World Rankings

[Edbrazil]

Just published. See: http://www.iwsf.com/wrl_0414/

 

Let the chatter begin.

[Horton]

Ellie Horton #24 Overall!

[LeonL]

I presume that one must have at least two "L" scores to be included on the ranking list?

[klindy]

@LeonL - Yes

[MattP]

@scotchipman‌ I completely disagree. The Elite list is based on prize money where at "Elite Sanctioned Event" which are for the most part invitationals which limits the field. Those events are typically held in locations with less than ideal conditions. Also with the introductory elite events some events are worth less points than others because of the prize money is lower in the events first 3 years. This inflates some events value over others. The IWSF ranking list is based on the top scores in R &L rounds. This shows who the best skiers in the world are with out question. Now if we had let's say 15 Elite events with equal prize over the year with sponsors paying travel and entry expenses it would be a different story. But for now the IWSF list is king. Some of the Elite skiers from outside the US will say the Elite list is better because that's how their federations and country's sports counsels decide on funding for their athletes so it means

more to some than others to attend those events even if they are on the introductory level which is also a good thing to some degree.

[RichardDoane]

@mattp - +1 to that

[Horton]

In the last few years the elite list has been a very inconsistent measure of the worlds best. Basically what @MattP‌ said.

 

The elite list might be the right idea but at least once in the last few years the #1 skier was clearly not the best skier that year.

[E_T]

@scotchipman‌ is't the definition of best in the world the one who has the highest buoy count. There for he is the best. IWSF FTW!

[Drago]

This is déjà vue all over again: the top 3 may be similar, I didn't look. The Elite list has well-funded skiers who can go to china or wherever , the Iwsf list has cherry pickers that go to the sweet spots and practice all week then ski 6 rounds in a weekend. Average them (2 from Elite, 2 from Iwsf)

[E_T]

@scotchipman‌ you don't ski for a win you ski for WR's no matter where it is who it's against that is what is always on a pro's mind

[MattP]

@scotchipman‌ thats why we have the World Championships.. Everyone is there on the same day behind the same boat and it is an Elite points event.

[Horton]

@scotchipman‌ no that is not what the Elite list is. The amount of prize money impacts the points a lot so luck can become a factor.

[EHorton95]

@horton 9th on the U21...that sounds better haha

[Horton]

@EHorton95‌ You are a woman now. Time to embrace it.

 

Under 21 meh

[Horton]

@EHorton95‌ what is scary is that I am 47th on the over 45 slalom list

[MattP]

@Horton‌ with a score of 6@38...

[Texas6]

Wait, you can get 6@38? -kidding hard to believe you can run that score and not be in the top 10 over 45

[jipster43]

The Elite list sure seems to reflect the tournament placings more accurately. T-Gas #9? That's ridiculous!

[wtrskior]

@jipster43‌ yep. Outside the top 3, this recent world ranking list does not accurately reflect who the best mens skiers are, there is no debating that. 1 PB and 1 more high score has you on there. The best skiers are the most consistent.

 

For example Jmac is on there because he pb'd in 1 tournament. He is lucky to be top 10 skiers in the world, he would agree I'm sure, but also be happy to take the ranking....

[Horton]

I am a Will Asher fan but if you look at the data for the 2012 Elite list and think he should have been #1 in the world you have lost your mind.

 

See the below data. This is where I totally lost faith in this system. I do agree that the list might be the right idea but Smith was clearly should have been #1 in 2012.

 

http://www.iwsfranking.com/2012/EliteRankingDBMS2012.htm

 

http://www.iwsfranking.com/skierinfo/info/displayskierresults.php3?firstname=William&lastname=ASHER&year=2012

 

http://www.iwsfranking.com/skierinfo/info/displayskierresults.php3?firstname=Nate&lastname=SMITH&year=2012

[Horton]

@scotchipman I can hardly wait to see how you explain that the list was correct in 2012.

[jipster43]

@Horton I can buy Asher being #1 in 2012 far easier than I can buy T-Gas being #9 now.

 

I do love the debate though!

[MattP]

TGas win at Masters is not on the Elite list yet. That will change it up. The Elite list only uses top 3 largest payouts or points create the list on a 12 month rolling list. It should be up here in the next few days

[LeonL]

Giving the old guys some attention......if there is a world ranking (and there is) for 65+, why would M7 be run at regionals and nationals as E instead of L? So the two biggest tournament most any of us would compete in doesn't provide for an opportunity to make world ranking list for 65+?

[klindy]

Good point @LeonL‌ It's up to each region to decide what class to pull each division/event. Ask your regional council person and/or EVP.

[Ghibli]

In 2012, N. Smith faltered at the two highest rated tournaments and it cost him the number one ranking because the same person happened to win both of them. I say well played W. Asher. Looks like if the top six point totals were considered, N. Smith would have ended up ranked number one. My novice guess why that is not done is that it would really penalize the participants that are not able to make it to six rated tournaments for whatever reason. Just the reality of a low level sport. Maybe more performances could be considered in order to achieve, say, a top five ranking. As it is now, if you want the number one ranking, better deliver at the top two tournaments. Weighted point systems are used in golf, tennis, track and field, and most other individual sports that come to mind. A win at the Masters golf tournament gets you more than twice the number of points of a run of the mill PGA event. T. Degaspari looks to be an early favorite for the 2014 number one. Stay tuned.

[MAD11]

Interesting debate, but the fact is that all Pro events are based on the Elite list. They are scores that represent how individuals performed in tough money events, not the perfect conditions of record slaloms. (which we all love by the way) Most pros I know could care less about the normal ranking list. It doesn't effect them for the most part, but the elite list does. Neither is perfect I agree. If your a Jr. it's different. Example, the Jr Master's invitations are based off the normal ranking list and the Open invitations are based on the Elite list.

