Jump to content

Latest PPA seeding


Wannabe
 Share

Recommended Posts

Who else did the 30km race at Paarl/Backsberg? With the latest PPA seeding run they gave the winner in the 30km race a time of 1:14, whereas it actually was 1:57. I did the race in 2:29, but got a index of 101 for it. Will contacting PPA about it help at all?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 37
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

nope, short races doesn't count towards seeding.

I did a middle distance road race last year cause I was feeling lazy, came first and got a seeding of 15.

PPA a gave a loooong explanation (that I can not remember but it did sorta make sense) ... it doesn't count!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...and if you do the long MTB routes you would really have to be damn good in order for it to affect yr seeding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was just fighting with them about the 2009 boshendal race, the winners time was 2:20 I had a good race and did a 2:55 or something which would make it one of my best, but the winners time is 1:40 on the PPA site, they said it had to be "adjusted" now Its one of the races that dont even count towards the seading.. how *** is that? I meen FFsakes..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still bumped about the weighed index. Did the ofm classic with a non cycling buddy and now my seeding is all screwed up

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"This calculation is done for every result in an event that counts for seeding.

The formula is: (your time / adjusted winner's time - 1) / beta value and then expressed as a percentage

So if the winner's time is 1:57 and your time is 2:29, then your index for the event is (149/117 - 1) = 0.27 = 27%."

 

Based on your the times you gave here, your seeding would be 27% and that is without the adjusted time of the winner, which will increase your seeding further.

 

If you use the adjusted time of 1:14 your seeding would be 101%

That does seem too much of a adjustment, you can query it but I doubt its gonna make a huge difference to your overall seeding

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wannabe@ - The PPA adjustment seems to be too large. Push (friendly) the PPA to check it out (which i am sure you did). I had the same problem with the Oudtshoorn race in Jan10, where they took the winning time of the medium race as the winning time for the long race. +-3 month later it was changed. It helps to phone RaceTec directly!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They do sometimes screw it it by giving someone from the 15km the winning time for the 30km. I would love to see anyone do that Backsberg 30km in 1:14!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

don't speak to PPA as they don't know anything about the seeding, rather contact racetec directly. Funny enough I did better in Die Burger MTB than the Backsberg MTB 45km but my seeding for Backsberg was better. Oh well, at least I'm not relying on my MTB races to get me a good seeding.

 

Also if you read more on the PPA site, a race will only count 33% of your seeding if it is longer than about 70-80km. Therefore you'd have to do well in 5 mtb races to get a good seeding as they only weight them 20%

Link to comment
Share on other sites

don't speak to PPA as they don't know anything about the seeding, rather contact racetec directly. Funny enough I did better in Die Burger MTB than the Backsberg MTB 45km but my seeding for Backsberg was better. Oh well, at least I'm not relying on my MTB races to get me a good seeding.

 

 

Speak to David Clarke, he is the brain behind the seeding calculations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thanks. i've spoken to david clark quite a bit. I know how the seeding model works. unfortunately no model will favour everyone in every race. the important thing is that its consistent,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about the stuff up with the Knysna MTB races where the wont be used in seeding cos of some lame excuse that the tiiming company recorded it in a format that isnt acceptable for the systems!!Doesnt even show on their systems!!!!!

Super Pi&^ed as i caned the 85km and would of been great for my seedings!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well i've dropped from B to E. Each time i checked the race indexes changes and so di my seeding. If you ask me they are not sure how to dot it or how they want to do it either. I mean, how do they calculate what the adjusted winning time should be? This only means that the top guys will have a seeding that remains relatively constant and the guys in the low groups just get kakker indexes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spoke to PPA and David Clarke. Some long explanation of the Ten minute compulsory rest that PPA was not aware of beforehand and that the Org's unilateraly implemented, that was now brought into the calculations (how that improves the winners time from 1:57 to 1:14 I cannot fathom (OK, maths never was my strong point :D ). They will look into that and redo seeding calcs if possible/necessary.

I'm not holding my breath though. (hopefully my seeding will improve from 101% to the about 27% it should be)

O'h, my seeding remained at "G". Guess I'll have to train a bit to improve it with the road races.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh the good old seeding chat again.

Dont we just love these!

Done with good intentions, but in reality provides bad results.

Niklas, yes I do agree with your statement on keeping things level through events and then we will see consistant results.

But with that statement you just gave it puts Davids seeding model at flaw.

I know that you are friends with him, so you dont want to complain much, but it is super clear that things are wrong when you look at how everyone has been moaning for as long as I have been on this site.

The winners time should not get played with on a long route with people with a A seeding winning it.

They will need to still adjust for events that has lower seeded people winning.

But I have seen races that the winners of the race (david george etc those caliber riders) have had their times knocked back a bit. Now if the best riders in this country are getting that time for the race, no body else in the world is going to better it. Look our riders even beat Lance at the argus :)

So rather at the end of the day, we will all be on the same level, for every event. They can always make groups smaller as they go along again.

When is this agm?

We need to torch I mean attend this meeting.

Getting David (frail) onto the board will be a major bonus for us so that we can have our interests represented internally better.

Does anyone know how the written nomination thing works?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

Settings My Forum Content My Followed Content Forum Settings Ad Messages My Ads My Favourites My Saved Alerts My Pay Deals Help Logout