AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

Re: AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

Actually, if you're including all races, then Sanchez was a badly beaten 6th or so at Pre. Whereas in his loss at the Worlds, El G was mere hundreths behind. Furthermore, I wager that running a 400H and a flat 400 is much closer to the same event versus a 1500 to a 5000 meter race. And finally, 1:50 in the half, that wouldn't even rank Sanchez number 1 high schooler in a good year. My vote still goes for either El G, Cherono, or Bekele.

Re: AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

I see no reason to count events that harm an athlete's AOY ranking. For example, in 1967 Jim Ryun was 4th in an indoor 600, but was still AOY.
Sanchez concentrated on IH while El G had a minimal season at 1500, but ran 300/5000. Using this method Sanchez (38 - 0) had about the same number of win - loss chances as ElG (33 - 2) did.

Re: AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

So, if I am reading correctly, by your logic if one loses all you to do is say that this isn't my normal event. Hence, my loss doesn't count. I on the other hand love to see someone go outside their normal event trying to dominate a wider spectrum, i.e. Aouita running the 800 or the 10,000. If everyone ran only their specialties we would have been deprived of some of the great races of all time.

[Conway]

Re: AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

Mr Gleason's logic has one fatal flaw - the criteria he is using is that used to determine INDIVIDUAL EVENT rankings ... Not AOY rankings ... That criteria works fine when comaring apples to apples - ie individuals competing in the same event ... However it is sorely lackign when attempting to compare individuals who competed in varied and different events ... For example how do you compare the seasons of athletes who have events regularly held in European meets against those with events that are run on a sporadic basis ??? Or the athlete that dominates his or her specialty but falters when attempting a different discipline ??? Or the athlete that competes in 2 or 3 different events with minimal loses but outstanding marks/times and clearly dominant in one ??? The answer is that you can't using that criteria ...

Re: AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

Not trying to stray too far from the original intent of this thread, but I would like to stress that the 400H is not at all that similar to the 400 flat. Having run both, I speak from experience.

I would also like to say that this type of discussion is what makes selections like AOY so darned much fun. It incites comparisons of performances and statistics which allow track junkies to fully explore every nuance of this magnificent sport.

Re: AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

Tried to post this yesterday, but it didn't take: Does anyone else think that it matters in AOY determination how globally competitive an event is? For example, El G's dominance in the 1500/mile or a sprinter's dominance in the 100 represents the triumph over a much larger pool of competitors than does Sanchez's dominance over the 400h or a hammer thrower's control of the event. The marquee events get more pretenders to the throne (thousands of middle distance runners in developing countries, thousands of sprinters around the globe) so a dominant miler or 100 man/woman stands at the top of a higher mountain than the pre-eminent competitor in a less popular event. This is an extension of why many of us love track and field: world champions in our sport are much more deserving of the title than, for example, football players (U.S.) or swimmers, who don't compete against a large portion of the world population.

Re: AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

Although as you say they are not that similiar, the muscles and endurance needed for the 400 and 400H is closer in relation to the 1500 versus 5000.

Re: AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

TO SWEDE:
You seem to make my point because I simply count ADDITIONAL events ONLY if they help an athlete's ranking. Clearly an athlete must have AT LEAST ONE EVENT TO GAIN AOY CONSIDERATION!

TO CONWAY:
Sometimes athletes in the SAME event have disparite records. In 1985 Aouita had 4 undefeated races at 3000/5000 while Padilla won the WC and GP final and lost 2 0f 16 races, so an objective method is needed.

TO BOTH OF YOU:
YOUR POINTS ARE WELL TAKEN AND ARGUED COGENTLY. However, in 1986-1997 I was assisted by the director of a major relay meet in devising an objective method of determining the AOY.

