Forums: Skydiving Disciplines: Relative Work:
Proposed new 4-way rule....

 


cmgolden  (D 15822)

Sep 24, 2002, 11:59 AM
Post #1 of 27 (3861 views)
Shortcut
Proposed new 4-way rule.... Can't Post

http://4way.org/...=ST&f=3&t=87

Comments welcome!


Premier quade  (D 22635)
Moderator
Sep 24, 2002, 1:09 PM
Post #2 of 27 (3829 views)
Shortcut
Re: [cmgolden] Proposed new 4-way rule.... [In reply to] Can't Post

Proposed rule change being discussed on http://4-way.org
Quote:
No team in the Advanced or Intermediate classes may be composed of:

a) more than one quarter of members who have won a gold medal in that class; or

b) any member who has won any medal (gold, silver, or bronze) in a higher class;

having won such medal(s) within the previous five (5) years, in the same event at a previous U.S. National Championship or FAI-sanctioned World Cup or Championship event.

Hmmm, lemme think about that. What would be rediculous but still possible?

So, a team could win a gold in this year's Intermediate class, three members go on and one team member decides to stay in Intermediate. That team member hooks up with three of the fourth place Advanced class team members for next year.

Hmmm.

Let's see what the scores would be for the gold medal team the next year?

Let's say one member from Gold Intermediate team Juggernaut (14.1 average) and three members of 4th place Advanced team Skydive.com Fast Forward (12.6 average) got together, what do you suppose their score could be in the Intermediate class would be?

I don't know eitherWink, but my -guess- is that it still whips the pants off of the rest of the Intermediate field since the second place Intermediate team scored a 12.6 average.

Hmmm...

What's the history here of the winning averages?

4-way Int.
1997 - n/a
1998 - 7.7
1999 - 11.8
2000 - 15.3
2001 - 14
2002 - 14.1


4-way Adv.
1997 - 10.83
1998 - 11.1
1999 - 13.6
2000 - 13.2
2001 - 15.5
2002 - 13.7


4-way Open
1997 - 20
1998 - 21.3
1999 - 21.9
2000 - 21.3
2001 - 21.3
2002 - 21.8

What I find interesting in this very small sample is that in the open class the winning score is pretty consistant.

With the introduction of the Recreational/Intermediate class in 1998 things seemed pretty fair, but if you look at the scores in the next few years it -seems- to me that there was some pretty obvious sandbagging going on because the top scores in both Intermediate and Advanced pop up and around quite a bit.


Premier PhreeZone  (D License)
Moderator
Sep 24, 2002, 2:56 PM
Post #3 of 27 (3813 views)
Shortcut
Re: [quade] Proposed new 4-way rule.... [In reply to] Can't Post

Same token, how would you like to compete against a team that just rotates one person out every year just to stay in the lower levels?


weid14  (D 20292)

Sep 24, 2002, 3:55 PM
Post #4 of 27 (3800 views)
Shortcut
Re: [PhreeZone] Proposed new 4-way rule.... [In reply to] Can't Post

you couldn't rotate one out to stay in the lower levels, if you won the gold that is, then you'd have to rotate 3 out.


Premier quade  (D 22635)
Moderator
Sep 24, 2002, 4:02 PM
Post #5 of 27 (3799 views)
Shortcut
Re: [PhreeZone] Proposed new 4-way rule.... [In reply to] Can't Post

Well, heck, there's all sorts of things you -could- do as far as shenanigans goes. I was talking about this and a lot of other Nationals issues over lunch last Sunday with our USPA V.P. who also sits in on a lot of interesting requests for mods to the rules and such.

