Ranking observation


Main message board: for the discussion of topical track & field items only.

Ranking observation

Postby highjumpfan » Fri Jan 04, 2013 11:17 am

In the women's American athlete of the year voting, Brigetta Barrett came in 8th place, while Chaunte Lowe finished ninth, yet in the high jump rankings Lowe finished ahead of Barrett.

Has this ever happened before to two single event athletes, or is it simply a mistake somewhere?
highjumpfan
 
Posts: 329
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: right where I'm supposed to be.

Re: Ranking observation

Postby Marlow » Fri Jan 04, 2013 11:53 am

highjumpfan wrote:In the women's American athlete of the year voting, Brigetta Barrett came in 8th place, while Chaunte Lowe finished ninth, yet in the high jump rankings Lowe finished ahead of Barrett.
Has this ever happened before to two single event athletes, or is it simply a mistake somewhere?

No mistake. Two entirely different mechanisms to determine each. AOY is a vote; the Rankings are not. I'd place more value in the Rankings, since individual voters tend towards their own biases.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21125
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Ranking observation

Postby aaronk » Fri Jan 04, 2013 1:50 pm

Marlow wrote:
highjumpfan wrote:In the women's American athlete of the year voting, Brigetta Barrett came in 8th place, while Chaunte Lowe finished ninth, yet in the high jump rankings Lowe finished ahead of Barrett.
Has this ever happened before to two single event athletes, or is it simply a mistake somewhere?

No mistake. Two entirely different mechanisms to determine each. AOY is a vote; the Rankings are not. I'd place more value in the Rankings, since individual voters tend towards their own biases.


From the T&FN pages of the Feb 2012 issue (I don't yet have the Feb 2013 issue!!):

"The Top 10 in the U.S. are listed in a separate box, with those who are also in the World Rankings indicated by an asterisk. It is important to note that the U.S. Rankings follow the order of the World where they overlap."

So, does this mean that the Lowe-Barrett switch is WRONG??

Or, does it mean that ONLY where the names OVERLAP must they remain in order of ranking??
Meaning, that those BELOW the overlapped names can be ranked ANY WHICH WAY???
aaronk
 
Posts: 3361
Joined: Sun May 06, 2012 9:39 am

Re: Ranking observation

Postby Marlow » Fri Jan 04, 2013 2:17 pm

aaronk wrote:From the T&FN pages of the Feb 2012 issue (I don't yet have the Feb 2013 issue!!):
"The Top 10 in the U.S. are listed in a separate box, with those who are also in the World Rankings indicated by an asterisk. It is important to note that the U.S. Rankings follow the order of the World where they overlap."

So, does this mean that the Lowe-Barrett switch is WRONG??

Or, does it mean that ONLY where the names OVERLAP must they remain in order of ranking??
Meaning, that those BELOW the overlapped names can be ranked ANY WHICH WAY???

You're still mixing apples and oranges. Rankings (World and US) should be consistent. Rankings and AOY places do not need to be consistent.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21125
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: aaronk, Google [Bot] and 8 guests