2017-18 State of U.S. Men's Figure Skating

[tosca]

So what you really mean is:

Based on *your* hypothetical points and weighting, the Olympic team makes sense ....​

I was hoping I was clear that hypothetical insinuated that it was my hypothetical in my last post as well as this in my first post:

I emphasize that all the numbers besides placements are hypothetical and I did this of my own accord.

For the sake of discussion, I have used your weighting/points system to make calculations for Karen and Ashley.
Your weighting/points system would give Ashley quite an edge in "body of work."
So we know that at least for the ladies, either the selection committee clearly did not use the same weighting/points system as yours -- and/or that the committee felt that one or more other factors should be taken into account beyond an arithmetical formula for body of work.

...
My point is that because we do not know the actual parameters used by the selection committee, mathematical methodology is not reliable (and cannot be reliable) in explaining the committee's decisions.

Your arbitrary/hypothetical system of weighting/points does nothing to make the selection of the U.S. ladies more black and white.
If anything, it does the opposite.​

[/INDENT][/INDENT]

Agreed. But also I chose not to go into women's on a men's thread. (although yes, I used female skaters as examples). I also had said this prior:

Again, this is all hypothetical but the point I am trying to get across is there is a way to apply hard analysis to "body of work". Again, the one thing that this does not take into account are more qualitative things like momentum etc. but at least it would give hard data to the concept of "body of work".

It does make things a little more grey for womens. I do not want to get into it on this thread but *my math* was not used by the USFS. I was trying to show how if mathematics (mathematics is not mine, it belongs to us all) was used, it could allow for less confusion when it comes to selection

Your spreadsheet has a few errors:

2017 Worlds was a Tier 1 competition (not Tier 3) in the USFS criteria.
2017 Four Continents was a Tier 2 competition (not Tier 3).

Jason Brown's results are from 2017 Worlds. Not 2017 Junior Worlds, which is what your spreadsheet shows.

Your spreadsheet inexplicably omits Grant Hochstein's ninth place at 2017 Four Continents -- so the truth is that he competed in six events, not five.
His 2017 Four Continents ninth place is "worth" zero points, according to your points system. But your spreadsheet does show other instances of ninth place.​

Thank you for pointing that out! I have corrected and although the averages and # of events change, the results remain the same.

 

[tosca]

Great job! Thank you so much - you’ve really shown how applying a formula makes sense.

I guess the only thing I might tweak in your model is the use of GP points for everything. If I assign the same value (not counting the bonus) to a 6th place finish at a challenger series event, a GP event, and a Championship or Final event, I’m basically saying that they’re worth the same thing. But for World Standings purposes, these events are weighted differently. I think you get more points for a championship event because the competition there is theoretically tougher. Also, I’m not sure about using averages to avoid penalizing someone with fewer events, because it kind of flattens things out. If you are assigned to more events than others, it usually means you earned them by performing well the previous season. If you are assigned fewer events, it can mean that you performed poorly the previous season and didn’t earn them, are new (ie inexperienced), were injured, or withdrew from an assigned competition for personal reasons. Since the idea is to look at someone’s work over time, just looking at the average doesn’t give you a true picture. JMO! Thanks again!

Of course! I understand where you are saying. I thought about taking the average for someone who had less events for someone like Bradie who had a much smaller "body of work" etc. All hypothetical numbers!

 

[zebobes]

Nice to have another analyst on this forum



Been a crazy day but I did it for the top 6 men at nationals + Max Aaron. LOVE DATA.

Interesting formula!

I would rethink the weighting so that ninth place is not weighted at 0, because that means that a 9th place at all 3 tiers has the same weight, but the tier 1 10 place has a higher negative impact than a tier 2. Is there a reason why you chose to give 10th place on a negative value?

Mark Mitchell's interview on TSL was pretty interesting. He was aware of BOW, but didn't think that Vincent's BOW was that much superior, considering their only tier one position, he had a higher placement. He actually argued that Jason, according to the BOW argument, had a stronger case than Vincent, and maybe he should have been on the team instead.

Anyway, I think Mark didn't think the BOW was applied in the same way for everyone, which was what made him so angry. He would like to see clearer weighting and a more transparent process. He did mention that his students are now motivated to do their best at every competition, which I think IS what the USFS would like to see.

 

[ice coverage]

I was hoping I was clear that hypothetical insinuated that it was my hypothetical in my last post as well as this in my first post: ...

I agree that you were not hiding that you were hypothesizing that your weighting/points system was something along the lines that the selection committee perhaps might have used.

... It does make things a little more grey for womens. I do not want to get into it on this thread but *my math* was not used by the USFS. I was trying to show how if mathematics (mathematics is not mine, it belongs to us all) was used, it could allow for less confusion when it comes to selection ...

My two cents are that a data-crunching exercise is (at best) meaningless -- and (at worst) potentially exacerbates confusion -- when we have no factual information as to what formulas (if any) were used by the actual decision-makers.

