Nonathlon reset

[HornetMaX]

Yeah, I see the points. How are points arrived at? Obviously, it is not the actual time for an event. Like I asked before, how are points calculated? For me now, they basically mean nothing. If I get 1000 points in nonathlon, I know what that means. If the points are based on time, then obviously the lists would be from younger to older, but they are not.

It's similar to how Nonathlon does it, but not identical. For each event I take the c2 world record (any age, any gender, any weight). There are good reasons to do this (compared to use gender-specific and/or age-specific WRs).

If you equate the WR you get 1000pts, if you do 3 times slower or worse (in terms of avg pace) you get 0 points, linear interpolation in between (and extrapolation if you do better than the WR).

As WR are typically from male, heavy and "young" athletes, if you are female, light and "old" you have no chance of getting 1000pts in a given single event. But that's not a problem as I have rankings that are female only so here everybody is on par.

Example for 2024 TheCore rowing (1K, 2K, 5K, so 3 events):

• #1 HW male has 2851pts (so close to 3x1000pts) and is (obviously)
• #1 LW male has 2771pts
• #1 HW female has 2698pts
• #1 LW female has 2501pts

What's interesting (IMO) is that as the scoring is the same no matter gender/weight/age I can actually compare across these categories: the #1 female is #68 overall in TheCore. There are only 67 males that do better than her over more than 15 thousands !!

Same for age: if you are a 50 years old male light weight and you want to see how you compare to 45-55 years old male lightweights, just take the file for male lightweight and filter out any line with age outside 45-55. Example: in 2024 TheCore male, the 1st over-50 is #6.

Note: the WR I used are from c2 website a few months ago. Even if a WR is improved (like recently the rowing 500m), I'm not obliged to update this in my code (and i didn't update, in fact), so that scoring can stay constant over time. If a lot of WRs are improved and I don't update them it just means that there will be more athletes with a >1000 score in events.

[Cyclingman1]

Thanks for additional info, but the actual calculations remain obscure. I really do not find the lists particularly compelling. I'll stick with P/AR, nonathlon, and C2 rankings for any comparative data.

[HornetMaX]

Thanks for additional info, but the actual calculations remain obscure.

Obscure ? I've basically explained everything about how it's done.

Maybe with an example ? Let's take the rowing 2K: WR is 5:35.8 so 3 times slower is 16:47.4.

If you rank a 2K on c2 logbook:

• Slower or equal than 16:47.4 you get 0 (zero) points.
• Equal to 5:35.8 you get 1000 points.
• Exactly at mid-point between the two times (that would be 11:11.6) you get 500 points.
• Faster than the WR you'll get more than 1000 points (how much exactly is a linear extrapolation between the two reference points)

I really do not find the lists particularly compelling. I'll stick with P/AR, nonathlon, and C2 rankings for any comparative data.

You mean the lists of events ? These could be easily changed. And having more than one set (Nonathon has only one set) allows you to focus on what you like (some people no longer row certain events after a given age, or are just allergic/not interested in some events).

C2 rankings is of course the basis of everything, but C2 rankings are per event: one may be good at (let's say) a 1K but much less at a half-marathon.
The Nonathon (and, similarly, what I've done) gives you a bigger picture.

But the number of participants in the Nonathon is tiny compared to what's logged on the c2 logbook, so the rankings have little value (but the absolute score is useful to monitor how you overall performance evolve, even if I really don't like how the scoring is age-adaptive).