Run-Down Forums

[Distance_Guru]

El G is the man! Boy he just flat out classed everyone in that dream mile. It looked to me like if he had had the rabbits hit the times they were supposed to he could have run a very fast time. As it was he just showed everyone esle how much better he is than they are.

And I loved Tetters race, sure she kicked to early and ended up 6th, but she still had me on the edge of my seet when she made her move. Plus I think this was her first big race in Europe, and she is still learning to run the 1500/Mile. I can't wait to she how good she can be when she figures it out. It's nice to have a top notch female runner that isn't afraid to run internationally. (That was a shot at Regina, and I do realize that many American female distance runners do go over and compete in Europe)[/b]
_________________
Time is the fire in which we burn

[Distance_Guru]

After Oslo the question on my mind is... who is Dwain Chambers and is this guy for real?

He only ran 10.05 but, it was only in the 60's and he did beat the two guys that were supposed to be the best in the world. Since he's from Britian and pretty young (24) I can see why I have never heard of him before. So sprint guys, did he get lucky? Or was this his coming out party?
_________________
Time is the fire in which we burn

[Dan]

Chambers is definitely for real, having been among the top 100/200 guys the past few years. He seems to be stepping it up this season (Conway and Justin have commented on changes in his training locale and coaching), but we'll know more when we see him competing in the 9.8 to 9.9 races.

From the limited opportunities I've had to see the British sprinters, he's looked by far the best of the lot post-Christie to me. I think I've only seen Lewis-Francis race twice, but he just didn't impress me nearly as much as Chambers when he's running well.

Dan

[SAMMA]

I've got a question Dan.

How come Morne Nagel scores me no points? He competed... very badly, but he competed... I've looked through the FAQs and I see no reference to a requirement that the athlete finish in a the top x number of positions.

I'm off to look at the Paris start lists and see if any of my athletes are likely to appear in the next couple of months...

Keep up the excellent work with the competition.

[Dan]

Andre, I presume?

Two pertinent lines from the FAQ scoring section:

[Dan]

Here's the entries to date for next Friday's meet:

http://www.meetinggazdefrance.com/english/lineup.php4

I've got a few more entered, but not much...

I see a problem developing with our system -- too often many of our chosen events are not held even in the Golden League meets. So much for the new "TV friendly" format being good for the sport... I don't know that event schedules are posted long enough in advance for us to pick events for the contest on that basis, so next year a top priority will be how to make the roster selection and/or scoring systems more flexible. A few ways I can think of to do that:

1) Allow weekly roster selections. If I can design the database to reliably keep track of when an athlete belongs to each roster and score accordingly, then this has a lot of potential.

2) Find some way to efficiently and meaningfully combine an athlete's purchase points across events so that they can be picked for a roster a single time and count for any event they participate in (i.e. 3k or 5k). This would be easy to score, but gives me a headache to think about the logistics... There are 1400+ athletes in the database, and I hate to think of the work involved in sorting through the multiple-event athletes to manually override some of the constructed purchase prices. Then there's the issue of how to combine those purchase prices... If Maurice costs say 4500 for the 100m and 3700 for the 200m, obviously he isn't worth 8200 unless he's going to double every meet. He's worth more than the value of just his 100m running, but by how much?

3) Combining #1 and #2.

Dan

[Conway]

Perhaps you could have "open" periods when individuals can make roster changes .. Might be easier than having them always open .. And then maybe you develop various prices for an athlete ... For example Mo might be worth 4000 in the 100, 3000 in the 200, and 3500 as a combination sprinter ... To be denoted as Mo-1, Mo-2, and Mo-1/2 ... Just a thought ...

[Dan]

Once the database and program are setup to allow changes, I don't think it would significantly cut down the workload to limit 'trade' periods, as that would probably be automated.

