4 to get to 40!


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

Re: 4 to get to 40!

Postby 26mi235 » Thu Apr 04, 2013 7:46 pm

Economist use a measure called the 'four-firm concentration ratio to judge the concentration in an industry or industry segment (often involved in Anti-Trust rulings, etc). Here the 4-Nation ration is .74 (74% of the total). However, if you go to sub-9.90 you get almost 100%.

Also, in that list above with marks of 10.10 or better, only a few are better than 10.00 Basic. In addition, there is not a single mark with a wind less than -0.1, and the average wind is about 1. (Neither are there altitude adjustments here.)
26mi235
 
Posts: 16318
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: 4 to get to 40!

Postby batonless relay » Fri Apr 05, 2013 6:11 am

26, are you talking about the American list or the European list? And, technically it doesn't matter because as I stated in the beginning, we're operating off of very limited data points. What you're suggesting is highly technical, and to be honest, highly superfluous, imo. We would have to know all of the athletes 100m races, and then correct each for wind and altitude and lastly mark down the age when that "windless", "altitude-less" extrapolation of the actual performance occurred - and my guess is that it would LOWER the age, not raise it. Remember, we're talking about the age when sprinters peak. That's it. And looking at the European and American Lists that number is before age 26. If you look a the top 10 Jamaicans ever (Miller, Quarrie, Stewart, Powell, Bolt, Carter, Blake, Frater, Ashmeade, Forsythe) you see the same thing - only problem with the Jamaicans is that 7 of the 10 are still active. But if history is a guide and it is in nearly everything, certainly economics, then very few of the Jamaicans will improve after age 26.
batonless relay
 
Posts: 700
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:40 am

Re: 4 to get to 40!

Postby batonless relay » Fri Apr 05, 2013 6:36 am

Now, when I glance at the women's list, I definitely get the sense that women peak later. How this contrasts with men COULD be due to natural testosterone production in men peaking pre-20's, but there are far better qualified people on this board than me to address that aspect.

Women's list
Code: Select all
1   10.49   0.0   Florence GRIFFITH-JOYNER   21 DEC 1959 (28)   Indianapolis, IN   16-Jul-88
2   10.64   1.2   Carmelita JETER   24 NOV 1979 (29)   Shanghai   20-Sep-09
3   10.65 A   1.1   Marion JONES   12 OCT 1975 (22)   Johannesburg   12-Sep-98
8   10.76   1.7   Evelyn ASHFORD   15 APR 1957 (27)   Zürich   22-Aug-84
12   10.78 A   1.0   Dawn SOWELL   27 MAR 1966 (23)   Provo, UT   3-Jun-89
12   10.78   1.8   Torri EDWARDS   31 JAN 1977 (31)   Eugene, OR   28-Jun-08
14   10.79   -0.1   Inger MILLER   12 JUN 1972 (27)   Sevilla   22-Aug-99
17   10.82   -1.0   Gail DEVERS   19 NOV 1966 (25)   Barcelona   1-Aug-92
17   10.82   0.4   Gwen TORRENCE   12 JUN 1965 (29)   Paris   3-Sep-94
21   10.83   0.0   Sheila ECHOLS   02 OCT 1964 (23)   Indianapolis, IN   16-Jul-88
28   10.85   1.0   Muna LEE   30 OCT 1981 (26)   Eugene, OR   28-Jun-08
28   10.85   1.5   Tianna MADISON   30 AUG 1985 (26)   London (OS)   4-Aug-12
31   10.86   0.0   Diane WILLIAMS   14 DEC 1960 (27)   Indianapolis, IN   16-Jul-88
31   10.86   1.2   Chryste GAINES   14 SEP 1970 (33)   Monaco   14-Sep-03
31   10.86   2.0   Marshevet MYERS   25 SEP 1984 (26)   Eugene, OR   4-Jun-11
35   10.88   0.4   Lauryn WILLIAMS   11 SEP 1983 (21)   Zürich   19-Aug-05
36   10.89   1.5   Allyson FELIX   18 NOV 1985 (26)   London (OS)   4-Aug-12
39   10.90   1.8   Shalonda SOLOMON   19 DEC 1985 (24)   Clermont, FL   5-Jun-10
44   10.92   0.0   Alice BROWN   20 SEP 1960 (27)   Indianapolis, IN   16-Jul-88
44   10.92   1.1   D'Andre HILL   19 APR 1973 (23)   Atlanta, GA   15-Jun-96
50   10.94   1.0   Carlette GUIDRY-WHITE   04 SEP 1968 (22)   New York, NY   14-Jun-91
51   10.95   2.0   Me'Lisa BARBER   04 OCT 1980 (26)   Carson, CA   20-May-07
54   10.96   1.9   Kimberlyn DUNCAN   02 AUG 1991 (20)   Baton Rouge, LA   13-May-12
59   10.97   0.1   LaTasha COLANDER   23 AUG 1976 (27)   Sacramento, CA   10-Jul-04
59   10.97   -0.7   Sanya RICHARDS-ROSS   26 FEB 1985 (22)   Shanghai   28-Sep-07
59   10.97   1.8   Mechelle LEWIS   20 SEP 1980 (27)   Eugene, OR   27-Jun-08
59   10.97   1.2   LaShauntea MOORE   31 JUL 1983 (26)   Maringá   30-May-10
70   10.99   1.3   Valerie BRISCO-HOOKS   06 JUL 1960 (25)   Westwood, CA   17-May-86
batonless relay
 
