Lists of Teams

Leaders by Category

Postby John Kirk » Mon Sep 22, 2008 9:48 am

Some others have expressed interest as well via email/offline. We'll have to see how things shape up, but one possibility is to sign everyone up who has 'X' amount of ascents in 2008 and then remove as requested (if anyone chooses to opt out).

Another possibility is a draft system with a bidding points quota. Example: Team leaders have 500 points to spend, each member is bid on until the deadline. Kind of like a hybrid of the NFL draft and EBAY.
User avatar
John Kirk
LoJ Architect
 
Posts: 1580
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 1:04 am
Location: Lakewood, CO

Postby Jeremy Hakes » Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:00 am

What about a Quad King category? (whoever completes the most quads?)
What about a Namemaster category (most named peaks that aren't ranked?)
Or a Softie Category? (Most soft-ranks). Softie not applied to turds... Toliet
User avatar
Jeremy Hakes
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Golden, Colorado

Postby John Kirk » Wed Sep 24, 2008 10:32 am

I'm a little hesitant about Quads without some qualifiers because there is carryover from prior periods (people already have partially completed quads). I think it would have to be completely new quads, thus, the total starts with all quads completed in year xxxx, then quads are removed that do not have all peaks in said quads completed within year xxxx.

On non-ranked in general we could call it the "Extraneous Award" or "Superfluity Award"

Along similar lines we could have an award for most repeats - "Same Old, Same Old Award" or "Masters of the Redundant"
User avatar
John Kirk
LoJ Architect
 
Posts: 1580
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 1:04 am
Location: Lakewood, CO

Postby Jeremy Hakes » Wed Sep 24, 2008 10:40 am

:-D

That's awesome. I love those categories! Especially the title of the repeats (Masters of the Redundant). That would help my team b/c I will likely be repeating a lot of stuff with my wife next year again.

Your points about quads make salient points. Hm. Maybe that one is not so great.

Have you thought about doing an example of this whole thing retroactively? Like taking a theoretical team (Derrill and I and Beau or whatever) and applying our stats to those criterion for some of the peaks? Curious to see how it would look as it is formatted.
User avatar
Jeremy Hakes
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Golden, Colorado

Postby John Kirk » Wed Sep 24, 2008 10:56 am

Jeremy Hakes wrote::-D
Have you thought about doing an example of this whole thing retroactively? Like taking a theoretical team (Derrill and I and Beau or whatever) and applying our stats to those criterion for some of the peaks? Curious to see how it would look as it is formatted.


I was planning on building something that would show these stats on an individual basis that would be used as info for team formation (probably top 50 for each category, in descending rank). I'll be building it in steps/pieces, but it will all be available from one page. I'll post something here when I have a page up.
User avatar
John Kirk
LoJ Architect
 
Posts: 1580
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 1:04 am
Location: Lakewood, CO

Postby John Kirk » Wed Sep 24, 2008 5:10 pm

Here's what is available so far:

http://listsofjohn.com/PeakStats/Content/categoryindex.html

8 categories so far. Some of the results are somewhat unexpected (high and low categories, first ascents).
User avatar
John Kirk
LoJ Architect
 
Posts: 1580
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 1:04 am
Location: Lakewood, CO

Postby mikeofferman » Thu Sep 25, 2008 5:37 am

Lots of interesting info!

Looks like a wrong link for the frequency award.
mikeofferman
 
Posts: 133
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2006 8:47 pm
Location: Windsor

Postby Jeremy Hakes » Thu Sep 25, 2008 7:26 am

Sweet! That's fun! And I lead in 2 categories! That means I'm worth something! :-D
User avatar
Jeremy Hakes
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Golden, Colorado

Postby John Kirk » Thu Sep 25, 2008 8:18 am

Jeremy Hakes wrote:Sweet! That's fun! And I lead in 2 categories! That means I'm worth something! :-D


Glad I could help you with that - always pleased to contribute to others' self-worth. :wiz:
User avatar
John Kirk
LoJ Architect
 
Posts: 1580
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 1:04 am
Location: Lakewood, CO

Postby Jeremy Hakes » Thu Sep 25, 2008 8:41 am

That whole thing is cool, John. Fun stuff! I really like being able to do previous years as well. That's a fun thing to look at. :)
User avatar
Jeremy Hakes
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Golden, Colorado

Postby MikeRodenak » Thu Sep 25, 2008 8:59 am

Its fun to look through the stats, interesting stuff for sure! I kind of landed where I figured I would on some of them, but something doesn't look right on the first ascents category. I am only listed as having 5, but I can think of 8 off the top of my head, all in Eagle County.

