AIDA Ranking

[Billextreme]

Hi Freedivers,

The AIDA Ranking list is now updated.

but..

We are STILL missing result lists from some competitions(!)

PLEASE, all organizers have to sent us this the result list's asap.

at ranking @ freedive.nu

/B

 

[wolleneugebauer]

it is easier to click this link:
http://www.hotweb.se/aspportal1/code/page.asp?ObjectID=77&CountryID=4&actID=3

or

http://www.hotweb.se/aspportal1/scripts/aida ranking 2006.xls

thanx bill for this great job!

 

[cebaztian]

Regarding ranking.

If you would take all results from year 2006 and take the average points from each discipline - and then compare them with CWT (1 point per meter) it would look like this:

STA +28%
DYN +16%

DNF -16%
CNF -30%
FIM -7%

Now why would anyone want to do this?
The Nordic deep competition wants to compare all disciplines and let them compete with each other.

The winner of Nordic Deep in Sweden this summer will be the one with the highest points in the deepest dive (FIM or CWT or CNF), the longest dynamic (DYN or DNF) and static.
This mean that the SPECIALISTS can show of.

The corrected pointsystem will look like this:

CWT - 1 point per meter
CNF - 1.3 points per meter
FIM - 1.1 points per meter
STA - 0.15 points per second
DYN - 0.4 points per meter
DNF - 0.6 points per meter

http://www.fridykning.se/nordicdeep/gasepoints.html

Sebastian
Sweden

 

[perow1]

Sebastian, are you sure the average results of the ranking actually reflect the true potential of the performances? I mean, in the ranking every aida result is listed even the failed ones. If diver x aborted the dive fore some irrelevant reason the result (with penalty) will still be listed, or if a penalty is given for som eother reason.

I am not sure that the unrepresentable results will even out when you consider the different disceplines. I am prone to think that more unrepresentable results will occur in the more common disceplines. At least some selection process should be taken into consideration when attempting to calculate the "correction factor".

 

[efattah]

Plugging my pb's I see I have extremely varied points:

CWT 88pts
CNF 45.5pts
FIM ??
STA 64.8pts
DYN 60pts
DNF 45pts

 

[efattah]

Sebastian,

Can you tell me what the water temperature is below 30m during Nordic Deep?

The website says that you must be changed into your wetsuit before transport. Is it still allowed to dive without any wetsuit?

 

[cebaztian]

Re: AIDA Ranking & points

Sebastian, are you sure the average results of the ranking actually reflect the true potential of the performances?

Not at all - and I am very interested in any discussion/arguments that will further us to a result. But failing due to "irrelevant reason" is still failing.
I do not want to base any list on my own ideas/evaluation too much - my opinion is that the list should look like this.

CWT - 1 point per meter
CNF - 1.3 points per meter SEB= 1.3
FIM - 1.1 points per meter SEB = 0.9
STA - 0.15 points per second SEB = 015
DYN - 0.4 points per meter SEB = 0.45 ?
DNF - 0.6 points per meter SEB =0.55 ?

ERIC
Surface temp 20-22
Thermocline at about 12-15 meters, temp drops to maybe 12 C
At about 70 you might find 6-8C water.

Of course you can dive without wetsuit. Deepest nosuit dive in this fjord is 45 meters (CNF Stig Severeinsen), (I once did a CNF to 51 with a 2mm shorty).
Jellyfish down to 25 can some days be an issue. Two dives has had trouble with that in the past - but we will take extra care of this issue this year and have people guarding the line against them.

Nordic Deep is always interested in hearing from athletes what they need. Whatever the rules (and safety) will fit, we try to arrange.

Sebastian

 

[perow1]

I think the idea of correcting the points to give more credit to some disciplines is interesting. However I would like to know the reson for correcting static. Since the winner will be the one with best points in depth+length+time isn´t it only necessary to correct depth to depth (cwt/ cnf/fim) and length to length (dnf/dyn)? Time is still competing against time in the total points.

