Discussion: Skipped control analysis
in: Possum Trot Weekend (Dec 10–11, 2011 - Shawnee, KS, US)
Dec 12, 2011 2:41 AM
#
ken:
See here for a somewhat unrefined but interesting view of the good and not-so-good skips: Possum Trot and Short Possum (or look for the "skip analysis" link above the splits tables)
The main non-obvious thing to know is that normal/normalized means the time savings is adjusted to cancel out differences in overall racing speed, so you can compare the merits of skips more or less directly between fast and slow runners.
Of course, some people like to skip early, late, or otherwise for various strategic reasons, so time is not the only factor, just the easiest to show.
The main non-obvious thing to know is that normal/normalized means the time savings is adjusted to cancel out differences in overall racing speed, so you can compare the merits of skips more or less directly between fast and slow runners.
Of course, some people like to skip early, late, or otherwise for various strategic reasons, so time is not the only factor, just the easiest to show.
Dec 12, 2011 1:19 PM
#
Here is a snapshot of the map with the course:
http://twitter.com/#!/okansas/status/1459484538963...
I expect ptoc.org will have routegadget with the course ready soon
http://twitter.com/#!/okansas/status/1459484538963...
I expect ptoc.org will have routegadget with the course ready soon
Dec 12, 2011 6:08 PM
#
Interesting indeed and perhaps even makes "Eric's Absurdly Detailed Skip Analysis" redundant (though, I'll publish it in the next day or two anyway since quite a few have asked). Pretty much confirms what I felt during the race: skip 23 for sure and let the pack situation determine the other since they're all about the same.
Dec 12, 2011 7:03 PM
#
ken:
Yeah, definitely publish yours as well. I think my current method has some flaws in cases where most fast runners skip a particular control (e.g. 23), so I'm very interested in comparing the results.
Dec 12, 2011 7:33 PM
#
Without giving it much thought, skipping 1 looks like it might be undervalued in AP's skip analysis.
Dec 12, 2011 9:41 PM
#
ken:
#1 does look like a good skip, I wonder if the actual times from S->2 reflect some hesitation as runners first looked at their maps, scanned the rest of the course for better options, reconsidered splitting from the pack, or had to navigate without any top runners leading the way.
Dec 14, 2011 5:01 AM
#
Well then, here it is:
http://carolsteam.org/racing/default.aspx/reports/...
Full meet report coming in a few days, but I figured I'd get the skip analysis out while people were still interested.
http://carolsteam.org/racing/default.aspx/reports/...
Full meet report coming in a few days, but I figured I'd get the skip analysis out while people were still interested.
Dec 14, 2011 5:35 AM
#
hey! i didn't skip 15! no reasoning to explain there... I thought (too) hard about skipping 7 and 12 but decided not to. 20 and 23 were my final answers.
Dec 14, 2011 2:21 PM
#
My apologies, that was Jeff who skipped 15. I must have got post-race conversations confused. I'll amend the report this evening.
Dec 14, 2011 5:46 PM
#
Trot #20 & #21 were equally popular skips on the Short (our #16 & #17). I skipped #17 and agree with your analysis but Ken's table shows #16 slightly better.
BTW: Justin lost 1.5 minutes at #30 and Mark got within 14 seconds, but Mark then gave back a minute at #31. Quite a head-to-head!
BTW: Justin lost 1.5 minutes at #30 and Mark got within 14 seconds, but Mark then gave back a minute at #31. Quite a head-to-head!
Dec 17, 2011 4:19 PM
#
It was a close one for sure. I remember having trouble with CP 30 and stopping to tie my shoe and breathe. Readjusted and found the control - just in time to see Mark coming up the gully towards me. Yikes! I tried to push it hard and felt lucky to come away with the win after such a close encounter within the last few controls....
This discussion thread is closed.