[Conway]

Yeah that would be kinda tough ... What if Mo in the 100 were valued at say 4000 ... Then look at Mo's previous exposure (previous 2 seasons maybe) in the 200 to determine a) what his value would be as a 200 sprinter and b) frequency of competition in the 200 ... If his value was say 3700 (as compared to the 100) and his frequency of competition ws say 60% ... Then maybe "double-Mo" would be worth 6,220 pts (60% of 200 value plus 100 value) ... Or something like that ... Just a thought ...

Or could just leave it alone all together ...

[Dan]

That's kind of the direction I was thinking... Theoretically, the IAAF year-end rankings, which the Fantasy purchase prices are derived from, should reflect frequency of competition in any particular event. If not, our mole hill just turned into a mountain with trying to combine purchase prices across events...

Now, if I can set it up to allow changes each meet, then maybe it's not much of an issue. If we know Mo is running both the 100 and 200 for a particular meet, then anyone would be free to pick him for their roster in both events, using the existing pricing/purchasing system.

Another challenge that will be presented is how to display rosters. Currently, I've got it set up to show the full roster for any given participant, along with how many points each athlete in their roster has amassed. If rosters can change, I don't think a composite picture could be captured... It would probably require showing the latest roster and snapshots of the roster by week, if desired. On the other hand, for the roster display to make much sense with the cumulative score, the current roster needs to show where the points have come from... That'll require some rather complex database queries.

Now you see why I said the logistics are a wee bit more complicated than it sounds on the surface? That doesn't even get into how to track and store changing rosters and how to change the scoring system accordingly...

Dan

[Conway]

Hmmm ... Maybe not worth the effort ... Sounds like it would require a relational database with each participant carrying a complete "account" of his or her own with each week being a separate file ... That would be a lot of work ...

[Dan]

Exactly... It's already got a lot of those pieces in place, but with a single table in the database assigned to keeping track of everyone's rosters. If the proposed change were made, I would need to add at least one additional table to store the "locked down" rosters for each player for that week, probably a separate such table for each week.

I think it can be done, it'll just require a lot of thought and planning to make sure it all works as expected and isn't a monster to maintain.

Dan

[Conway]

Well if you don't mind the work that's great ... Just wouldn't want it to be unmanageable ....

Now on to Paris ... any thoughts on the next sprint showdown ?? No Montgomery apparently but who needs Monty when you have Greene and Chambers ??? So far Chambers has had cold/cool weather on his side ... Paris should be different and Mo should be anticipating his rival at this point ...

Also what do you think of Edwards and Olsson ??? AND ... Both Johnson and Jackson were beaten in the hurdles at Sheffield ... Wade will be in Paris and they will be joined by Anier Garcia !!!! Could be the race of the meet !!!!

[Dan]

I invested rather heavily in the 110h and have been eagerly awaiting the materialization of that matchup... Wade looks to be consistent, but hasn't quite broken through to that level to challege Johnson and Garcia when they're on. Trammel and Colin Jackson are always wild cards. Should be plenty interesting.

Looks like the men's 100 could use a bit more filling out, but it's solid through 4. No disrespect to Chambers, but I'd be shocked if Greene isn't victorious this time out. If he isn't, it doesn't bode well for his physical condition for the rest of the circuit.

Paris isn't a 9 lane track, is it? They have 9 entered for the hurdles... I assume that means multiple heats, which could mean there's still a chance of several more being added to the 100 (Frankie!!).

The men's 400 hurdles has a lot of Olympic and World Champions entered... '97 WC, '99 WC, '00 OC, '01 WC. If nothing else, there's a lot of pride on the line there.

The women's 1500 looks like a solid field, with most of the major players represented.

[Micah Ward]

Hey guys, I haven't had a chance to look at the entries for Paris yet but I do have a thought on the restructuring of the rosters and so forth.

We are still REAL early in this process so I say let's just let it ride for a while and see how things develop. After all we have only had two meets. By the end of the season we may be happy with things as they are.

Right now I am having fun even if the Warthogs aren't on top. And Dan doesn't need anything else added to his plate. It might interfere with his social life and lady friends.