Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Excluding the Beta which will make it worse (and which I will work out tomorrow for me, but which apparently differs for each rider) it would be (in seconds - more accurate as taught by Fandacious) (9724/9211-1)*Beta(1 for now)*100=5.569 - thus, SA Champ will only get a B seeding (higher than 4.5). The crux of the matter is that even if he won by 10 minutes they would still have adjusted by almost 10 minutes which would probably still work out at a B seeding!

 

But which I think is fine if everybody's are done like that and only that method is used, but now most riders are still riding on their previous indexes as calculated with "easier"/previous methods - that is where the problem is!

Yeah, consistency over time adds reliabiliry and, thus, credibility to a system. And to the PPA. :blink:

  • Replies 81
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

The formula doesn't really matter, and the flaws don't really matter either. Here's why:

 

1. The field needs to be spread out across the alphabet.

2. The faster groups will be more sparsely populated to cater for people moving up between annual number issue.

3. Unless you are riding away from your start group every week, you are prolly in the right start group.

4. Just ride your bikes, you whingeing pansies!

 

 

That is all.

 

Haven't you left for OZ yet ? Go already !

Posted

Confused about the Index for the 99er?

 

They say the winners time for the index is 2:33 but Racetec says 2:42.

 

My time stays the same at 3:06, why do they do this? I will never move up at this rate!

 

BACK TO KILLARNEY RACE TRACK :o

Posted

The formula doesn't really matter, and the flaws don't really matter either. Here's why:

 

1. The field needs to be spread out across the alphabet.

2. The faster groups will be more sparsely populated to cater for people moving up between annual number issue.

3. Unless you are riding away from your start group every week, you are prolly in the right start group.

4. Just ride your bikes, you whingeing pansies!

 

 

That is all.

Hey, hey, hey... some of us are aspirational!!

Posted

Hey, hey, hey... some of us are aspirational!!

 

And quite rightly too!

 

Like I said, if you are regularly riding away from your start group then you should be in a faster group. If you are not, then you are prolly seeded about right.

 

But if everybody's seeding is moving up, then the seeding process is truly flawed.

Posted

Well I started the 99'er in B - for Bunch of wheel suckers - it makes it difficult to ride away from wheel suckers, Bikemonster, when all they do is conserve energy by sucking wheel and then out ride you at Vissers - quite frustrating!!!

 

I moved up to H from J this season. Current seeding: 23.56469 = on the edge of moving to G (where I'd like to be).

 

I just wish the seeding system was more transparent so that you could actually see where you are and what kinda work you need to do to get moving. By them adjusting the winners' time doesn't motivate me to try improve my seeding because every time I try, I get screwed!

Posted

The formula doesn't really matter, and the flaws don't really matter either. Here's why:

 

1. The field needs to be spread out across the alphabet.

2. The faster groups will be more sparsely populated to cater for people moving up between annual number issue.

3. Unless you are riding away from your start group every week, you are prolly in the right start group.

4. Just ride your bikes, you whingeing pansies!

 

 

That is all.

If you're a Secret Agent for the PPA, please admit it now that you're leaving...

 

 

:D

Posted

Well I started the 99'er in B - for Bunch of wheel suckers - it makes it difficult to ride away from wheel suckers, Bikemonster, when all they do is conserve energy by sucking wheel and then out ride you at Vissers - quite frustrating!!!

 

I moved up to H from J this season. Current seeding: 23.56469 = on the edge of moving to G (where I'd like to be).

 

I just wish the seeding system was more transparent so that you could actually see where you are and what kinda work you need to do to get moving. By them adjusting the winners' time doesn't motivate me to try improve my seeding because every time I try, I get screwed!

Climb, SirK, climb...

 

Future C A T rider right there... :clap: :clap:

Posted

I'm the first one to complain about the untransparent seedings, but its definitely possible to move up. I've only been riding seriously for about 18 months and I've moved up from M in spring 2009 to E now, without any cheating, just hard work. I'll probably get whacked this weekend in E, but looking forward to it! If the seedings were too lenient, everybody would be riding A-D by the end of the season and there would be nobody left in the lower letters....

Posted

I'm the first one to complain about the untransparent seedings, but its definitely possible to move up. I've only been riding seriously for about 18 months and I've moved up from M in spring 2009 to E now, without any cheating, just hard work. I'll probably get whacked this weekend in E, but looking forward to it! If the seedings were too lenient, everybody would be riding A-D by the end of the season and there would be nobody left in the lower letters....

 

Start winning podiums in your groups...

 

And you will climb like a helium balloon. <_<

Posted

My seeding has dropped from N to M after doing the 99er! Not much to rave about but its a start in the right direction after being on a tandem the last 4 years. Looks like ill be racing medallion and Bay City if i want to improve my seeding a bit more.

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