2009 Carousel Seedings

[Guest Agteros]

Ok. so things got a bit too personal / intimate for some with apparent vested interests... However, the questions does stay

 

How was the time calculated on which the deemed winning time used for seedings?

 

Here is a table of the results / speeds for the Long and Elite distance events over the last few year (as obtained from the Championchip results pages)

 

	Long			Proj Time based		Elite
Year	Time	Dist	Speed	on Elite speed		Time	Dist	Speed
2009	02:39:59	110	41.25	02:34:42		03:33:46	152	42.66
2008	02:40:25	110	41.14	02:33:23		03:31:57	152	43.03
2007	02:44:47	110	40.05	02:32:51		03:31:13	152	43.18
2006	02:35:06	110	42.55	02:38:28		03:38:59	152	41.65
2005	02:33:32	110	42.99	02:35:32		03:39:10	155	42.43

 

Using my own known time, as well as the seeding given, I've calculated the deemed winning time for seeding purposes as 2:27:00. This time is markedly faster than any of the winning times for the last few years....

 

Another possibility is that the avg speed from the Elite distance race was used to come up with a winning time for the 110km event s not Elites participated in the 110km. This time I've shown under the column "Proj Time based on Elite speed". Again, 2:27:00 is significantly faster than any of the times calculated there...

 

I guess the only way to put this to rest, is for people to post the year they've done the race as well as their times and seedings.

 

Anybody having that information, and willing to share it?

[Guest Agteros]

Nobody keeps a spreadsheet with times and seedings of their previous races, which includes a bit of Carousel history?

[Andyr249]

Good work there Os! The current seeding is a mess up!!

There was no problem in 2008 so why "fix it if it ain't broke"? The 2008 and 2009 times were almost identical, in fact the 2009 time was slightly faster than the 2008 and 2007 times! If I remember correctly 2007 was the first time that the extended the route to 110km from about 95km or so. Who makes the decision as to when a race is "too slow"? There is simply not any factual basis whatsoever for deeming that the 2009 time was too slow!!