And of course we have times when one or more things go wrong. You select the wrong, trucks, wrong durometers, get a lousy start, wind works against you, one of your cones knocks down another, you're sick, jet lagged, had a bad strategy, you DQ etc. Lets say that one or more of those factors combine and cause a less than average finish about 22% of the time. So toss out your worst 22% of your finishes.

This wouldn't benefit me. It would likely make my results look worse. We would toss out my Breckenridge win, and likely my Catalina 2nd. But I do think it would help to order some of the other racers more accurately. Maybe even tossing out a percentage of your top points and a larger percentage of your worse points to allow for weighting of the races would be more accurate.

People that consistently finished high- Chicken, PD, would be rewarded. And this model hopefully would be able to statisically help predict the likely outcome within one "sigma" of the race.

The disciplines have to be separated and ranked separately because the amount of races offered in each discipline is not the same. I think that is why Hans was trying to put together a distance graph to try and define the disciplines.

That was important- because semantics change and so do perceptions- but distances are hard and fast...unchangeable.

Funny that in the 1970's the 28 inch fibreflex pro slalom Board was considered a great GS deck. No one would consider using that deck for GS today- nor would people consider using the 26 inch Fibreflex double cutaway deck for most slaloms. The game changed.

But again I am not a database guy or a stat guy- but I do know enough to see how a system can rank Bruce Brewington much higher than other racers. And though that is cool for Bruce who has supported almost every FCR race it doesn't convey that much useful information to the person reading the points results.

What does Basketball use- or football - or skiing? Likely Gary's model is in some way derived from someone elses model. But it is important to note that each sport has its own model. One size doesn't fit all- so we got to try a bunch of shoes and see which one fits.

Gary Fluitt · Post by **Gary Fluitt** » Thu Mar 13, 2003 5:23 am

Ahhh! stop calling it "Gary's points system". It's the ABC points and a lot of guys weighed in on it.

Once we collect all the data we can have all sorts of database fun (although personally I find "database fun" to be an oxymoron). I'm not the guy to do a lot of statistical analysis. I know just enough Excel to be dangerous.

I know what you are all saying, that we need a weigh to "weight" the racer ability. We have no "ranked" racers right now. The only way I know how to do this is to get a bunch of data first, THEN make the comparisons. The first chore of course is to collect the data. So that's what we're doing. I'll be happy to make the data available to anyone who wants to do the analysis. I'll be very curious to see what Arab can do with the statistics for instance....

A lot of companies use the "Big Mac Index" to figure out what it costs to eat in any city in the world. That's because the McDonald's Big Mac is one of the few commodities you can find in every city in the world. So what we need is the slalom equivalent of the Big Mac. We need a guy. A middle of the pack kind of guy (like me!) to go to every race and see how he does against every other racer in the world. So, you guys, I'll start a fund, you can donate $ so I can go to every race, and I'll go be the international slalom scene "Big Mac". Then you can rank everyone off my results. Selfless of me don't you think?

This does bring up a serious point that if we can do any kind of statistical analysis, we need both coasts to race together a lot. So meet halfway (sort of) and come to Breckenridge June 6-8.

Anybody know when Da Farm race is?

Brady Mitchell · Post by **Brady Mitchell** » Thu Mar 13, 2003 5:45 am

Gary,
Please see my post in this forum...
viewtopic.php?topic=621&forum=43&2

Pat Chewning · Post by **Pat Chewning** » Thu Mar 13, 2003 5:52 am

Here's one way that ranking is used in ski racing, which might be applicable to skateboard slalom:

There is a race program called "NASTAR" (National Standardized Racing). It is based on a "handicap" system. It allows racers anywhere to be compared to other racers.

1) There are NASTAR pacesetters available at each ski area which offers NASTAR racing. These are typically ski instructors with racing backgrounds.
2) A NASTAR race is held with a good representation of NASTAR pacesetters. The absolute best racer gets a 0 (zero, nil) handicap. Each other pacesetter gets a handicap based on the % (percent) slower he is. (e.g. If it takes you 1.15 times longer than the best to finish the course, then you have a 15 handicap)
3) These pacesetters, with their assigned handicaps then go back to their local areas and set the "handicap time" on each race day. (e.g. If the pacesetter has a 15 handicap and does the race in 115 seconds, then the 0 handicap time is 100 seconds.)
4) A participant in a NASTAR race then can then earn a handicap based on how well he does against the 0 handicap time. (120 seconds would be a 20 handicap).
5) There are ways to determine (average) the 0 handicap time for a particular race in the case where multiple pacesetters are in attendance, and their actual times are not in agreement with their assigned handicaps.

This is a system which works to help the average recreational racer measure progress and aspire to a lower handicap. It is not very useful for determining who is the "best" after a long season of races.

One of the attractions is that it offers more precision than a finish-placement system. (i.e. 1st place, 2nd place, etc)

If skateboard slalom data were to be gathered for eventual analysis, then I would suggest that the actual times be included, as well as the finish placement -- to allow a NASTAR-like comparison system to be used. (In addition to an ABC type system.)

-- Pat Chewning

Hans Koraeus · Post by **Hans Koraeus** » Fri Mar 14, 2003 3:28 am

I'm all for getting all competition results into a database in a standardized way as Gary said. As much as possible. That's the main objective. Once in there we can use it for all sorts of rankings and stuff.

Join the ISSA 25 cone series. One cyber race every second month!

Regular sessions allow newbies to join our community and discover slalom racing.