- Jun 21, 2003
(the) graph would look a little different, with the GOE of the triple of the axel on the x-axis as the independent variable, and the PCS being on the y-axis as the dependent variable.
Makes no difference to the mathematics, but yeah, that would male it be easier for the viewer to conceptualize the question visually.
Shanshani said:I don't think that's quite a correct description of r[sup]2[/sup], it's more the amount of variation in GOE that's explainable by differences in height/distance, rather than the % of GOE itself.
I think the following is good language: What is r? When the height goes up by 1 standard deviation, we expect (statistically, on the average, and with everything else staying the same) that the GOE will go up, not by a full standard deviation but by only r% of a standard deviation.
(Put this way, I am not surprised that the correlation is low.)
Quantity rather than quality.
To me, that is the whole core and soul of the CoP. Quantify everything you possibly can. What's left over, try your best to attach numbers to esthetic qualities as opportunity arises. What you will get is a lot of quantity, with new world's records in point totals set in every competition.