Hey, if I wanted to go out and win a medal in something just to make me feel good or have something cute on my resume, there's plenty of ways to go about it. I mean, I don't skysurf, but I know SBS does, even if we sucked (and clearly we do) we coulda walked away with the Intermediate Silver just by jumping out of the plane.


ernokaikkonen  (D 12)

Sep 25, 2002, 12:48 AM
Post #6 of 27 (3767 views)
Shortcut
Re: [quade] Proposed new 4-way rule.... [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
No team in the Advanced or Intermediate classes may be composed of:

a) more than one quarter of members who have won a gold medal in that class; or

b) any member who has won any medal (gold, silver, or bronze) in a higher class;

having won such medal(s) within the previous five (5) years, in the same event at a previous U.S. National Championship or FAI-sanctioned World Cup or Championship event.

So what's the rule now?


Watcher  (D 24876)

Sep 25, 2002, 6:31 AM
Post #7 of 27 (3751 views)
Shortcut
Re: [quade] Proposed new 4-way rule.... [In reply to] Can't Post

Faster and slower draws I think account for some of this flucuation within the advanced class. Also this years intermediate was alot better than years past as it had 8 more blocks and were 10 rounds instead of 6. Of course I still felt our draw was kinda slow.

Jonathan


ltdiver  (D 20506)

Sep 25, 2002, 6:45 AM
Post #8 of 27 (3750 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ernokaikkonen] Proposed new 4-way rule.... [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
So what's the rule now?

Only a) more than one quarter of members who have won a gold medal in that class.

At least they're trying to stop the 'bably killing'.
Juggernauts had a real talking to by several Open competitors (read: Airspeed) on what they did at Nationals. I hope others take note.

ltdiver


ernokaikkonen  (D 12)

Sep 25, 2002, 7:14 AM
Post #9 of 27 (3743 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ltdiver] Proposed new 4-way rule.... [In reply to] Can't Post

In Finland it's:

An intermediate(We only have two classes, Intermediate and Open) 4-way team may have no more than one member who has

a) won a gold medal in that class.
or
b) competed in a higher class

I hear for some reason they're changing that to two members, dunno why.

Erno


weid14  (D 20292)

Sep 25, 2002, 8:38 AM
Post #10 of 27 (3735 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ltdiver] Proposed new 4-way rule.... [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
So what's the rule now?

Only a) more than one quarter of members who have won a gold medal in that class.

At least they're trying to stop the 'bably killing'.
Juggernauts had a real talking to by several Open competitors (read: Airspeed) on what they did at Nationals. I hope others take note.

ltdiver

oh, they've heard it from about everywhere.... Crazy


Premier quade  (D 22635)
Moderator
Sep 25, 2002, 11:14 AM
Post #11 of 27 (3720 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Watcher] Proposed new 4-way rule.... [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Also this years intermediate was alot better than years past as it had 8 more blocks and were 10 rounds instead of 6. Of course I still felt our draw was kinda slow.

I think you have to define the term "better" -- better for who? Are more blocks better for the average weekend Intermediate team or are they better for people that really ought to be in the Advanced class anyway?

I would have thought that would make for even -lower- scores in Intermediate, but I think the scores of the winning team speaks for itself.

As for the number of rounds, going from 6 to 10 -shouldn't- make that much of a difference in the overall -average- a team can achieve. About the only difference I can think of is that a -lot- of weekend Intermediate teams will not have the energy to perform well jumping more than about 6 rounds in a single day. Looking around in the heat and humidity of SDC on Saturday, it seemed to me that a -lot- of the Intermediate teams were petering out on round seven. Of course, that's just -my- observation.


Premier quade  (D 22635)
Moderator
Sep 25, 2002, 3:06 PM
Post #12 of 27 (3701 views)
Shortcut
Re: [cmgolden] Proposed new 4-way rule.... [In reply to] Can't Post

Ok, I've thought about it for a couple of days and if I wanted to proposes something that would really make the system -fair- it would probably be something like;

Quote:
No team in the Advanced or Intermediate classes may be composed of any team members that have previously been on a team attending the U.S. National Championships in that event that has scored higher than 0.618 times the winning average in the previous year's event at the next higher level.

Ok, let's look at how that would work.

Golden Knights Gold wins the 2002 Open Class with an average of 21.8

ANY member of ANY Advanced team that scores an average of more than 21.8 x 0.618 or 13.47 would be forced to then compete in the Open class next year. In this case it would mean both the Gold and Silver Advanced teams move up.

For Intermediate, since the winning Advanced average was 13.7, everyone with a higher average than 8.46 would have to move up. I'll admit, that's a LOT of folks, but it would really balance out the rankings in a very natural way.


(This post was edited by quade on Sep 25, 2002, 4:54 PM)


Premier PhreeZone  (D License)
Moderator
Sep 25, 2002, 3:43 PM
Post #13 of 27 (3693 views)
Shortcut
Re: [quade] Proposed new 4-way rule.... [In reply to] Can't Post

How about an easier number to deal with like just .6?

And for the intermediate to advanced make it something more like .8


Premier quade  (D 22635)
Moderator
Sep 25, 2002, 3:56 PM
Post #14 of 27 (3692 views)
Shortcut
Re: [PhreeZone] Proposed new 4-way rule.... [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
How about an easier number to deal with like just .6?

"You don't really want the explaination do you?" quade said as he fired up the geek-o-vision.

"THIS ought to get a few heads to explode!" he said.

Essentially, there is a certain natural beauty and proportion to the number.


(This post was edited by quade on Sep 25, 2002, 4:00 PM)


Premier PhreeZone  (D License)
Moderator
Sep 25, 2002, 4:23 PM
Post #15 of 27 (3682 views)
Shortcut
Re: [quade] Proposed new 4-way rule.... [In reply to] Can't Post

Yeah yeah yeah... I know all about the Fibonacci sequence with the golden ratio, but for simplicitys sake... And leave it to you Quade to make me relive my 10th grade year math class again in about 15 seconds.

And yes, the hidden meaning in it does not esacpe me.


Samurai136  (D 26609)

Sep 27, 2002, 10:25 AM
Post #16 of 27 (3591 views)
Shortcut
Re: [quade] Proposed new 4-way rule.... [In reply to] Can't Post

 


Fibonacci



Sly

I'm gonna smoke now.

k


Kennedy  (B License)

Nov 13, 2002, 6:23 PM
Post #17 of 27 (3443 views)
Shortcut
Re: [quade] Proposed new 4-way rule.... [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
"You don't really want the explaination do you?" quade said as he fired up the geek-o-vision.

"THIS ought to get a few heads to explode!" he said.

Essentially, there is a certain natural beauty and proportion to the number.

OK, so I just made my MATH majoring roommate cry. Why did you go and make me do that? Wink

So explain it to me: other than a very dorky/geeky explenation that you obviously enjoy, what makes your number so great? How is that better than .7 for skydiving?


Premier quade  (D 22635)
Moderator
Nov 13, 2002, 6:41 PM
Post #18 of 27 (3435 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Kennedy] Proposed new 4-way rule.... [In reply to] Can't Post

Well, because phi (0.618...) is the the reciprical of Phi (1.618...) it would very quickly and evenly distribute all the players into logical classes in which it would be just as easy to move up because you're good as move down because you suck.

ANY other number would have a tendancy to unfairly move people up or down.


(This post was edited by quade on Nov 13, 2002, 6:42 PM)


Ron

Nov 14, 2002, 7:42 AM
Post #19 of 27 (3395 views)
Shortcut
Re: [quade] Proposed new 4-way rule.... [In reply to] Can't Post

If you read 4way.org
We looked at making a numerical seperation for the classes...Like some shooting sports use. It didn't seem to gather much support, and was such a different approach that it would meet with alot of resistance.

We tried to come up with a rule that had a chance of passing.

To do this it had to be a smaller change that still produced the effect we were looking for.

There were several options (only one draw and class, using math to decide who goes into what class, good old peer preasure), but this rule is not so new that it will meet with alot of difficulty getting passed, didn't require a math degree, and most importantly worked.

I for one HATE any kind of handicap. I have yet to see one that works well.