Posts: 700
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:40 am

Re: 4 to get to 40!

Postby 26mi235 » Fri Apr 05, 2013 6:41 am

I am aware that handling all of that data manipulation is a lot of work, with not always consistently available information. However, it is not " highly superfluous", it is more precise as a measure of the marks, although not a unique or necessarily the best measure.

As for the 4-country concentration ratio, when I saw the data the similarity with that index struck me immediately, it is something that is used in important legal settings, and it is probably not well-known here. The highest concentration figures are probably in the steeple and the marathon, although the 10,000 might be pretty high as well. One way to look at different events might be to look at this measure for the top X (e.g., 100, 50, etc) marks in each event and see which ones are most evenly distributed and which are most concentrated.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16318
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: 4 to get to 40!

Postby batonless relay » Fri Apr 05, 2013 6:48 am

26mi235 wrote:I am aware that handling all of that data manipulation is a lot of work, with not always consistently available information. However, it is not " highly superfluous", it is more precise as a measure of the marks, although not a unique or necessarily the best measure.

As for the 4-country concentration ratio, when I saw the data the similarity with that index struck me immediately, it is something that is used in important legal settings, and it is probably not well-known here. The highest concentration figures are probably in the steeple and the marathon, although the 10,000 might be pretty high as well. One way to look at different events might be to look at this measure for the top X (e.g., 100, 50, etc) marks in each event and see which ones are most evenly distributed and which are most concentrated.

You're going to have to explain that a bit more...WAY over my level. Concentration by country in the top 50, 100? Concentration by age in the top 50, 100? or both? or neither?
batonless relay
 
Posts: 700
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:40 am

Re: 4 to get to 40!

Postby 26mi235 » Fri Apr 05, 2013 9:38 am

The 4-country concentration rate is the frequency for those four divided by the frequency for all. If you are taking the top 100, then it would be the fraction of the top 100 that come from those four countries. There is nothing magical about 4 countries, but it often is not a bad value to use for the concentrated subset.

One application would be to calculate, by event, what fraction of the top 50 performers come from the top four countries in each event and then look at the fractions across events and look at how they changed over time. You can use any time interval to define the top X performers; one year is the most natural, but you might also use Olympiads or decades (the longer the interval the deeper I would tend to go).

Batonless relay: Note, none of this is meant to dispute anything that you have been saying in this thread, it is just a potential analysis tool. I might have an advantage in some analytical techniques but you clearly have an advantage in knowledge of the sport and the basic underlying data.
26mi235
 
Posts: 16318
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Re: 4 to get to 40!