There is no room for the static specialists to show off since an eight minute static will correspond to a 72m dive CWT.

 

[cebaztian]

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.

The idea is: The same amount of training should give the same amount of points. Static gives 30% more than CWT acording to 2006 ranking.

Sebastian

PS. Perow - do you feel 0.15 is too low for static

 

[trux]

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:

1. 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.
2. 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:

1. STA (and maybe NLT too) : k2 = 1
2. DYN / DYF : k2 = 1.1
3. 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.

 

[SanSan]

Hi

I don't think using AIDA ranking for points correction is good. There are not much competitions in CNF and FIM and therefore I don't think its a good base.

On our competitions we use World Records for points weighting:
1000/ WR x CR = points for scoring

WR – word record
CR – competition result

 

[perow1]

The idea is: The same amount of training should give the same amount of points. Static gives 30% more than CWT acording to 2006 ranking.

Sebastian

PS. Perow - do you feel 0.15 is too low for static

If the basic idea is that the same amount of training should give the same amount of points, then i feel that (in general) 0,15/sec is to low. I think that the reason for the 30% difference according to the ranking is just this, most people can put in more training in static. I would say that a bigger proportion of the active divers will reach 72m CWT than 8min static if the same amount of training is put into it. I think the same is valid for 9, 7, 6 and perhaps 5 and 4mins in contrast to 81, 63, 54, 36 wich this point system gives. Below four the 0,15 factor might be more even.

In the case of nordic deep I can see the case of two close divers, one having an edge of 10p from a deeper dive. To catch up with this the other diver (better at static) will have to beat the first with about 1.07 to win, or the other way around. Very exciting really, if the numbers/points are realistic is hard to say if they haven´t ben put to a test. It will be exciting to find out. I guess that the correction factor for static is that it should take more than 50 secs to catch up on a 10p loss from the deepdive.

I am just trying to say that this point system might siut this particular competition really good, that we will se. But in general i doubt that the point system will reflect the amount of training needed to reach the score.

 

[Billextreme]

Top Ten (11 in some cases) intersection of all best competition results EVER:
(By 31/12-2006)

Women:

CWT: 68,7 points, (top 11)
DYN: 76,36 points, (top 11)
STA: 78,8 points, (top 10)

Men:

CWT: 91,27 points, (top 11)
DYN: 97,4 points, (top 10)
STA: 93,3 points, (top 10)

2007 we can already see that DYN will be even stronger compared to the other two disciplines.

I guess you will only confuse yourself with “mix-in” the results from FIM and CNF tho the basis of this discussion not incl so many results/athletes in these disciplines.

/B

 

[cebaztian]

Those of us who have studied statistics know that you can reach almost any result by chosing how much or what part of the population it should be based on.

I believe:

1) This is a developing sport and early results (previous years) we should not take into account.
1b) This might mean - as Bill might suggest - that FIM, CNF, DNF are not ready to be compared yet (but one has to start at some point and I always believe that NOW is a very good time).
2) I believe that the WHOLE population should be used when finding Coefficients (maybe take away the top and last five). This concerns every one competing therefore results from all levels hould be included.


Sebastian

PS Any more comments on the idea "same amount of training (generally) should award the same amount of points.

PS TRUX I think for the moment K1 is a quite enough to introduce. K2 to might be to much at once (althought I like your K2 personally).

PS. San San - can you give us an example.


//Feel the fear - do it anyway - and you might die//

 

[trux]

1b) This might mean - as Bill might suggest - that FIM, CNF, DNF are not ready to be compared yet.

I am actually of the opposite opinion: I believe that adjusting the coefficient also for less popular disciplines with less results and lower records will (desirably) lead to increased point values for that disciplines, and hence increasing the popularity of the discipline, and consequently new higher records (automatically lowering the coefficient in future). So it is an excellent example of a loop-back auto-regulation system.