The classes should have rules that limit who can enter it....I think that limiting someone who has medaled in a higher class from entering in a lower one works.

Ron


Premier quade  (D 22635)
Moderator
Nov 14, 2002, 9:55 AM
Post #20 of 27 (3384 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] Proposed new 4-way rule.... [In reply to] Can't Post

I followed the "rewrite" proposal on 4way.org for a bit and while it's ok and maybe even acceptable to a lot of folks, it ultimately won't change the sandbagging and player/coach situation.

As for the numerical part of the discussion, I think you might be refering to my contribution to that thread which is essentially the same as presented here. Wink

Well, I can imagine that there are a number of reasons it didn't gather support, but probably the biggest one is the simple inertia of the current system. If no one had ever used the current system and was devising one from scratch, I seriously doubt they'd come up with a solution as convoluted and unfair as the one we currently have. However that system we have in place is the one people are "comfortable" with and to radically change it would cause an uproar even if it ultimately would make the sport a lot better for everyone participating.

I also hate the handicap system which is why I believe a system that mathematically breaks down the classes according to raw scores is probably the most fair.

My system would totally eliminate the player/coach -- you could still hire whoever you wanted to coach you, they just couldn't be a point turning member of the lower classed teams.

And lastly, in order for my system to work, there would need to be some sort of record keeping by the governing body far beyond what is done in the current system, but almost trivial compared to a lot of other organizations.


Ron

Nov 14, 2002, 10:29 AM
Post #21 of 27 (3374 views)
Shortcut
Re: [quade] Proposed new 4-way rule.... [In reply to] Can't Post

You and others sugested the "Math" solution...

And yes, the reason that it didn't fly has alot to do with how the "system" already is.

However, for your plan to work...
It would have to get passed....which it most likley would not.

It would require alot more record keeping.

It would require only one draw, and you would not know what class you were in until after the competition.
That takes alot of the fun out of it.

If you looked at prior meets to do the math. It could still be used to cheat.

According to the "Math" of the whole years meets Frost could have gone Advanced..We had a one rd meet, a Camera caused Zero in another, and one just bad meet (for a 13.5 year AVG. which put us below Nemesis, Beez, Even Tunnel Vision I think.) ..but we did a 14.9 and the winner of Advanced did a 13.7.

So that does not really work....You could just sandbag all your meets. "Damn my camera broke again", or "Opps, funneled again".

I think the Math way could increase the "Sandbagging"
And I could always have aPro on the team, but he just gets factored in like the rest.

How would you factor in a team that didn't do any meets?

I just think that you need to limit the Big Dogs from playing in the kiddie pool. Open to Advanced, or Advanced to Intermediate.

This proposed rule does that pretty well. There are still people in Open that have never medaled in Open, or Advanced...Me for one. Or people in Advanced that could go Intermediate....But I think that this rule will keep most teams from doing it.

Ron

Besides....I am a stupid skydiver....I hate math.


Premier quade  (D 22635)
Moderator
Nov 14, 2002, 10:45 AM
Post #22 of 27 (3371 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] Proposed new 4-way rule.... [In reply to] Can't Post

I don't think you completely understand my proposal.

Eh, no big deal.


Ron

Nov 14, 2002, 11:23 AM
Post #23 of 27 (3364 views)
Shortcut
Re: [quade] Proposed new 4-way rule.... [In reply to] Can't Post

You could explain it to me....

Just a thought.

Try to use small words, and not to much math.

Questions:

1. where would this years teams been put?
2. When would they have known what class they are in?
3. How would the results have changed this years standings?
4. How would it Eliminate Sandbagging and Player coaches?

Ron


Premier quade  (D 22635)
Moderator
Nov 14, 2002, 12:24 PM
Post #24 of 27 (3358 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] Proposed new 4-way rule.... [In reply to] Can't Post

Recapping and adding to what I've already posted higher up in the thread.

Obviously the wording would need to be reworked, but in a nutshell here's what I would want.