I am opposed to citing mathematical methodology in order to create a false aura of "making sense" of how the committee's decisions were reached.

IMO, it is quite an understatement that your hypothesizing makes things "a little more grey" regarding the selection of U.S. ladies.

A huge (IMO) flaw in your hypothesizing is that it could lead someone to "expect" (my word) that the committee would make or even "should" have made the opposite choice for ladies from what it actually did.

---

ETA:

If the committee did use formulas (its own formulas) in its decision-making, fine by me. I have no problem with using math in decision-making.

But I don't understand the point of going through an elaborate "analysis" to come up with "results" that had no bearing on the committee's decision-making.​

 

[Mrs. P]

Interesting formula!

I would rethink the weighting so that ninth place is not weighted at 0, because that means that a 9th place at all 3 tiers has the same weight, but the tier 1 10 place has a higher negative impact than a tier 2. Is there a reason why you chose to give 10th place on a negative value?

Mark Mitchell's interview on TSL was pretty interesting. He was aware of BOW, but didn't think that Vincent's BOW was that much superior, considering their only tier one position, he had a higher placement. He actually argued that Jason, according to the BOW argument, had a stronger case than Vincent, and maybe he should have been on the team instead.

Anyway, I think Mark didn't think the BOW was applied in the same way for everyone, which was what made him so angry. He would like to see clearer weighting and a more transparent process. He did mention that his students are now motivated to do their best at every competition, which I think IS what the USFS would like to see.

Thanks for sharing that. That's really interesting to hear that his issue was with Vincent, not Adam. And making a case that Jason should have been chosen over Vincent, now that's surprising!

I agree that the different events seemed to weight for different folks, at least at first view.

 

[zebobes]

Thanks for sharing that. That's really interesting to hear that his issue was with Vincent, not Adam. And making a case that Jason should have been chosen over Vincent, now that's surprising!

I agree that the different events seemed to weight for different folks, at least at first view.

Well, I don't necessarily think that he was saying that Jason should have been on the team instead, but he was trying to show that if they were REALLY following the criteria, Vincent didn't really have a case either.

 

[Mrs. P]

Well, I don't necessarily think that he was saying that Jason should have been on the team instead, but he was trying to show that if they were REALLY following the criteria, Vincent didn't really have a case either.

Mark seem to left out the fact that Vincent did beat Ross in their one head-to-head at Finlandia and that his GP season was slightly better. Perhaps there's a case to leave Vincent out if you're going to pick Adam, but I don't think it's that extreme that picked Vincent but not Ross.

I think I would have spilt the assignments. Given Ross Olympics and Vincent worlds or vice versa.

 

[zebobes]

Mark seem to left out the fact that Vincent did beat Ross in their one head-to-head at Finlandia and that his GP season was slightly better. Perhaps there's a case to leave Vincent out if you're going to pick Adam, but I don't think it's that extreme that picked Vincent but not Ross.

I think I would have spilt the assignments. Given Ross Olympics and Vincent worlds or vice versa.

His point was that was a Tier 3 criteria. On the Grand Prix, Vincent got 4 and 9, while Ross was 6th, so on Tier 2 they're about even, and on Tier 1, Ross beat Vincent,

To sum up his rationale, on Tier 3, Vincent beat Ross, Tier 2 they are even, and Tier 1 Ross beat Vincent.

 

[Mrs. P]

His point was that was a Tier 3 criteria. On the Grand Prix, Vincent got 4 and 9, while Ross was 6th, so on Tier 2 they're about even, and on Tier 1, Ross beat Vincent,

To sum up his rationale, on Tier 3, Vincent beat Ross, Tier 2 they are even, and Tier 1 Ross beat Vincent.

It's good to hear Mark's take, even if I don't agree with it.

Looking at Jackie Wong's side-by-side chart (http://www.rockerskating.com/news/2...championships-part-1-making-sense-of-criteria) gives me a whole different view, though.

In Tier 3, Vincent has three competitions where he scored between 250-263. Ross' range was 219-240, plus Vincent beating Ross at Finlandia by 17 points. I don't think they're even on Tier 2. Yes Vincent was 9th in his second GP, but his score was still higher than the one Ross earned at Skate America. And the point difference at Nationals was less than 1 point.

It would have been interesting to hear how TPTB actually factored everything.

 

[mrrice]

Adam is getting a ton of publicity. He just did an interview on Access Online and in just the past week he's probably gained over 30,000 Instagram followers. I wonder if this could influence whether or not he gets picked for the team event.

I saw this and responded in Cafe', I didn't think it belonged in this section. However, if this post is not going to be bumped, I'll move mine here...Since it's basically a political story, I wasn't sure what to do with it.

 

[brightphoton]

Seriously, ice coverage, what is your end game with this rudeness? If you don't like models and statistics on figure skating decisions, ignore it and let them be.

This is the third time I've seen you be rude and snide towards people who only want to have fun with numbers.