How are you getting the data for the first ascents? I would assume its based on the date the log was signed? I know on the 3 in question there are two names, but I know when I climbed them there was no one in the register. There was one that Kiefer and I climbed together so I would think we would both get credited for the first LOJ ascent on that one, but the other two I was solo.

Edit - In looking through the list nobody got credit for those other 3 FA's, the ones I am looking at are PT 7215 (with Kiefer Thomas) on 4/30/08, PT 8184A on 5/3/08 and PT 9732A on 5/31/08. Thanks.
MikeRodenak
 
Posts: 138
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2007 2:31 pm
Location: Avon, Colorado

Postby John Kirk » Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:57 am

MikeRodenak wrote:
Edit - In looking through the list nobody got credit for those other 3 FA's, the ones I am looking at are PT 7215 (with Kiefer Thomas) on 4/30/08, PT 8184A on 5/3/08 and PT 9732A on 5/31/08. Thanks.


Mike,

Part of the problem is people aren't validating their dates. Kiefer didn't validate his dates for 7215 and 9732 A, so there isn't a way to distinguish whether he was first or you were. I updated his dates so you get credit for those. 9732 A also shows Mike Garratt, where he logged it 7/23/08, but we don't know when he climbed it. This metric can be kind of frustrating, because you could be first, but someone could do the peak later in the year and if they don't validate when they did it, no one gets credit for a first ascent (there is no way to tell if they did it today, yesterday, or two years ago... All we know is they logged it into the system on x date, not when they climbed it).

I suppose one solution to this is to use the earliest date that is validated, but then we get into all the peaks Mike Garratt has already done that others will get credit for (Mike hasn't validated dates and I don't expect him to since that is over 3000 peaks).
User avatar
John Kirk
LoJ Architect
 
Posts: 1580
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 1:04 am
Location: Lakewood, CO

Postby John Kirk » Thu Sep 25, 2008 11:04 am

There are 12 categories up now - just need to build the average distance calc (Travelers Award). Winter Ascents will be a link to the Winter Index page (same as available from the home page menu).

The most recently built, YDS Average actually penalizes those of us who rate all our ascents, since on average, people tend to send ratings only for the difficult ones. In other words, there are a lot of unrated peaks that are keeping people's numbers up high. Expect there to be a bit of variation in this as more peaks get ratings. People on top now for a certain period could be somewhere else later as more of the peaks they did are rated.

As funny as it seems, hopefully sabotage doesn't become the primary means of advancing competition (rating peaks to bring down YDS averages, logging second ascents without validating dates, etc.)
User avatar
John Kirk
LoJ Architect
 
Posts: 1580
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 1:04 am
Location: Lakewood, CO

Postby Jeremy Hakes » Thu Sep 25, 2008 1:17 pm

re: sabotage

John - while certainly a valid point, I (personally, but then again, maybe I'm naive) can't imagine the people who are interested in this list and "competitions" would do such a thing. We're just out having fun, ya know? :disturbed:
User avatar
Jeremy Hakes
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Golden, Colorado

Postby MikeRodenak » Thu Sep 25, 2008 5:18 pm

Thanks John! That makes a lot more sense, I can see what you mean about Mike's ascents as well. I bet there are tons of peaks he signed before you instituted the dates where he is the only name and then a second ascent comes along with a date that would "steal" the first ascent. I think the system of ignoring the un-validated dates makes a lot of sense for that situation.

The other good thing about this is that nobody gets credit for the FA, so at least someone is not "stealing" credit. Of course I doubt I had true "first ascents" on any of those peaks anyway, just out of our members. I can't possibly be the first human to ever climb them.

Hopefully people won't "sabotage" the data by coming in behind someone and not putting their dates in! I have plenty of "first ascents" available in Eagle left if nobody else gets them first :-D
MikeRodenak
 
Posts: 138
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2007 2:31 pm
Location: Avon, Colorado

PreviousNext

Return to LOJ Member Stats

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest