Karla Kontinued

Karla W65 400 Final Malaga Rob JeromePhoto courtesy of Rob Jerome

Now, I think, is an appropriate time to update what’s been happening at the World Champs in Malaga for Canada’s W65 Sprinter Karla Del Grande. I wrote a few weeks ago about her newly established record times, and compared the results duncanSCORE vs Age Grading. You can refresh your memory here.

Karla set a hot Malaga on fire. If you check the results, they list her gold medal time of 14.04 in the 100m, and her 28.83 gold medal winning time as world records. These performances are actually slightly slower to times posted earlier this season, and the applications for these times to be world records are pending. Karla ran a 100m in 13.91 at the NACAC (North/Central America/Caribbean) meet and a 200m in 28.53 at the Canadian Masters Championships. In winning the gold in the 400m in Malaga, she just missed equally the existing WR. Karla ran 68.22.

For the record, this Outdoor season Karla set 2 W65 World Records (pending) in the 100m (13.91) and 200m (28.53), and just missed (0.01 seconds,1:06.22) equaling the World Record in the 400m.

Also for the record, those times have Age Grades of 96.84% (100m), 98.13% (200m), and 96.89% (400m). AG rates her 200m as the best, and 100m and 400 near equal.

The duncanSCORE evaluates these performances slightly differently. 967/97 percentile (100m), identical 967/97 percentile for the 200m, and 952/95 percentile for the 400m. That’s an equal performance in the 100m and 200m and and a 400m about 2% less.

As well, these new W65 world records are rated by AG as inferior to her W60 world records from 5 years ago. Karla’s duncanSCORES on the other hand rate them significantly superior.

I’m biased I admit. But I think the dSCORES are a better evaluation.

And don’t forget, you can get updates on the blog posts automatically by just clicking on the “follow” button on the bottom of your screen.

Please follow and like this post

The Karla Konundrum

Karla in the 200m at Porto Alegre WC (2013) – Photo courtesy Doug “Shaggy” Smith

This post talks to how “numbers” can play tricks on you. Sometimes you need to be careful. Age Grade percentages versus duncanSCORE percentiles can sometimes be eerily similar despite the fact they are comparing to different “realities” (in the case of AG against the theoretical best possible performance, dSCORE against your peers across the globe). Let’s do a deep dive on these numbers.

Recently, Canada’s superstar women’s sprinter, Karla Del Grande set 2  new (pending) World records (100m and 200m) for W65 at the Canadian outdoor championships. She currently holds those Outdoor World records for W60. She also came very close to a new WR in the 400 (3/100 shy). This was her first National championship in a new age-group (W65).

The Hytek scoring system spits out these Age Grades (latest 5 year Age Grades based on 2014-2015) for the 100m as 96.49%, for the 200 as 99.16%, and the 400m as 96.96%. All exceptionally high AGs, as you would expect. But note, the 100m is her “poorest” AG, just oh so slightly inferior to her 400m AG (despite the 100 being a WR and 400 not!) The 200m AG is over 2 1/2 pts better than the 100m. And here are her AGs for her W60 100m and 200m world records … 100m – 98.83 and 200m 100.64. So AG says her most recent performances are not as good as 5 years ago. (But in AG’s defence, there is certainly more to come as Karla builds and heads to Malaga for the 2018 WC).

Maybe you’re asking what are her duncanSCORES?  I’m glad you’re asking.

Her 13.96 W65 100m converts to a 966 duncanSCORE (97 percentile). The 28.53 200 converts to an almost identical 967 SCORE (97 percentile). The 400m also rates incredibly high – 952 SCORE, 95 percentile.

The duncanSCORES rate her 100 and 200 performances as identical. The 400, 1 1/2% inferior. AG says the 100m was the poorest performance, the 200 the best. And the 400 2.37% worse than the 200. Her W60 world records in the 100 and 200 also rate near identical scores (954/95 percentile and 953/95 percentile).

So the 2 grading systems yield differing results. AG says the 200 is Karla’s best event, and as of right now, her 2 new WRs are much less than her W60 records. dSCORES indicate that her 100 and 200 are equally her best, and that versus her peers, in 5 years she has improved significantly.

You choose!

But definitely run the duncanSCORE (duncanSCORE) and enter some of your past performances. See what it says about how you are doing (versus your peers in the same age group) then, ,versus now. How are you faring?

Postscript: The week after her new 100m and 200m WR, Karla ran in an invitational Masters 100m  at the NACAC (North and Central American, Caribbean) Championships. She ran 13.91! Primed for Malaga

Please follow and like this post

So … How This All Started

above photo courtesy of Dan Slovitt

Header photo courtesy of John MacMillan

The “beginning” for the duncanSCORE was the very late autumn of 2015.  Without going into details, I was on committees that were selecting “Athlete of the Year” in a couple of jurisdictions. My input involved athletes’ successes in terms of medals won at various championships, and records set.

Needless to say athletes in different age groups and across the track and field event spectrum were involved. Picking winner(s) was difficult. Often the discussion came back to “well Abc had an Age Grading of xx.xx% while Xyz‘s Age Grade was only xx.xx-1%”.

After much back and forth, I gave up, infuriated. Comparisons were being made across age groups and events and disciplines, and the Age Grade differences in my mind were insignificant. Knowing that the sample “sizes” for each age year and event were only ONE, and the model created included some manual “tweaking”, I knew this was a very inappropriate use of Age Grading. Believing that an Age Grade to the 1/100 was significant over a similar result from a different age group and event was ludicrous.

There had to be (and needed to be) a better way!

A few days later it started dawning on me. For the last year or so, since he had taken over the masters world rankings from Martin Gasselsberger, John Seto was beginning to amass a treasure trove of Masters’ performances. (For some history on rankings for masters, read this on Ken Stone’s masterstrack blog https://masterstrack.blog/rankings/).

Could these not be used? Perhaps they could be!

I started pulling the data for a few track events and a couple of field events from a single year for a collection of age groups. I wanted to see if it was possible, and moreover, if the results made any sense. They seemed to. I consulted with my coaches Paul Osland and Mike Sherar, and they too thought there was something there.

I pressed on. Adding more age groups and looking at 3 years of data for M50 800m. I added a few more events.

All this took me into the late spring of 2016.

I played around with different scoring systems and ideas. At the same time I started gathering more data. As many years as possible. To this point I have organized 4 years of best performance (2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016). See here the mechanics how it works

I won’t further bore you with all the problems and blind alleys I pursued. Just know I explored a lot of them before deciding on the concept you see today.  I’m a slow learner and worker, but here at last, is a “beta” look at the concept.

For a more in-depth understanding see An Introduction

 

 

Please follow and like this post