SA seeding

[RossW]

Hey,

 

I did the Trailseeker #1 and started in batch E for the 40km (43km actually). I did a 2h06min and now in batch E again.

Going to the SASeeding page I cannot find myself under Gauteng but I am under National and KZN, with both showing the same set of results. So it's updated, but not in the correct place.

[Li Mu Bai]

where is SwartPiet to shed some light?

[T-man]

Dont look at your provincial rating...no longer in use...look at your national one only....

Edited July 12, 2012 by CL Venter

[428 others]

O great, seems I have the same SAS # as someone else...

[T-man]

They are busy upgrading the web service.. I think it will run better once the upgrade is done!

[swartpiet]

Hi guys, Sorry Ive been scares. Last week was hectic with the race and registration. Weve been having troubles with SAS. As CL Venter correctly states. We are busy writing a new web service that will directly integrate with SAS getting rid of a lot of manual spreadsheet work which causes a lot of mistakes to creep in as well. If you have any queries on your seeding or batching please send email it to sas@advendurance.com

 

Also note, that you can now do your own entry changes and substitutions on eventry.co.za. I believe we are the first entry system to allow users to do this themselves.

[Kai]

HI guys,

 

There seems to be a misconception about how SAS works and that's why there are so many unhappy campers.

 

Batching is done on a race index, which is a result of a mathematic algorithm which includes winning time vs times of the time of the participant 70% down the field, it includes the quality of the first 10% of riders (am I racing against Kevin Evans/Theresa Ralph or just any Tom, Dick or Harry) also the CSA race weight classification. Is this a 100 participant race or a 3500 UCI rated race.

So winning a smaller race might not count as much as finishing 20th in a big race.

Being batched well also depends on how large the batches are. If a trail might include more potential bottle necks, smaller batches might push good riders into batch B or C.

I think talking to the girls at race registration might be a good option for those who do not understand how everything works.

[jcza]

Will be great if the site is updated with all results and not just the Advendurance events. Seems like last update was April 2012 for non-Advendurance events.

[Craig Slow]

This topic seems to be quite, my 5cents worth.

 

I was given a rating on saseeding of 80 after my first (ever) 20km mountain bike race done last year in two hours!

 

Now I do 40km races in 2h30 and my rating is 83. No idea how this works.....

[andydude]

This topic seems to be quite, my 5cents worth.

 

I was given a rating on saseeding of 80 after my first (ever) 20km mountain bike race done last year in two hours!

 

Now I do 40km races in 2h30 and my rating is 83. No idea how this works.....

 

Well done on going faster!

 

I guess Einstein would say it all comes down to relativity.

[Strider_]

HI guys,

 

There seems to be a misconception about how SAS works and that's why there are so many unhappy campers.

 

Batching is done on a race index, which is a result of a mathematic algorithm which includes winning time vs times of the time of the participant 70% down the field, it includes the quality of the first 10% of riders (am I racing against Kevin Evans/Theresa Ralph or just any Tom, Dick or Harry) also the CSA race weight classification. Is this a 100 participant race or a 3500 UCI rated race.

So winning a smaller race might not count as much as finishing 20th in a big race.

Being batched well also depends on how large the batches are. If a trail might include more potential bottle necks, smaller batches might push good riders into batch B or C.

I think talking to the girls at race registration might be a good option for those who do not understand how everything works.

 

Hi Guys

 

I thought I might add to this topic.  SAS seeding has gone mental.  There is seeding or systems are in a complete mess.  My seeding has gone from hero to zero.  E.g.

 

Barberton XCM           Was 36.7         then changed to 40.16            and now is 42.25

USN MTB 3                 Was 40.1         then changed to 40.60            and now is 41.48

Nissan Trailseeker 4    Was 40.21       then changed to 40.64            and now is 41.18

 

I agree that the seeding should change after an event once the difficulty of the course has been finalised.  I dont see why your seeding for that event should ever change again.  If SAS had the same system as the golf handicap system,  Yes I would agree taking the last 3 Index's of your last 3 rides.  But thats not happening they are taking your best 3 Index's and they are changing it when ever they like.  

 

The Index's should not change SAS.  Your Software has to be looked at and needs to be consistent.

[Kyle Petersen]

Agreed total nonsense at the moment!!

Thought I was the only one   

[RyanAW]

 

Hi Guys

 

I thought I might add to this topic.  SAS seeding has gone mental.  There is seeding or systems are in a complete mess.  My seeding has gone from hero to zero.  E.g.

 

Barberton XCM           Was 36.7         then changed to 40.16            and now is 42.25

USN MTB 3                 Was 40.1         then changed to 40.60            and now is 41.48

Nissan Trailseeker 4    Was 40.21       then changed to 40.64            and now is 41.18

 

I agree that the seeding should change after an event once the difficulty of the course has been finalised.  I dont see why your seeding for that event should ever change again.  If SAS had the same system as the golf handicap system,  Yes I would agree taking the last 3 Index's of your last 3 rides.  But thats not happening they are taking your best 3 Index's and they are changing it when ever they like.  

 

The Index's should not change SAS.  Your Software has to be looked at and needs to be consistent.

 

The seedings decay. PPA has the same thing with a penalty that increases over time

[ahp005]

Total nonsense!

[Uncleslow]

 

Hi Guys

 

I thought I might add to this topic.  SAS seeding has gone mental.  There is seeding or systems are in a complete mess.  My seeding has gone from hero to zero.  E.g.

 

Barberton XCM           Was 36.7         then changed to 40.16            and now is 42.25

USN MTB 3                 Was 40.1         then changed to 40.60            and now is 41.48

Nissan Trailseeker 4    Was 40.21       then changed to 40.64            and now is 41.18

 

I agree that the seeding should change after an event once the difficulty of the course has been finalised.  I dont see why your seeding for that event should ever change again.  If SAS had the same system as the golf handicap system,  Yes I would agree taking the last 3 Index's of your last 3 rides.  But thats not happening they are taking your best 3 Index's and they are changing it when ever they like.  

 

The Index's should not change SAS.  Your Software has to be looked at and needs to be consistent.

 

 

I disagree. Of course your index (and that of everyone else) must gradually be reduced - otherwise you have a few good races, and voila - your seeding will forever put you in a good batch.

 

If you don't ride - you drop down the index / seeding ranks. Simple.

 

We can discuss the time frame used, before your index is devalued, but keeping an old result is pointless - eventually you'd have everyone in batch A.

 

Just my thoughts... 

 

Ah - just a quick Ninja edit. Not easy to use the last-3 results only as suggested. This is MTB world - a puncture or a crash in a stage race also shouldn't destroy your index.

Edited November 28, 2016 by Uncleslow

[Slakkepas]

 

Hi Guys

 

I thought I might add to this topic.  SAS seeding has gone mental.  There is seeding or systems are in a complete mess.  My seeding has gone from hero to zero.  E.g.

 

Barberton XCM           Was 36.7         then changed to 40.16            and now is 42.25

USN MTB 3                 Was 40.1         then changed to 40.60            and now is 41.48

Nissan Trailseeker 4    Was 40.21       then changed to 40.64            and now is 41.18

 

I agree that the seeding should change after an event once the difficulty of the course has been finalised.  I dont see why your seeding for that event should ever change again.  If SAS had the same system as the golf handicap system,  Yes I would agree taking the last 3 Index's of your last 3 rides.  But thats not happening they are taking your best 3 Index's and they are changing it when ever they like.  

 

The Index's should not change SAS.  Your Software has to be looked at and needs to be consistent.

 

Your seeding ages every week with a % value (cant remember the amount).  Basically the same as the penalty system with the road seeding