Tweet
Re: Mo and all-time 1500-10K scoring
It's OK with me that these guys likely don't pay much attention to IAAF scoring tables and comparisons based on them. I'm guessing that they do care about running as fast as they can (given whatever preparation/competition limitations come their way) at whatever distances they race(d), and these scoring table-based comparisons are still interesting to bring together a range of performers and performances.
To the comments on Komen's 10,000m lifetime best: Similar comments could be made about some of the others, I think. I'm sure Gebrselassie had a faster 1500m in him, & that's probably true of Bekele, too. Across such a range, no athlete is going to show whatever might have been his "eldrickian" best :wink: at every distance. The commitment to being the best 5k/10k runner in history means that attention could not be paid to being one's absolute best at 1500m, and Komen's focus at shorter distances meant he never showed his maximum potential at 10km (and on the USA level, the same could be said of Bob Kennedy).
To aaronk's post: Your methodology makes about as much sense as adding together 1 million Indian rupees, 1 million US dollars, & 1 million Euros, and then saying they are equal to 3 million of some other currency. There has to be some strategy of conversion and comparison. Otherwise, you are basically saying -- to take an athletics example broader than the 1500m-10k, so as to highlight the point -- 60 seconds of David Rudisha's 800m WR is equivalent to 60 seconds of whichever men's WR/WB marathon you prefer. That 60 seconds of Rudisha's WR is ~60% of his WR performance, whereas 60 seconds of the WR/WB marathon is less than 1% of that performance. Those two 60-second segments can't be worth the same in these sorts of comparisons, but your aggregation of times method does just that. Some voices crying in the wilderness are prophets, and some are just, well, voices in the wilderness. Come in from the wilderness...listen to some of the voices here (not mine, but others).
Finally, I do have a question about the statistical wizardry that resulted in the total scores listed for Bekele, Geb, Komen, Farah, et al.: I don't consult the IAAF scoring tables much, so I thought that such consultation would be relatively straightforward, requiring primarily reading and addition skills. However, using the IAAF scoring tables (2011 revised edition) on the IAAF site, I do not arrive at the same numbers as the stat wizards. Once again, I have been humbled by the most ordinary things. I have re-checked my reading and math skills, and feel they are appropriate to this task. What obvious thing am I missing? A new edition of the scoring tables? Initiation into the Stat Wizards Club? Perhaps some kind person can provide some explanation or a breakdown of the specific #s for any of the top 4 on this list? Thank you.
It's OK with me that these guys likely don't pay much attention to IAAF scoring tables and comparisons based on them. I'm guessing that they do care about running as fast as they can (given whatever preparation/competition limitations come their way) at whatever distances they race(d), and these scoring table-based comparisons are still interesting to bring together a range of performers and performances.
To the comments on Komen's 10,000m lifetime best: Similar comments could be made about some of the others, I think. I'm sure Gebrselassie had a faster 1500m in him, & that's probably true of Bekele, too. Across such a range, no athlete is going to show whatever might have been his "eldrickian" best :wink: at every distance. The commitment to being the best 5k/10k runner in history means that attention could not be paid to being one's absolute best at 1500m, and Komen's focus at shorter distances meant he never showed his maximum potential at 10km (and on the USA level, the same could be said of Bob Kennedy).
To aaronk's post: Your methodology makes about as much sense as adding together 1 million Indian rupees, 1 million US dollars, & 1 million Euros, and then saying they are equal to 3 million of some other currency. There has to be some strategy of conversion and comparison. Otherwise, you are basically saying -- to take an athletics example broader than the 1500m-10k, so as to highlight the point -- 60 seconds of David Rudisha's 800m WR is equivalent to 60 seconds of whichever men's WR/WB marathon you prefer. That 60 seconds of Rudisha's WR is ~60% of his WR performance, whereas 60 seconds of the WR/WB marathon is less than 1% of that performance. Those two 60-second segments can't be worth the same in these sorts of comparisons, but your aggregation of times method does just that. Some voices crying in the wilderness are prophets, and some are just, well, voices in the wilderness. Come in from the wilderness...listen to some of the voices here (not mine, but others).
Finally, I do have a question about the statistical wizardry that resulted in the total scores listed for Bekele, Geb, Komen, Farah, et al.: I don't consult the IAAF scoring tables much, so I thought that such consultation would be relatively straightforward, requiring primarily reading and addition skills. However, using the IAAF scoring tables (2011 revised edition) on the IAAF site, I do not arrive at the same numbers as the stat wizards. Once again, I have been humbled by the most ordinary things. I have re-checked my reading and math skills, and feel they are appropriate to this task. What obvious thing am I missing? A new edition of the scoring tables? Initiation into the Stat Wizards Club? Perhaps some kind person can provide some explanation or a breakdown of the specific #s for any of the top 4 on this list? Thank you.
Comment