Quote:
No team in the Advanced or Intermediate classes may be composed of any team members that have previously been on a team attending the U.S. National Championships in that event that has scored higher than 0.618 times the winning average in the previous year's event at the next higher level.

Ok, let's look at how that would work.

Golden Knights Gold wins the 2002 Open Class with an average of 21.8

ANY member of ANY Advanced team that scores an average of more than 21.8 x 0.618 or 13.47 would be forced to then compete in the Open class next year. In this case it would mean both the Gold and Silver Advanced teams move up.

For Intermediate, since the winning Advanced average was 13.7, everyone with a higher average than 8.46 would have to move up. I'll admit, that's a LOT of folks, but it would really balance out the rankings in a very natural way.

So, to specifically answer your questions . . .

Quote:
1. where would this years teams been put?
Well, I'll admit I didn't go back and look at that, but as you can see it's a pretty easy thing to figure out for yourself.

Quote:
2. When would they have known what class they are in?
A person would know what class they're in for NEXT year the moment official scores were posted at THIS year's Nationals. That's the entire point. FINALLY it would actually mean something when a person calls himself an "Advanced" 4-way skydiver. How you're "seeded" would be determined from the previous year's Nationals. It's a very simple calculation. Take the winning average of the Open team, multiply by 0.618 and if your team's score was above that, then you're now in Open, if not, then you may compete in Open if you'd like, but your incentive is to develop yourself at the proper level and win some Gold there. Same deal with Intermediate, look at the winning average in Advanced and multiply by 0.618. If your team average was higher, move into Advanced, if not stay in Intermediate.

Quote:
3. How would the results have changed this years standings?
I haven't really done the math to figure that out, but suffice it to say that Intermediate would have changed quite a bit -- maybe Advanced too.

Quote:
4. How would it Eliminate Sandbagging and Player coaches?
Because the seeding takes place only once a year, after Nationals, it would make no logical sense for any team to sandbag -- they're only screwing themselves out of a year's worth of skydiving. Player/coaches are eliminated due to the rules -- no Open class competitors on Advanced or Intermediate teams. Simple.

Now, is this a perfect system? No, because NSL and USPA don't really play by the exact same rules and don't have their Chamionships at the same time. I'd like to see that change as well, but that's another issue entirely.


Ron

Nov 14, 2002, 1:43 PM
Post #25 of 27 (3347 views)
Shortcut
Re: [quade] Proposed new 4-way rule.... [In reply to] Can't Post

Locical...
Makes sense....
It will probley never work.
It most likley would never get passed.
Sly

But according to what you have....then Nemesis, Bees, Vision. Would all of had to go Open this year.

The Bees and Tunnel Vision would not be able to try for Advanced Gold next year either.

They, are by definition Weekend teams...Teams that have jobs, and have to pay for jumps/gear...ect.
Should the weekend teams have to compete against Airspeed?
The Advanced class was created to allow the weekend/non pro jumpers a chance to stand on a podium. This would have made them compete in open...and the super cool jump off situation would not have happened. This would have robbed these teams,,and everyone on the ground of the tension.

That would have sucked.

It also limits the % of performance in the lower classes.
I personally think that a weekend team (with no pro's should be able to do a solid 15....It has really yet to happen).

In fact only three times have I seen a Weekend team post over a 14 on a 10 round meet. Nemesis once at Fantasy of Flight, Frost at Nationals and Bees at the NSL playoffs.

The top weekend teams have been posting 13-14 (minus any ringers) since 99. But I would hate to put a cap on them. And besides the move up rule would take over.

Looking at the Nationals...There are very easy to see levels.

Intermediate it is harder to see.....a 15 in Intermediate does not equate to Advanced draw. However, there were levels in Intermediate. 2 Teams pulled away from the pack. One was sandbaging, and the other was the top Airforce team...they don't pay for jumps, gear..ect. Airforce is the Intermediate version of the Knights.

10 to 13.7 Advanced. Thats not alot of disatnce...and there are alot of teams that can fit in that class.

