Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - General Discussion

General Climbing Discussion

Author

Vic Ranges Bouldering - FINALS!!!

Corinne

7-Sep-2003
11:33:13 AM

Thanks to all those that have been at the comps so far, you've really made it a great event. It was fantastic to see all the comments people had regarding the route setting for the last two rounds (and thanks Phil for starting it up). As you know the third round is coming soon and the final will be in October. I just wanted to ask again if anyone wanted to make any suggestions or comments about the rounds so far or maybe for the two coming rounds. As the sole organiser, i'd LOVE to have the help and input from as many people from the climbing community as i can - after all, it's you guys that i'm doing it for.

Thanks
Corinne


Hardware

7-Sep-2003
4:56:25 PM

Corinne have you set a specific date for this comp ???

Corinne

7-Sep-2003
6:33:44 PM

Round 3 - Sunday 28th September
Final Round - Sunday 19th October


GG

8-Sep-2003
9:11:50 AM

You'll always hear me banging on about this.....

The comps need to sort out the Intermediates from the Opens in the results. Unfortunately it means more work for the organizers.....Here is a simple way...if you can boulder 2 * 7's or above then you are open!

Thanks for your efforts in putting together an excellent series. I have enjoyed all of them so far.

-Gareth

Corinne

8-Sep-2003
1:15:22 PM

Hi Gareth,

Already on top of it! The idea of having to attend one round prior to the final is to obtain scores for all the competitors, based on these scores in rounds 1, 2 & 3 people will be put into categories for the final.

Unfortunately because grades do vary between rounds (that's just the way it is!) we cannot classify people by the grades they climb but instead we will look at their scores as a whole.

Thanks

Corinne


GG

8-Sep-2003
2:58:10 PM

I think this is an excellent strategy for the Finals. I just think that having Intermediates with scores higher than placing opens detracts from what is an excellent series. When you enter a comp you at least like to think you have a chance of placing. People may get put off if they percieve things to be unfair......

You said ".........we cannot classify people by the grades they climb" - However people win or lose on the score they get (which is 10 * SUM OF BEST 6 GRADES.)

Opens are scoring 420-550?

Bang Bang Bang.

Caveat: Again a fine effort and I know many of us really appreciate the effort that goes into the comps. Excellent fun for $16 bucks!

Dalai

8-Sep-2003
4:11:59 PM

Gareth, the important thing is to go into it for the fun. It's just a really good training day...

The system's inherent failing is it relies on peoples honesty and placing themselves in the correct group. Though as one of those Open placers, maybe I should be competing in Intermediate instead ??

If not already implemented - perhaps the winner of the round in Intermediate should be only allowed to compete in open in the next round?

Corinne

9-Sep-2003
1:21:11 PM

At the moment, those who win the intermediate category - esspecially if their score reflects one of an open grade - they are asked to compete in the open category in the following rounds.

It is an honesty system and the grades may vary between rounds, but that is all part of the comp. The idea is to come together as a group of boulderers and enjoy yourselves!! It's a lot of work to organise it and i don't get paid, so for those few unavoidable issues, i think we can all just take it in our stride. Thanks for all the fantastic feedback and it makes it all worthwhile when i hear it directly from you guys!

Thanks

Corinne

joemor

9-Sep-2003
1:53:21 PM

what is the rough definition or difference between intermediate and open?

Corinne

9-Sep-2003
2:00:49 PM

What do you think the definition should be?

Intermediate is for those who have not competed very much or have not been climbing long or simply do not climb very hard.

Open is a very general and large category for those that climb relatively strong and are more experienced.

This is a VERY rough idea, basically the open is for the more confident boulderers and it's very hard to draw a definitional line between the two.

joemor

9-Sep-2003
2:56:23 PM

im sure that the intermediate section would change depending on the turn out, perhaps there should be no sections and then at the end the scores might give a clue to where the division should be?


nmonteith

9-Sep-2003
2:57:50 PM

You should be in opens Joe! - you are as hard as jelly.

joemor

9-Sep-2003
3:00:04 PM

with a boulder problem to prove it!!!

Corinne

9-Sep-2003
3:17:14 PM

We tried to divide it up after people scores were handed in at the end of the round but there were no clear 'divisions' so we rely on people to designate themselves to the appropriate category.

The rounds are just for fun, not for prizes, not for glory and not for money so - open or intermediate - it doesn't matter. The finals will be more regulated and those of you who have done well in the qualifying rounds will be placed in open.

Thanks
Corinne


phil_nev

9-Sep-2003
5:55:31 PM

"The rounds are just for fun, not for prizes, not for glory and not for money ..."

Well said..... Corinne has done a great job with the rounds, we can all only hope that once the rounds are over, corinnne will continue to contribute and posibly organsie some more comps.
I am quite happy to continue to offer my services for a good cause, its great having new problems going up on a more regular basis.

Cheers, Phil


alrob

9-Sep-2003
7:58:11 PM

hehe, i see there has been a bit of controversy over my mate Pauls performance in intermediates last round. I don't think he intentionally entered that category to blitz the field. He figured that in opens there would be the likes James, Bryn, Sticky, Vinnie etc, and that intermediates was a more approriate category.

So i think that people can only be slotted into the divisions on score, not on climbing experience. Pauls probably been climbing for about 2 1/2 -3 years, but is just insanely strong.


phil_nev

9-Sep-2003
9:54:08 PM

Regardless of wether or not james sticky et al were competing, paul is not intermediate and he would have known that before the comp, and should have entered into the opens..... Personally, if i were to ever compete, id rather get whipped in the opens than go into a lower category and cream the field.

Hopefully paul will be enetered in the opens for the next comp eh??

Corinne

9-Sep-2003
10:00:46 PM

Thanks Phil!

You're right, those who go into intermediate just to win and "cream the field" are not doing the right thing, as i've said before, those that have bouldered at a certain level (ie. as paul did) will be made to compete in the open category next round and in the final.

again.... thank you Phil

Corinne


..::- Chris -::..

10-Sep-2003
9:11:10 AM

My 2 cents on how i think intermediate division should work...

Put all the Sheets in order from highest score to lowest score. Take the number of competitors, divide it by 2 find the sheet, and you have your winner for intermediate.

It is as simple as that..
- It is random,
- no body knows until the end.
- you can't try and sit on a certain score because it is impossible to tell
what the middle score will be
- and it stops grade sitting which i see in many many sports....
- It also gives allot of climbers a sense of they are in with a chance right
up until you read the scores out.....

And perhaps give a small prize to the person who came last in the open.....

This is the way the Mill comp was ran, I thought it was very fair, and I know allot of the climbers took great pride if they managed to fall into the open category.
Can someone tell me what's wrong with this method ??
Chris : ) .

Corinne

10-Sep-2003
11:04:12 AM

Thanks Chris,

The Mill used to look at the scores and find a division - where there was the biggest gap in the middle range. The majority of scores that fell before that gap were the last in the open, and the first score after the gap was the 1st in intermediate. ie. 400, 400, 400 ,400 ,400, 320. It was never a random matter of picking the middle person because in most cases you have about 6 or 7 people with the same score in the middle - thanks for the suggestion but i've tried it and it doesn't quite work. If you have any other ideas i'd love to hear them. We also tried the Mill version but there were multiple 'gaps' and it was difficult and unfair to pick which gap to take it from.

Thanks
Corinne

There are 32 messages in this topic.