Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Re: AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

    TO TT:

    I just updated the steeplechase marks and my preliminary results are:
    1. Cherono 85 points
    2. Sanchez 80 points
    3. El G 75 points
    4(tie) Johnson, Olsson and Bekele 70 points.

    Cherono had the 3rd and 18th best series of marks while Sanchez had the 16th best series of marks for a 7.5 point lead. Usually when all win-loss totals are compiled a 1-point increase is the result. The same principle applies to the final honors compilation, so I doubt that the final order for the top 3 will change.

    El G's win-loss of 33-2 pales beside Morceli's 55-0 in 1993 with all 1500/miles except for 1 3K, so I doubt that he is unfairly treated in these rankings.


    TO RMc in "Why not Radcliffe as AOY":

    Your point about Tergat in the Top 10 is well taken. I suspect that he should be displaced by throwers. For example, I estimate that discus throwers Alekna (60 points) and Fazekas (55 points) belong in the top 10. Their preliminary win-loss records are 28-4 and 35-2. Even with a world record and front-loaded points in honors and win-loss, Tergat doesn't belong ahead of them and probably ahead of shot putter and a hammer thrower.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Re: AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

    As always the similarities between the TFN rankings and the AI ones are more striking than the differences. There really is something to this subjectivity thing rather than trusting a computer.

    One thing that's similar that TFN has taken some heat for is the provisional inclusion of Chambers, Toth et al in the rankings since there has been no 'formal' banning process for any of the apparent THG guilties. Obviously my British brethren still believe in the concept of due process also. Bravo!

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Re: AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

    Yes, Radcliffe

    1. Radcliffe 28
    2. Kluft 23
    3. Mutola 21
    4. Guevara 20
    5. Cloete 9

    But their voters were obviously somewhat conflicted also because she was left off a ballot completely (which is rather significant when only seven people are voting).

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Re: AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

    Who did they do as woman? I would fall over dead if they did not go with Radcliffe.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Re: AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

    Just got my Athletics Weekly with the AOYs as chosen by Athletics International:

    1. Sanchez 26
    2. Bekele 18
    3. El Guerrouj 15
    4. Shaheen 14
    5. Olsson 11

    So TFN not the only ones to 'get it wrong'

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Re: AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

    TO POWELL:
    Re your statement "I'd have gone with Bekele...based on his World XC double.
    1. I counted 3K, 5K and 4K XC as 5K and 12K XC as
    part of 10K. Despite this aid his w-l was only
    30 - 4 and one of those losses was to an
    unranked runner.
    2. His honors WON weren't as good as those ahead
    of him--one WCh and a couple of GL meets.
    3. His marks did well--10K (2nd all-time)and 5K
    (12th all-time) but he is tied for 4th.

    TO TT:
    While doing the above, I also updated the 110HH marks. Johnson earned no points, so the preliminary estimate is:
    1. Sanchez 79 points
    2. Cherono 76 points
    3. El G 72 points
    4t. Johnson, Olsson and Bekele 68 points

    Cherono might have had an advantge because steeplechasers rarely run other events, but it also means that they have more wins BUT MORE CHANCES TO LOSE! Kiptanui was 50 - 2 in the St in 1991, but when he added 3K-5K in 1995 his w-l was 52-3, so I would disagree with that criticism.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Re: AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

    TO ALL READERS OF THE LAST THREE THREADS:
    I'm sorry for making this a three-part response, but I've been having disconnect trouble.

    TO ANALYST:
    I agree with your criticism. We've based our system on three factors:
    1. The director with whom I worked told me that
    one of the founders of AOY told him that they
    use 40-40-20.
    2. T&FN states that "honors alone can outweigh
    the other two criteria." To accomplish this
    goal honors have no minus points and wins in
    OG/WCh have 50% higher value.
    3. "Emphasis on winning" is accomplished by
    assigning double value to higher places.

    I disagree with your characterization of "a hard and fast 40% to honors...SUBJECTIVE." If rules are established BEFORE THE YEAR BEGINS and marks that are published AFTER THE YEAR ENDS are used the subjective part is greatly diminished and the possibility of a rigged vote is abolished.

    I suspect that this PROPOSED system is imperfect and that your input could make it more perfect. I also suspect that most threads on this subject are based on a reversed process--CHOOSE MY AOY, THEN FIND REASONS FOR MY CHOICE.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Re: AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

    TO ANALYST & RMc:

    I"m not a college fotball fan, but I became a USC fan when my JC track coach moved up to USC and when I moved to LA. However, although the BCS explanation in the San Jose Mercury News was cogent, I must agree with USC being the "odd man out." Everything seems to be reasonable in the BCS rules except for margin of victory which is not computed to avoid running up scores. Perhaps a marginal advantage for a two-touchdown win over a one-point win would answer your valid criticisms. USC's only loss was to Cal. The Cal coach said that Kansas St. was the best team that they faced.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Re: AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

    TO TT:
    Our method is partly based on year-end marks, so this is only an estimate:
    1. Sanchez 79 points
    2. Cherono 76 points
    3t. El G and Johnson 72 points
    5. Olsson 68 points

    Cherono's w-l of 43-0 and Johnson's 41-2 is the main reason for their improvement. Olsson's 36-4 is the main reason for his loss of a place.

    The weakness of the 2003 athletes is illustrated by this fact: most #1s had more than 90 points.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Re: AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

    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.

    I love "objective" rating systems, but note that the "objective" systems chose Oklahoma #1 despite being crushed in the Big 12 champs, while the "subjective" humans chose USC which has been playing better as the season went on, and lost only in multiple overtimes to my alma mater. Seems the "subjective" came out right this time....

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    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.

    So Edwin Moses never deserved his AOY's because he was a comparatively indifferent 400 runner???? The 400 hurdles are as different as the highs are to the flat 100 for men. That Sanchez was willing to step over was unusual in itself and deserves accolades, not scorn.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Re: AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

    Keyser Soze: Well-stated. I thank you for your argument.

    Leave a comment:


  • Keyser Soze
    replied
    Re: AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

    Why be bitter about a guy who chooses to represent the country his family originates from?

    The love and exposure he gets in the D.R. is much more than what he would recieve if he ran for the United States. He is well known and respected there, and is a national hero. He is even bigger than Sosa and A-Rod. The impact he has on the youth alone is well beyond what he would have been able to do here in the states.

    What is the point of being pissed off at this guy? I'm sure a lot of U.S. 400m hurdlers are glad he runs for a different country. That opens up one more spot on the team..

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Re: AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

    Felix navi dissed USA.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Re: AOY Sanchez? You must be joking!

    Wimper like a beat dog who can't take another step. Spray like a cat which can't climb over the fence, and curls up in a corner. Stink so bad, he'd have to close his own nostrils in order to avoid his own stanky breath. Sanchump and change. I wouldn't pay a dollar and 15 cent to watch that fool run backward at USATF. Who would be the idiot then?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X