Postby batonless relay » Thu May 23, 2013 7:06 pm

batonless relay wrote:The American sprinters most likely to join the much the more elite fraternity this spring, imo, are (based upon previous years results of course):

-Charles Silmon
-Keenan Brock
-Marcus Rowland
-Cordero Gray
-Prezel Hardy
-Zye Boey
-Aaron Earnest
-Dentarius Locke

Isiah Young, who was NOT on my list, is the newest member of the sub-10 club. Yup, wrong again. :lol:

East finalists?
1 Isiah Young UMS 09.99 +0.3 3 Heat
2 Anaso Jobodwana JKST 10.14 +0.8 6 Heat
3 Diondre Batson UAL 10.16 +0.1 2 Heat
4 Tevin Hester CLEM 10.21 +1.3 4 Heat
5 Aaron Ernest LSU 10.22 +1.9 1 Heat
6 Reggie Lewis CLEM 10.22 +1.9 1 Heat
7 Harry Adams AUB 10.22 +1.4 5 Heat
8 Darrell Wesh VAT 10.23 +1.4 5 Heat
9 Warren Fraser CLEM 10.24 +0.3 3 Heat

West finalists?
1 Silmon, Charles SR TCU 10.03Q 1.7 5
2 Brown, Aaron JR USC 10.11Q 2.0 6
3 Webb, Ameer SR Texas A&M 10.14Q 1.6 1
4 Woodson, Markesh FR Missouri 10.20Q 2.4 2
5 Hardy, Jr., Prezel JR Texas A&M 10.31Q 2.4 3
6 Larney, Josh SR Iowa 10.31Q 0.6 4
7 Austin, Justin SR Iowa 10.22Q 2.4 2
8 Horsley, Carl JR Cal St. Northridge 10.23Q 2.0 6
9 Bryan, Michael JR Texas A&M 10.30Q 1.7 5
batonless relay
 
Posts: 700
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:40 am

Re: 4 to get to 40!

Postby gh » Fri May 24, 2013 8:11 am

the next choice at this point is perhaps Diondre Batson.
gh
 
Posts: 46321
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: firmly at Arya's side!

Re: 4 to get to 40!

Postby batonless relay » Fri May 24, 2013 9:08 am

gh wrote:the next choice at this point is perhaps Diondre Batson.

I agree. Silmon and Brown would be my next choices.
batonless relay
 
Posts: 700
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:40 am

Re: 4 to get to 40!

Postby gktrack » Fri May 24, 2013 3:03 pm

Brown is from Canada I believe, but you can replace him with Dentarius Locke (on your initial list) who just PR'ed 10.05 (1.6) in the East Region.
gktrack
 
Posts: 1130
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 9:42 pm

Re: 4 to get to 40!

Postby gktrack » Fri May 24, 2013 4:53 pm

gh wrote:the next choice at this point is perhaps Diondre Batson.

Yes, saw him run for the first time today, he looks good... and he appears to be one of the taller sprinters, listed at 6' 2". Also, according to Alabama website, supposedly split 46.2 in the 400.
http://www.rolltide.com/sports/c-xctrack/mtt/diondre_batson_836559.html
gktrack
 
Posts: 1130
Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 9:42 pm

Re: 4 to get to 40!

Postby olorin » Fri May 24, 2013 6:49 pm

gh wrote:the difference between a mile list and a 100 list is that you know the mile list probably doesn't have any marks on it that were achieved through the aid of wind and/or altitude and/or questionable starting.


I roughly corrected the list for wind/altitude (using 0.1 for +2.0 and 0.1 for altitude).
Of the original 39 Americans.

We lose 11 because there adjusted marks is higher than 9.99
Isiah Young
Kareem Streete-Thompson
Phil DeRosier
Marcus Brunson
Rodney Martin
Rakieem Salaam
Harry Adams
Joshua J. Johnson
Mark Jelks
Mickey Grimes
Jim Hines

We gain three athletes that didn’t have a legal sub10 but have an adjusted sub 10:
Calesio Newman
Curtis Johnson
Steve Riddick

So we end up with 31 Americans that have adjusted sub10 performance.
Of these only 18 have a second sub10 adjusted performance. Another seven have a second performance of sub 10.05, and six can regarded as one off or questionable marks.
Hope there are no mistakes as I am trying new software
olorin
 
Posts: 708
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], effable and 3 guests