This is actually a provocative discussion for some. When I first started talking about this S.Nagel and R.Castineyra got very emotional. ONE SHOULD NOT COMPARE DISCIPLINES.
If we should follow their wishes we would need to make only single discipline competitions. Once there is a competition with two or more disciplines, everyone expects announcing the overall winner.
I find Sebastian's idea excellent, and always wanted to see a more just pointing system. I find strange that for example DNF and DYF disciplines are usually rewarded with the same points per meter coefficient. Same goes for other disciplines.
Basically, I'd tell there are two methods how to get the right coefficients:
- Evaluating a big number of PB of individual competitors, and/or big number of results from competitions. Then taking the averages for each disciplines, and adjusting the point coefficients so that the average in every discipline receives the same number of points.
- Instead of averages of many competitors, taking only records in individual disciplines, and then calculating the coefficients in the same way as above.
Of course, also some compromise between the two methods can be done - for example considering not only world records, but also national records, or say first 10 ranking competitors worldwide or in every AIDA nation.
Another correction factor could be added for preference on certain disciplines, but I'd tell that there would be already much more controversy and many more disputes and different opinions about it. So for example, once we do the coefficient calculation using one of the methods mentioned above, another adjustment could be done to increase the points for example at depth disciplines. Finally freeDIVING is about diving, hence primarily about the depth, so the depth disciplines should be somehow preferential (my personal opinion here). Also dynamic apnea is closer to the real diving than static apnea, so giving slightly more points for dynamic disciplines may be desired.
The points could be adjusted by the second coefficient (k2), after calculating the coefficients from average or record performances (k1), for example in this way:
- STA (and maybe NLT too) : k2 = 1
- DYN / DYF : k2 = 1.1
- CWT / CNT / FIM : k2 = 1.2
So the final points would be equal to
performance * k1 * k2
I am aware that the
k2 coefficient (and assigning its hight) is much more controversial than
k1, so maybe results calculated both with and without it may be always announced.