 

[mrrice]

Adam is getting a ton of publicity. He just did an interview on Access Online and in just the past week he's probably gained over 30,000 Instagram followers. I wonder if this could influence whether or not he gets picked for the team event.

I certainly hope not......Look, Adam is speaking as a Gay Man who happens to be a figure skater. I know first hand how seriously frightening it can be to labeled and bullied for being gay when you're young. In my case, I had to leave school because it got the point where I didn't feel safe on campus. There is nothing in the "Code Of Conduct" that states that a skater can't speak his or her mind about subject that directly effects them, or someone they know.

If Adam were to be pulled from the team for being gay, speaking out against Pence or anyone else who has an "Antigay" stance, I would boycott the Olympics and refuse to watch. I am certainly not into "Outing" people but, when I was living in Los Angeles and working at Universal we had a gay night. There were so many public people who showed up holding hands with their partners that Pence would have blown a gasket.....One of the couples that showed up were well known News Anchors. I watch the news for news, I don't care who the Anchor chooses to love. I think Pence should back away from judging people for loving who they love and keep Politics out of their relationships.

 

[nguyhm]

I think I would have spilt the assignments. Given Ross Olympics and Vincent worlds or vice versa.

I think that would have been fair - a National silver medalist should be rewarded for something. The selection made by USFSA almost shows how "meaningless" Ross' silver medal is and that's discouraging for up and coming skaters. Where are the incentives? Everyone can improve just as well as deteriorate. What if Ross's skate that night was not a fluke, that he has improved - we'll never find out. I wish he didn't withdraw and skate lights out at 4CC but then I understand why he decides to stay home.

 

[ice coverage]

Seriously, ice coverage, what is your end game with this rudeness? If you don't like models and statistics on figure skating decisions, ignore it and let them be.

This is the third time I've seen you be rude and snide towards people who only want to have fun with numbers.

I have been neither rude nor snide.
I have been polite as I have offered a different point of view.
If you don't want to read my posts, ignore them and let them be.

tosca's "hypothesizing" (the word used by tosca) was not billed as "fun with numbers."
tosca seems to take her/his own "hypothesizing" seriously enough to bill it as making the selection decisions "less grey and more black and white."

For me, tosca's hypothesizing did not live up to her/his billing -- given that it would have put Ashley significantly ahead of Karen in terms of body of work, for example.

 

[brightphoton]

^ yeah, see this? I don't get why you have to follow up cool figure skating models with this negativity.

 

[tosca]

I have been neither rude nor snide.
I have been polite as I have offered a different point of view.
If you don't want to read my posts, ignore them and let them be.

tosca's "hypothesizing" (the word used by tosca) was not billed as "fun with numbers."
tosca seems to take her/his own "hypothesizing" seriously enough to bill it as making the selection decisions "less grey and more black and white."

For me, tosca's hypothesizing did not live up to her/his billing -- given that it would have put Ashley significantly ahead of Karen in terms of body of work, for example.

I am just going to say that I was having fun with numbers. I did not take my things that seriously at all. I was just trying to say that some kind of metrics should be applied to the idea of "body of work". I also feel like I was clear that the USFS did not use my methodology.

Anyways, I'd love to move on from this conversation!

 

[sheetz]

If Adam were to be pulled from the team for being gay,

I was thinking more on the lines of whether or not TBTB would be persuaded to put Adam in the team event due to his increased celebrity rather than Nathan/Vincent or Nathan/Nathan. His earning a team bronze would likely be widely publicized.

 

[mrrice]

I was thinking more on the lines of whether or not TBTB would be persuaded to put Adam in the team event due to his increased celebrity rather than Nathan/Vincent or Nathan/Nathan. His earning a team bronze would likely be widely publicized.

Well, I can't see the argument for using Adam in the team event unless Nathan or Vincent turn it down. Adam was 4th, right? I could see Nathan wanting to be fresh for singles and saying no. That's the only situation where I could the USFS committee choosing Adam for the team event.

 

[Moxiejan]

Well, I can't see the argument for using Adam in the team event unless Nathan or Vincent turn it down. Adam was 4th, right? I could see Nathan wanting to be fresh for singles and saying no. That's the only situation where I could the USFS committee choosing Adam for the team event.

Obviously, Nathan gets priority for the team event. But if a second skater is used, the decision likely will come down to BoW. And Adam's international results are far stronger than Vincent's.

 

[el henry]

I am just going to say that I was having fun with numbers. I did not take my things that seriously at all. I was just trying to say that some kind of metrics should be applied to the idea of "body of work". I also feel like I was clear that the USFS did not use my methodology.

Anyways, I'd love to move on from this conversation!

Thank you Tosca for supplying us with your "fun with numbers"

I enjoyed reading them, you were perfectly clear as to what you meant, what you were doing, and why you were doing it, and I for one hope you continue

As @Tavi.... said, va Tosca