Semi pro...this year only 2 teams were in the void of Advanced/Pro they both posted 14.9 and 15.3.

Pro teams that did 17 or better. All of these teams have or had skydiving as the job they do. Knights, Airspeed, Majik.
Still I would hate to limit what a team in a class can do....If a weekend team can do a 17....good for them.

And you didn't have an answer for a new team..One that was not at last years nationals.....Or a team made up of other teammembers?

Not that it is a bad idea....Just has alot of working out left to do.

Maybe a rework of the %....0.7 would have let a team with a 15.2 go Advanced....but that might be to high. It would be better however.

And the Move up rule would have to go.

Until a total rework can be done...lets fix the problem we have now....Pro's should not be allowed to compete for Advanced medals...Or Intermedate teams should not be allowed to hire Advanced winners.

The current proposal does this.

Ron


BikerBabe  (D 18644)

Nov 14, 2002, 3:46 PM
Post #26 of 27 (415 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ron] Proposed new 4-way rule.... [In reply to] Can't Post

Ron, I generally agree with you, as someone who plans on competing in the advanced class next year with my weekend team. However, I must correct a misconception that I hear a lot of...

Quote:
top Airforce team...they don't pay for jumps, gear..ect. Airforce is the Intermediate version of the Knights.

ACK! No! Wrong! As far as I know, the Knights don't train 4-way on top of (and secondary to) putting 1000 students per year through a 25-hour ground school/5-jump course. On top of 21-hr course loads, mandatory intramural athletics, and various military duties...Crazy

When I was on the team (I did the Demo team, not the competition team), I think the Senior 4-way team got maybe 30 4-way training jumps a month on Air Force Academy time. Look at any of their logbooks...a majority of their "free" jumps at the AFA will be from 4,000 ft. The only exception was on our spring break training camp. If you look at previous nationals results, the top AF cadet team only started attending USPA nationals a couple of years ago, and until this year, they were averaging in the 7-8 range. This year's team decided to go out to Calhan on the weekends, go to the tunnel, and train using their own $ for jumps...and it shows. None of the previous years teams has done nearly as much training on their personal time (or dime).

At the AFA, competiton, while a cool aspect of the Wings of Blue, is really not the number 1 priority...As a matter of fact, if I had to rank them when I was there, it would be teaching AM-490 (the basic first jump course), demos, then competition in order of priority. Things may have changed since then, but I doubt it. It's much easier to recruit applicants to the AFA from an air show audience of 200,000...

Sorry for harping...it just gets to me when I hear that the AFA teams have it easy...Smile

Edited to add: they also have to train for classic style and accuracy...Unsure


(This post was edited by BikerBabe on Nov 14, 2002, 3:49 PM)


Ron

Nov 15, 2002, 2:08 AM
Post #27 of 27 (399 views)
Shortcut
Re: [BikerBabe] Proposed new 4-way rule.... [In reply to] Can't Post

You forgot to add that they get coaching from Team Frost.Wink

I know a good bit about the Airforce team....
You said they might do 30 4way jumps a jumps a mth....Thats a lot of free 4 way jumps. I think the top Airforce team did ~150 team jumps last year. Which is more than Frost did, and almost most more than Nemesis did this year. And more than most of the Intermediate teams.

The "New" guys already have 10 jumps this year, and 2 hrs. of tunnel time. Next week they are going to have a week long train up at Perris Valley CA. They will also have a Civilian coach there for the whole week.

But in my comparison to the Knights it is fairly good....
It's just that the Airforce team has to do everything, as opposed to the GK's having different teams. And the AFA team might only do 150 jumps, but most Intermediate teams do around that number or less. The GK's do 1,000 jumps....Again Top Open teams do around that # or less.

So in the Intermediate class...they are just like the GK's.

Ron
Frost 98-02
82 Airborne "All American Freefall Team" (Demo team, comp team, Instructor) 99-02



Forums : Skydiving Disciplines : Relative Work

 


Search for (options)