Goofy IAAF Rankings--m200

[Mennisco]

Any fan worth their salt knows which rankings matter. Here, here!

[Mighty Favog]

The intro to the very first T&FN World Rankings said the magazine would present them on a monthly basis.

I'm still waiting. :wink:

[dj]

The intro to the very first T&FN World Rankings said the magazine would present them on a monthly basis.

I'm still waiting. :wink:

They were. In 1948. If you weren't around then, you missed them!

[tafnut]

The intro to the very first T&FN World Rankings said the magazine would present them on a monthly basis.
I'm still waiting. :wink:

As I've stated here before, T&FN 'should' (uh oh, here comes a gh flame) update them on-line on a weekly basis from July 1 till the last significant meet!!!!! It is SO doable and plenty of SMEs (Subject Matter Experts - Navy term) are available for the job. Too bad it'll never happen.

[Justin Clouder]

Re: Goofy IAAF Rankings--m200

I can't understand why Obergfoll is only ranked third. Four of her performances are superior to Spotakova's best. Nerius' best is 65.82m out of the six but Obergfoll has done 62.77m, 68.08m, 70.20m, 67.78m, 66.91m and 66.59m.

If the rankings were just based on how far athletes threw we'd not need a separate system at all.

I do believe there is merit in trying to weight the significance of the competition rather than simply the distance or time. The rankings are not trying to say where athletes would place in an ideal competition (T&TN rankings come with the same proviso) but to measure the impact of an athlete on their event.

It might be badly dressed, but it's not naked.

IMHO!

Justin

[26mi235]

Re: Goofy IAAF Rankings--m200

It might be badly dressed, but it's not naked.

IMHO!

Justin

If you are badly dressed and act as though you are well-dressed and that everyone needs to conform or pay the consequences (see tafnut and others above), it can be worse than being naked.

[Justin Clouder]

We could probably torture this analogy for some time yet... :lol:

Justin