Facts, Not Fiction

 
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 48
  1. Collapse Details
     
    #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Mired in Tar
    Posts
    2,113
    Update after shot put:

    Projected
    Rank
    Name
    Projected
    Score
    Difference from
    Initial Projection
    1
    Zamzow
    6027
    +122
    2
    Gittens
    6006
    +145
    3
    Atherley
    5940
    +31
    4
    FrÝynes
    5881
    +114
    5
    Bender
    5804
    -28
    6
    Gray
    5708
    +85
    7
    Beattie
    5679
    +154
    8
    Taubert
    5657
    +68
    9
    Lester
    5635
    +169
    10
    Rusnak
    5610
    +159
    .
    .
    .
    14
    Marsh
    5469
    -35
    .
    .
    .
    17
    Berge
    5408
    -101
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
     
    #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Mired in Tar
    Posts
    2,113
    Quote Originally Posted by donley2 View Post
    Thanks again for the projections. Love these.
    You're very welcome, kind sir. I find them helpful.
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
     
    #13
    Administrator
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    A Temperate Island
    Posts
    7,567
    I appreciate the projections too!
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
     
    #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Mired in Tar
    Posts
    2,113
    Thanks, polevaultpower! I appreciate the insight you and our fellow denizens so often bring to these message boards, and strive to make my own meager contributions.
    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
     
    #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Mired in Tar
    Posts
    2,113
    Update after 200:

    Projected
    Rank
    Name
    Projected
    Score
    Difference from
    Initial Projection
    1
    Zamzow
    6073
    +168
    2
    Gittens
    6054
    +193
    3
    Atherley
    5949
    +40
    4
    FrÝynes
    5858
    +91
    5
    Bender
    5847
    +15
    6
    Gray
    5760
    +137
    7
    Beattie
    5734
    +209
    8
    Lester
    5681
    +215
    9
    Taubert
    5666
    +77
    10
    Rusnak
    5630
    +179
    .
    .
    .
    14
    Marsh
    5511
    +7
    .
    .
    .
    18
    Berge
    5400
    -109
    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
     
    #16
    Zamzow can make up a lot of ground in the final two events, so Gittens needs a PR in either the JT or the 800.
    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
     
    #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Mired in Tar
    Posts
    2,113
    Update after long jump:

    Projected
    Rank
    Name
    Projected
    Score
    Difference from
    Initial Projection
    1
    Zamzow
    6176
    +271
    2
    Gittens
    6054
    +193
    3
    Atherley
    5952
    +43
    4
    Bender
    5866
    +34
    5
    FrÝynes
    5852
    +85
    6
    Beattie
    5837
    +312
    7
    Gray
    5797
    +174
    8
    Rusnak
    5729
    +278
    9
    Lester
    5705
    +239
    10
    Taubert
    5666
    +77
    11
    Marsh
    5635
    +131
    .
    .
    .
    18
    Berge
    5397
    -112
    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
     
    #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Madison, WI
    Posts
    23,374
    Zamzow just got a 28-cm PR (6.01); while she lost a few points she 'should have lost a whole lot more. Not sure this wraps it up but it is sort of like last year where Ellenwood got a 6.07(?) with very lucky tailwind on a day of headwinds.

    With advantages of 52/41m JT and 2:18/2:29 800 the advantage is now to Zamzow.
    Last edited by 26mi235; 06-08-2019 at 07:37 PM.
    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
     
    #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    on task
    Posts
    11,716
    Quote Originally Posted by Davidokun View Post
    Update after long jump
    The fact that both men and women here are generally outscoring the projection - can the effect of a championship meet in a warm-weather venue be . . . projected? Or are you intentionally conservative so we don't get ahead of ourselves?
    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
     
    #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Mired in Tar
    Posts
    2,113
    As previously mentioned, my projections are based on summing average event performances. As anticipated, the athletes generally outscore these projections because they are peaking for this championship event. The difference may be viewed as a shortcoming of my present methodology. Alternatively, it may be viewed as a measure of successful preparation by coaches and athletes.
    Last edited by Davidokun; 06-08-2019 at 07:50 PM. Reason: Wordsmithing
    Reply With Quote
     

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •