Amazing or Uncomfortable?

rico

I am expecting backlash, Panda and more but... I am surprised this did not make the forum...

Mateo_Vargas

HOs must work good on that lake.

Horton

Always uncomfortable with anomalies

scoke

Totally uncomfortable. Can you imagine what he felt like to not be the guy on a HO and run a paltry [email protected]? And then miss 39 will everyone else ran pb’s. Oh my!!

Horton

@scoke if somebody was to do the analysis I believe they will find anomalous scores in all divisions & on all brands of skis.

It would be awesome if somebody besides me would do this analysis. I am already a pariah in much of Europe and would like to be welcome in my own country.

@rico I'd be willing to bet you a bottle of Macallan 18 that these score stand. If there's anything I've learned in the last couple of years it is that National and International officials are rarely able or willing to take corrective action.

LeonL

Some pretty tall scores.

Horton

It should surprise no one that the rumor mill is on FIRE at the moment. This event has caught the attention of everyone who skis internationally - pros and amateurs alike. I have heard from may of the worlds elite skiers and officials in the last few days. Perhaps this will not be swept under the rug.

The impact of the this one event can easily be seen by searching for the event id (21S034R) on the Dynamic World Standings page http://www.iwsftournament.com/homologation/idopenslalomweeklydisplay.php?listdate=2020-10-13

If these scores are legit or not - this episode is that last straw as far as I am concerned. The International standings lists based on scores does no longer work. We need to move to a model where international standings depend on how a skier places against his or her contemporaries. I expect the entrenched bureaucracy to reject my proposal but I am working on it anyway.

jcamp

The problem with a ranking system based on who you beat is that some people just don't have access to tournaments with other top competitors due to where they live, financial resources, etc. I would like to think that if some dude can run deep 41s, but maybe doesn't have the $ or time to travel that they still get their due.

Horton

@jcamp that would be great if everyone respected the standards. They do not so the current system is deeply flawed.

rico

What is the point of being ranked top 10 in the world if it is half bullshit and someone who can run a legit 41 is competing with someone who runs 6 buoys less but ends up with the same score?
There I said it...

This is why a lot of the top skiers prefer podiums and winning events over ranking.

@Horton is it why Elite ranking was introduce?

Horton

@rico I can only speculate the origins of the elite system. At this point it is the better of the two lists. I still I'm conflicted about weighting the events based on cash prize.

bigtex2011

I buying an HO today

rico

It will also be interesting because a world record was set at the event...

Than_Bogan

I'm a total hypocrit, because as a competitor I really loved the Rankings List -- the opportunity to compare myself to everyone else while just attending whatever tournaments I felt like.
But as a fan, I barely care what these top pros do on their own somewhere. I want to see them compete. Every site is different, so I'm actually much more impressed by Regina's incredible streak of 6 victories at Swiss Slalom than I am by her world record.
If somebody can run -41 on their home site, don't get me wrong -- I'm impressed! But I'm even more interested in what they can do in a real competition against the other insanely talented skiers.

So, against my better judgment, I find myself strongly agreeing with @Horton's position on this one.

rico

@Than_Bogan I find it very funny that you brought up Regina's world record...

As for the ranking list, how would you feel if you did not make it to the US Masters or lost a sponsor because other skiers got Mickey Mouse scores somewhere else?

What if the point of having all these rules and bullshit if it does not mean anything?

schafer

So because 2 guys who are capable and have done it before run a few 41’s behind arguably one of the best drivers in the world we immediately question the integrity of the tournament?

rico

@schafer no but it is always the same story... One skier does really really well one round (fine) vs one skier does really really well 2 rounds (humm) vs one skier does really very well 3 rounds (what?)...

Now 2 skiers do really really well 3 rounds and more skiers PB (WTF)...

At the end of the day look at all these skiers scores at the previous tournaments and their scores at the following tournaments.

schafer

@rico sure. You and I have good tournaments and bad tournaments. Even the pros have good and better days. I mean their bad days are less glaring than mine.
I know personally for me. Some days the same lake. Same boat. Same driver feels hard. Other days. All the same things. Even same conditions and it just comes together and feels “easy”
Travers is a perfect lake maybe there is less pressure than even say at Swiss last weekend. Even the hacks like myself will most likely score better under less pressure, although I can still screw it up on any given day... but I like my chances better under less pressure.
Maybe this is more a ranking system issue in your eyes. And if so then we are debating 2 different things.
Doesn’t mean that the course isn’t perfect there. Judging on point. And chris driving. I chaulk it up to great skiing on that day.

MattP

Are we talking about JT, Ashers and Jamie’s scores here? It’s pretty much all their home sites. It was not a pro event it was a backyard midweek record. It was relaxed and well run I’m sure. One of the few places JT and Asher have run 41 in the past. I heard all 3 were training together for at least a week leading up to the event. Check the survey and boat ecv video if you want. I’m sure it’s kosher.

No wonder pros don’t come to this site too often. We piss on their parade when they do well.