[Patmaster]

Does anyone know who to contact for corrections? I changed countries (!) a few years back and I'm still under the "wrong" one?

[Texas6]

How are guys like Bauchesne and Risto on the Elite list? Did they even compete as pros last year in any event?

[MattP]

@patmaster‌ contact Bob at bcorson@comcast.net

[Edbrazil]

Noting @leonL comments about 65+. For this time, it is up to the individual federations to

determine who they will nominate for the 2014 Worlds. Since the World Rankings are sparse

in 65+. Currently, the AWSA Rules Committee is working on the question, and I believe

that other tournaments than L/R will be considered this year, as in AWSA Rankings.

 

Think that each federation can nominate 15 men and 15 women in 65+ for the Worlds.

 

The one thing I don't like about the Rankings cutoff date, especially for 55+ and also

some 45+, is that a lot of skiers had packed it in by when the Worlds and venue were

announced in September. Many of these decent skiers would have had no plans to

travel internationally to a 35+ Worlds.

So, with the announcement, they were faced with having to get in 2 L/R performances

in the Spring before April 30th. Meaning probably travel to Florida and getting in

some early training. I've advocated a supplementary Rankings with a later closing

date for 35+. Such as after Regionals or Nationals.

[disland]

When are we going to grow up as a sport and have one rulebook? E/L is stupid.

 

As a minimum E scores should count for the ranking list. For that matter so should class C but that's a different argument.

 

Second when will someone figure out how to use the automatic ranking system we have here in the US and apply it to the IWWF list so its updated every week not twice a year? I am pretty confident if you can put on a waterski tournament you have a computer and internet access.

[Edbrazil]

Last year, Bob Corson was working on a "Dynamic Rankings List". I had the URL for that,

but lost it when my disc drive crashed. That also may have been for private viewing only,

as it was still under development.

 

I think that Europe may have something like that for their Rankings.

 

AWSA has to deal with just one high-tech country. Yet there are countries like East

Nowhere that may have water skiers but aren't otherwise all that advanced, and I'm

sure that it is tough to drag scores out of some federations in IWWF.

[ForrestGump]

The problem with Elite Ranking is that it's purely $ based. A tournament with a higher purse, awards more points. So the skiers who place on that day, gets more points than the skiers who place in events with lower $ purses. Because of that, you could have a winner of a lower dollar event receive less points than 2nd, 3rd or worse finisher at a higher dollar event. Not altogether accurate as to the capability of the participants.

[disland]

@Edbrazil IWWF has no problem making new rules that require more cameras and recording devices but then when it comes to enforcing the delivery of scores we make excuses that they cant submit them electronically. This seems inconsistent.

[Texas6]

I agree with what you are saying @ShaneH, but just to play devils advocate a bit - doesn't Professional Golf rank their players the same way, by purse winnings? Not trying to open up a can of worms about golf, just thought that's how they got ranked and if so, we're not alone

[Horton]

To clarify @ShaneH‌'s point if one tournament per year has a much larger payout it skews the data

[Than_Bogan]

Winning the biggest tournaments with the biggest money on the line is certainly a valid metric of success.

 

We have a lot of metrics in this sport, and each measures something one could be interested in. At the amateur level, National and Regional placement is one interesting metric and may sometimes be very different from the "average" which is also an interesting metric.

 

Personally, I lean more toward Scot Chipman's viewpoint as far as which choice I'd consider a better (not perfect) reflection of overall prowess. But for those who prefer some other rankings list, more power to ya.

[Than_Bogan]

If I'm not mistaken, the highest ranking New Englander on any list is Bruce Epstein @ #7 in 65+. GO BRUCE! He and his wife are truly great people.

 

(This is true even you count Chris Rossi as a New Englander.)

[gsm_peter]

Need for a totally new list?

The Horton Baller World Ranking List. :-B

 

[Texas6]

I'm quite confident @Horton has the cycles for this pet project:)

[Kelvin]

On the 2013 Elite list, Whitney is ranked number 1 ahead of Regina despite the fact that Regina won every elite tournament she entered. Not getting any points for the trip downunder cost Regina the #1 spot. Despite all that, my money would be on Regina in a head to head match-up.

[Horton]

Thinking out loud… I am NOT going to do a rankings list but if I was going to ….

 

I might take the top three scores per skier at any class R event and the best 4 placements for each skier at pro events and some simple-ish math to get the rankings. I would get rid of or greatly diminish the weighting the scores according to the payout.

 

[andjules]

I know I'm at a slalom-focused site, but did anyone else find it interesting how poorly the USA featured in Men's Overall (top US overall skier was 19th on the list)?

[klindy]

@andjules‌ I noticed.

[Chef23]

I noticed the lack of US skiers in overall also. Overall doesn't seem to be important in the US and some skiers have dropped overall as they got older. I seem to remember Zach Worden could run mid 38 and trick 7 or 8K and he doesn't ski overall.

 

There are some good younger overall skiers like Nick Lang and Taylor Garcia it will be interesting to see if they continue competing in overall as they get older.

[ntx]

Once they start to work, the skiing falls off. Very few options to make a living water skiing and the amount of time needed to dedicate to 3 event training is unreal. Look at Storm Selsor. He dominated until about two or three years ago. He is still a elite skier but is now working full time. I think the same will happen with Dylan once he gets done with school. My guess is that Taylor Garcia will be the next big thing. Training money looks to be unlimited for him and the pressure to find a job will not be a issue. I think Nick will look at getting a education and go into the workforce. Priorties change once they reach the early to mid 20's. School and work are not a bad thing.