Skubarra Posted November 19, 2015 Posted November 19, 2015 SASeeding has got it right in my opinion. Rate the race on its merit (difficulty, terrain, weather etc.) which is usually 70%, 80% 90% or 100% for the marathons and ultra marathons. The winners time is the winners time, after that each oke gets an indiex as it currently works. Why should PPA be any different. They actually make a similar kind of adjustment for the winner, look at the results of many races on saseeding, for example on the W2W ride the winner has an index of 20. Interesting discussion but really in practice, if you go fast in lots of races your seeding improves and if you go slow or don't do races your seeding index worsens. You don't need to understand the system to get a decent seeding, you just need to participate a lot.
Trail Ninja Posted November 19, 2015 Posted November 19, 2015 They actually make a similar kind of adjustment for the winner, look at the results of many races on saseeding, for example on the W2W ride the winner has an index of 20. Interesting discussion but really in practice, if you go fast in lots of races your seeding improves and if you go slow or don't do races your seeding index worsens. You don't need to understand the system to get a decent seeding, you just need to participate a lot. That adjustment is made according to the race rating.If the race is rated 80%, then the winner gets an index of 20, the rest followsIf rated 70%, the winner index is 30 etc etc. You get the trend. My point is theres no beta and all this complication.
Skubarra Posted November 19, 2015 Posted November 19, 2015 That adjustment is made according to the race rating.If the race is rated 80%, then the winner gets an index of 20, the rest followsIf rated 70%, the winner index is 30 etc etc. You get the trend. My point is theres no beta and all this complication. The Wines2Whales Race has an index of 10 The W2W ride an index of 20 The W2W adventure an index of 30 Given that all 3 were on exactly the same route and the adventure had by far the worse weather of the 3 how do one explain the differences? Edit - Point is Saseeding also make some kind of adjustment for the strength of the field and the race rating is really another word for beta That adjustment just looks much more thumbsuck to me than the ones PPA use (unless the 10,20,30 indexes above are purely coincidental...)
Long Wheel Base Posted November 19, 2015 Posted November 19, 2015 The Wines2Whales Race has an index of 10 The W2W ride an index of 20 The W2W adventure an index of 30 Given that all 3 were on exactly the same route and the adventure had by far the worse weather of the 3 how do one explain the differences? The mind just boggles. Would love to see the reason behind that one.
Pure Savage Posted November 19, 2015 Posted November 19, 2015 The Wines2Whales Race has an index of 10 The W2W ride an index of 20 The W2W adventure an index of 30 Given that all 3 were on exactly the same route and the adventure had by far the worse weather of the 3 how do one explain the differences? Its a MTB ride, lucky got any seeding.
Trail Ninja Posted November 20, 2015 Posted November 20, 2015 The Wines2Whales Race has an index of 10 The W2W ride an index of 20 The W2W adventure an index of 30 Given that all 3 were on exactly the same route and the adventure had by far the worse weather of the 3 how do one explain the differences? Edit - Point is Saseeding also make some kind of adjustment for the strength of the field and the race rating is really another word for beta That adjustment just looks much more thumbsuck to me than the ones PPA use (unless the 10,20,30 indexes above are purely coincidental...) I see your point. Did not note that. The only reason I can see for doing this is if you look at the winning times for each event, it progressively becomes faster towards the RACE. Therefore, if the ADVENTURE wins with 4h time and the RACE with 3h time, it would be unfair to give both a 10 index. The winner of the ADVENTURE is not nearly as good as the winner of the RACE (aka Erik Kleinhans) Thats the only reasonable explanation I have. Looking at your point, PPA certainly has a more scientific way of calculating an adjustment, however I strongly disagree what races they use to compare to others as the base race. Road should be measured against road and MTB against MTB.But also, say they use K2C as the MTB base race, this also is not really comparable to say a 60km Origin of Trails ride. So I personally cannot agree how they do comparisons. However, I do not have the answer or any suggestions so my opinion would probably not count anyway. End of the day, I just try and ride seeding races and gooi mielies when I do to get a good seeding
Patchelicious Posted November 23, 2015 Author Posted November 23, 2015 Sooo still no real answers as to how this calculated....
Trail Ninja Posted December 2, 2015 Posted December 2, 2015 So, I got my seeding index for the K2C SASeeding gave me a 48 index for my effortPPA gave me a 92 index. How can this be?? Exactly the same race and time!!!!!!Something does not add up SASeeding had no adjustment (beta), the ride was rated 100%.PPA has a beta and now throws my PPA seeding far out from SAS.
Veebee Posted December 2, 2015 Posted December 2, 2015 a mate said to me that the SCT has a beta of 1.07. I'm comparing this to the 2015 Amashova that has a 1.03... so with the Stellies being shorter and having less elevation, how is this possible... unless they had 100km+ winds ?
Patchelicious Posted December 2, 2015 Author Posted December 2, 2015 a mate said to me that the SCT has a beta of 1.07. I'm comparing this to the 2015 Amashova that has a 1.03... so with the Stellies being shorter and having less elevation, how is this possible... unless they had 100km+ winds ?SCT is CPT based, just like the PPA *cough cough
Skubarra Posted December 2, 2015 Posted December 2, 2015 So, I got my seeding index for the K2C SASeeding gave me a 48 index for my effortPPA gave me a 92 index. How can this be?? Exactly the same race and time!!!!!!Something does not add up SASeeding had no adjustment (beta), the ride was rated 100%.PPA has a beta and now throws my PPA seeding far out from SAS. tbh I don't think you can compare seedings on PPA and SAS, they are calculated from different bases and different methods so they will never make sense when you compare. The important thing is more how your K2C result on SAS compare to other results on SAS and same for PPA results.
Veebee Posted December 2, 2015 Posted December 2, 2015 SCT is CPT based, just like the PPA *cough cough
raptor-22 Posted December 2, 2015 Posted December 2, 2015 They actually make a similar kind of adjustment for the winner, look at the results of many races on saseeding, for example on the W2W ride the winner has an index of 20. Interesting discussion but really in practice, if you go fast in lots of races your seeding improves and if you go slow or don't do races your seeding index worsens. You don't need to understand the system to get a decent seeding, you just need to participate a lot. correct, the seeding system is a sort of loyalty programme.the more you use it the better your benefits
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.