1. We divided the areas as follows:
A. Honors (40%)
1)OG/WCh 32-16-8-4-2-1
2)Golden League 8-4-2-1 (5 of top 10)
3)Super GP 4-2-1 (5 of top 15)
4)GP I 2-1 (5 of top 20)
5)GP II 1 point (5 of top 25)
2) - 5) are descriptions of an EVENT NOT
A MEET and top 5 is based on year-end
T&FN lists
B. Win-Loss (40%)
+ 3 points = defeat a ranked athlete in an
OG/WCh final
+ 2 points = defeat a ranked athlete in a
final
+ 1 point = advance to a final ahead of
a ranked athlete
- 1 point = loss to a ranked athlete in a
final
- 2 points = tie with an unranked athlete
in a final
- 3 points = loss to an unranked athlete
in a final
failure to meet ranked athletes also have
deductions
A formula front-loads these points to
equalize endurance athletes with explosive
athletes in 1A. and 1B.
C. Sequence of Marks (20%)
1. Average of top 5 marks (less for
endurance events) all-time is used
2. Points are : 10-9-8-7-6.5-6.0-5.5-5.0-
4.5-4.0-3.5-3.0-2.75-2.50- 2.25-2.00-1.75-1.50-1.25-
1.00
2. 1A. and 1B. are added to allow an athlete such
as El G add his 1500 and 3000/5000 to earn
more points. Additional points in a 2nd, 3rd
and 4th event for sequence of marks are
dropped 1,2,or 3 places respectively.
3. The point of this tome is simple: T&FN has a
method that is subjective, arbitrary,
inconsistent and exclusive. Our method is
objective, approximate, consistent and
inclusive. Arguments about who should be
ranked where are bullshit, but our method is a
springboard for constructive criticism to
improve AOY.

Re: AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

wITH THAT METHOD WHO IS ATHLETE OF THE YEAR?

Re: AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

< Our method is objective, approximate,
>, consistent and inclusive. Arguments about who should be ranked where are bullshit, but our method is a
springboard for constructive
>criticism to improve AOY.>>

This "objective" crap is of course the big lie that all proponents of computer-generated rankings try to foist on the public (see BCS; say no more).

The very fact that the system quoted her assigns a hard and fast 40% to honors instantly makes the system SUBJECTIVE, not objective. The objectivity of any mathematical model is always compromised by the subjective assumptions that some human, no matter how well meaning or how well informed, has to make going in.

Re: AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

>One bias that I do see constantly with the rankings - and that has sort of been
>brought out by others is that of the "undefeated season" .. It seems to be
>automatically assumed that to be undefeated is to be THE BEST of the best
>..

Ayhan's season is a perfect example ... While she had a narrow loss in
>the biggest meet, that was her only loss, she beat everyone in site, and had an
>awesome sequence of marks ... But getting outleaned made her season marginal in
>the eyes of the voters ...>

Isn't this like saying that the there was a bias in awarding the Florida Marlins the World Series trophy because of a narrow win over the New York Yankees? Anybody with any baseball savvy whatsoever could tell you who was better.

[Conway]

Re: AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

No ... Because it is impossible for any baseball team to go undefeated in over 160 or so games ... Not a valid comaprison at all ...

Andn really what is being talked about here is quality of performances and competition vis a vis simply dominating clearly inferior competition ...

Re: AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

Exactly, Sanchez dominated, but in a year where there was basically no competition. So Sanchez benefits by competing agaisnt no one, and yet when he went outside of his normal event he was beaten like a drum. Whereas, El G and Cherono, and for that matter Bekele all tried different events and although they had loses, it was due to far stiffer competition than Sanchez ever faced.

Re: AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

Sanchump dissed America, runnin for Dominican instead of his proud USA. Think he would have been on that stage had he had rounds of heats, trials, semis this past year at USATF?

Over-rated chump who got a big bump, a little lump sum and had a little fun in the Dominican sun.

[trackhead]

Re: AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

>Sanchump dissed America, runnin for Dominican instead of his proud USA. Think
>he would have been on that stage had he had rounds of heats, trials, semis this
>past year at USATF?

Over-rated chump who got a big bump, a little lump sum
>and had a little fun in the Dominican sun.

you're an idiot. he's by far the best in the world. he could run usatf's backwards and still win.