for an ad-free Fetcheveryone experience!

How to score a team competition

2 watchers

rf_fozzy Aug 2021 1:33pm, 16 Aug 2021 15,168 posts	Quote Pin rf_fozzy Cerra - I like that - just add up the 10 or whatever best scores and then have some kind of bonus for number of runners That could be normalised for club size perhaps. I want to avoid the points based solely on positions for 2 reasons; 1. The fact that orienteering is a time trial formats so without the head to head racing I always think the positions thing is a bit silly because you've no idea how close the person in front or behind you is. The time score rewards people running hard even if you make mistakes. 2. Position based scores are how the CSC works and I'd like something a bit different
larkim Aug 2021 1:37pm, 16 Aug 2021 15,244 posts	Quote Pin larkim It's difficult to work it all through unless you know objectively what a correct answer looks like I suppose. A bit like the Olympic medal tables. Maybe a better approach is to have different "winners". So a prize for the top team (max 5 scorers), a prize for biggest turnout (in proportion to club size) etc etc. Trying to normalise the whole thing when different people will have a different view of which is the more important aspect to reward is tricky! I quite like the bonus deductions for participants as Cerre describes.
rf_fozzy Aug 2021 1:42pm, 16 Aug 2021 15,169 posts	Quote Pin rf_fozzy Unfortunately we can have only one yhoa club champion! I have realised that the average * turnout actually works out as: Sum of scores /club size Which might not work as the number of runners actually running only matters for the purposes of the sum part. Maybe that doesn't matter and actually does what I want?
Cerrertonia Aug 2021 1:45pm, 16 Aug 2021 14,459 posts	Quote Pin Cerrertonia It seems ok to me - you reward people for running fast, and you reward people for taking part. Not running at all always makes your team's score worse, running faster irrespective of how fast you are always improves your team's score.
rf_fozzy Aug 2021 1:45pm, 16 Aug 2021 15,170 posts	Quote Pin rf_fozzy Larkim - basically I need a scoring system that "looks" fair - the smaller clubs are always going to complain that they can't get as many runners as the bigger clubs and so they are penalised. In reality, the bigger clubs are always going to have an advantage, but whatever system must give the smaller clubs a chance. I've got some old results I can use as test beds, but I need an idea for what system I'm using before I trial it.
rf_fozzy Aug 2021 1:46pm, 16 Aug 2021 15,171 posts	Quote Pin rf_fozzy Cerra - yes I guess that's true It also has the advantage of being simple to understand!
Cerrertonia Aug 2021 1:47pm, 16 Aug 2021 14,460 posts	Quote Pin Cerrertonia Although you would have to enter a nominal 59:59 or whatever for non-runners to make it work.
rf_fozzy Aug 2021 1:48pm, 16 Aug 2021 15,172 posts	Quote Pin rf_fozzy The only disadvantage is that the obvious gaming of the system is that you could stick a deliberately fast runner on each course, but I don't think that matters.
rf_fozzy Aug 2021 1:50pm, 16 Aug 2021 15,173 posts	Quote Pin rf_fozzy Why do I need a nominal score for non runners As long as I know how many club members each club has, it's a simple division of the sum of the scores. What I do need is a nominal score >0 for people who DNF (or in reality misspunch) but who actually do start the event.
Cerrertonia Aug 2021 1:59pm, 16 Aug 2021 14,461 posts	Quote Pin Cerrertonia You can get a higher score, either by adding more runners, or by running slower. That doesn't seem right.