Horton

@mattp & @schafer

The impact of the this one event can easily be seen by searching for the event id (21S034R) on the Dynamic World Standings page http://www.iwsftournament.com/homologation/idopenslalomweeklydisplay.php?listdate=2020-10-13

MattP

@Horton I understand.

Remember the dynamic list is not used for anything its just nice to have at current time. The bi-yearly IWWF static list is still used for worlds and the like. Both lists only take 1 score from the sanction. Doing it multiple times is moot. They also had the same score each time they got into 43. Regardless if they did it once or four times its still worth the same.

rico

@MattP Nothing against JT, I admire him as a skier and I am thrilled when he does well. I also know he can certainly run 41, but How many tournaments (even backyard R) did he run 41 in the past 5 years?

MattP

Will Asher has run into 43 7 times since 2016. At Hancock, Trophy, Botas x2, Swiss, Travers x3. Pretty much does it once a year.

Jon Travers has run into 43 5 times since 2013. At Travers x3, Swiss & Botas. Has 2 6 no continuations at 41 from Travers.

Home site has its advantages!

scoke

Pretty strong statement here "Check the survey and boat ecv video if you want. I’m sure it’s kosher."

Really? You've reviewed it, plotted the boat path video of the OM rounds and approved it?
Ok not reviewed it but personally talked with the person that has?
OK not talked with them, have you pulled the video from awsa south and casually checked it out?
Ok not even seen the video but are just talking from vague and general experience?
OK never been there but just pulled this out of your arse?

You reviewed the TC report checking all course homologation as well?

"I'm sure"? based on what again?

Sounds like you are so sure you could make a wager!! @MattP

Horton

@MattP forget about the open skiers. How many other skiers changed their international ranking at that event? Like I said before I'm hoping somebody else will do the real analysis but when I pull up that Dynamic list and do a search for the event ID the page lights up

rico

Exactly so Asher ran almost 50% of his 41 in one tournament
and same for Travers (remember the scores at Swiss and Botas were also under scrutiny)

MattP

@scoke more tongue and cheek, BUT we the people no longer have access to the ECV dropbox or I would have already looked.
I know the driver and I trust his abilities.
I know the site and I trust them to run a legit event. They are home to world championships & MLCQ among other high profile events.

If there is something hinkey going on the powers that be should look into it and then downgrade or let the scores stand. All the appointed officials are reputable. Until there is evidence against the scores I have no problem backing them and the officials. This is the USA you are innocent until proven guilty.

lazzn

At the enormous risk of a panda/making a fool of myself on the internet:

Was there not a pending world record set at this tournament? That means (at least a little bit of) it must be reviewed(not to mention all of the homologation). Why are we bothering to do the sport of tournament skiing if people cannot ski well without it suddenly being "something was intentionally wrong". What's the point of having R events anymore. Should we just start classifying tournaments by how close to perfect their homologation dossier is? Why don't we just have one site where all of the tournaments happen, it can be nobody's home site and it can be remeasured after every skier. It can use super high res EC cameras and Surepath, and we can throw out scores with out of tolerance paths before they're even posted. Will that finally be enough?

Is the problem here simply that the process isn't fast enough and scores that did occur with unfair conditions get posted and then pulled when they have been reviewed later? Without real actual information about the tournaments themselves this kind of argument is nothing but harmful.

As an aspiring TC (and driver) that spends a little too much time looking at the rule books, it seems to me that the tolerances for everything are fine. Pushing them is not worth it because at some point it will go wrong. The process for these tournaments should catch anything that's wrong. To suggest that we are letting things through this many times is to suggest an impossibly large scale of collusion, or that a lot of senior officials are incompetent.

As for the rankings list, am I the only one looking at it who finds that (looking on the surface without doing statistics) a vast majority of the scores from that tournament which affected the list are not that much different than other scores? Sure some were fairly above average, but what's to say that there isn't some other qualitative bias at play here for many of the lower ranking scores that were above average. As I recall earlier in the summer, many skiers who normally had high averages in other seasons had a low dynamic ranking list average because they simply had not been to many tournaments. Many of them were still training like normal though, and when they did find themselves at an R event they beat their scores by a great margin. Is this to be considered an anomaly? Especially in a year where many skiers season was drastically different than normal, it is important to consider what else could cause this.

MattP

@Horton to answer your question.
29 Slalom skiers (Out of 34 on the list) according to the ranking list posted 1 of their top 5 scores in a R/L in the rolling 12 months as of today.
16 of those was their top score to the list.
of those 9 have 5 scores on the list, 1 have 4 scores, 4 have 3 scores, 2 have 2 scores, 0 have 1 score
11 of those was their 2nd top score to the list.
1 of those was their 3rd top score to the list.
1 of those was their 4th top score to the list.
0 of those was their 5th top score to the list.

The data is HERE
Scorebook HERE

MISkier

@MattP, it looks like 19 have that score as either their top score or tied with their top score. 8 have it as the next best score.

MattP

@MISkier Yes. I have updated the sheet. Thanks.