|
Aug 2021
2:04pm, 16 Aug 2021
15,174 posts
|
rf_fozzy
Ah no.
Each runners score is calculated as follows:
(Time of winner on course in seconds/your time in seconds)*100
So the winner will score 100 and everyone slower scores less.
A non runner scores zero.
A misspunching runner night score a nominal 20 (need to calibrate this based on past results)
|
|
Aug 2021
2:05pm, 16 Aug 2021
14,463 posts
|
Cerrertonia
Yep, that works.
|
|
Aug 2021
2:12pm, 16 Aug 2021
15,175 posts
|
rf_fozzy
The only wrinkle in this system is if a Graeme Gristwood (best GB orienteer on the men's side) turns up and wins his course by 20mins.
Question is do you discount his time? Or accept it as part of the results.
Non-qualifying runners further down the results don't matter - only the winners.
|
|
Aug 2021
2:14pm, 16 Aug 2021
15,176 posts
|
rf_fozzy
I suspect for simplicity, you accept the hand dealt rather than adjusting.
However it does mean that non-yhoa runners would have an impact on the result.
This is where scoring based on position is simpler - you can simply discount non-qualifying runners.
|
|
Aug 2021
5:47pm, 16 Aug 2021
15,178 posts
|
rf_fozzy
I've done a trial run based on some old results. The average score thing seems to work a bit.
The only downside is that the scores "look" rubbish.
Club 1: Total 920, but average 6.13
Club 2: Total 2779, but average 13.89
Club 3: Total 1032, average 4.32 (NB: this club doesn't travel to other club's events, so they're always going to be disadvantaged under any system that takes an average based on club size)
Club 4: Total 2460, average 24.6 --> Winners
Club 5: 745, average 9.31
Club 6: 723, ave 7.61
Not a bad start as one of the small clubs would have ended up winning that event. Might need a little bit of tweaking, but it's close.
|
Virtual Orienteering
Nov 2024