Justin Freeman??

I apologize for my previous comments that were conceived without much
thought or knowledge. It was a knee-jerk reaction to what I thought
were poor choices and glaring omissions to the US Olympic Team.

It seems the selection process set by the USSA is too concrete and the
FIS quota of atheletes should not be based off the USSA points list.
The selection should include the second section of the rules, not defer
to it after Section I is exhausted. The discretionary seletion based
on an outstanding result or recent trend of an athelete's reults would
allow for the selection of someone like David Chamberlain who deserves
to be on the team based on his performance at the National
Championships. Would this eliminate all of the controversy? No, but it
would give more flexability to the selection process.

Jim Howe

What exactly are the USSA, FIS and Olympic rules under which the team
was selected? I've read something about the best four races over the
past year for the USST, but don't know much else. I'm not convinced a
points system is a sign of strength - is that how the Norwegians,
Swedes and Finns choose their teams? - though Jay's analogy to USGA and
Ryder Cup selection is something to think about, and a points system
does minimize favoritism. Cross-country skiing is somewhat closer to
golf than track and field in that there are more ups and downs race
to race and other variables involved.

Gene


"Jim Howe" wrote:

I apologize for my previous comments that were conceived without much
thought or knowledge. It was a knee-jerk reaction to what I thought
were poor choices and glaring omissions to the US Olympic Team.

It seems the selection process set by the USSA is too concrete and the
FIS quota of atheletes should not be based off the USSA points list.
The selection should include the second section of the rules, not
defer to it after Section I is exhausted. The discretionary
seletion based on an outstanding result or recent trend of an
athelete's reults would allow for the selection of someone like David
Chamberlain who deserves to be on the team based on his performance
at the National Championships. Would this eliminate all of the
controversy? No, but it would give more flexability to the selection
process.

Jim Howe

Gene-

Click on the link within Nathan Schultz's reply to find USSA team
selection rules.

Jim

I followed that link, but it's hard to find that e.g., these 14 races
count towards points, and points are awarded by this, that, and the
other thing. I'm green at this, so I kind of follow the idea that
Babikov blowing everyone away at Nationals kind of screws up points,
but I don't know exactly why. It seems to the outsider that a national
champ (1st in the US) should get a certain number of points at
nationals regardless if Babikov is rippin' or not. Other races...well,
yeah, not everyone shows up, so there's some fudge factor to normalize
the field. (Math geeks out there will like including "normalize" in a
post.)

Jay (wannabe geek) Wenner

Here's what the system is for the first eight:

Athletes ranking in the top 50 in the World Cup Overall or the top 30
in the Sprint World Cup or Distance World Cup standings as of January
16, 2006 shall be nominated to the team...

Objective selections shall be based on the results achieved by athletes
in World Cup competitions held between October 1, 2005 and January 16,
2006 (tentative) (the “objective selection period�). Discretionary
selections, if any, may be based on a variety of factors. Additional
objective team selections, if any, shall be based on the USSA National
Ranking List, developed from competitor’s best four (4) USSA scored
competitions (in which he/she competed as a USSA member) between
January 13, 2005 and the closing of the selection list on January 12,
2006 (tentative).

Is that all there's to it? I've heard talk of FIS points and rules for
who can compete in how many events, or who is even eligible to be on the
team. Other limits?

Gene

"Jim Howe" wrote:

Gene-

Click on the link within Nathan Schultz's reply to find USSA team
selection rules.

Jim

My understanding of the rules was that the enitre FIS quota of skiers
was to be selected using the objective process of points earned during
WC and USSA selected events. If this process does not complete the FIS
quota then the discretionary selections will be made until the quota
has been reached.

Jim

Gene Goldenfeld wrote:
What exactly are the USSA, FIS and Olympic rules under which the team
was selected? I've read something about the best four races over the
past year for the USST, but don't know much else. I'm not convinced a
points system is a sign of strength - is that how the Norwegians,
Swedes and Finns choose their teams? - though Jay's analogy to USGA and

We select almost all our athletes without using any rigid rules:

This effectively says that we assign a coach and then trust him/her to
pick the best racers for the day/race.

Ryder Cup selection is something to think about, and a points system
does minimize favoritism. Cross-country skiing is somewhat closer to
golf than track and field in that there are more ups and downs race
to race and other variables involved.

There have been (suspected?) instances of 'coach favourite' selections,
but mostly it works much better than a mathematically predetermined rule.

Terje

--
-
"almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in caching"

There's been a background discussion about points and whether this or
that skier has enough for one or more events. What's that about? In
fact, how are these races graded vis a vis points?

"Jim Howe" wrote:

My understanding of the rules was that the enitre FIS quota of skiers
was to be selected using the objective process of points earned during
WC and USSA selected events. If this process does not complete the FIS
quota then the discretionary selections will be made until the quota
has been reached.

Jim

Gene Goldenfeld wrote:
I've read something about the best four races over the
past year for the USST, but don't know much else.

Unfortunately it doesn't even do the four best races (important ones or not)
over the past year. It does the four best point races. There is a
difference, especially for the women at nationals.

The starting value for points in a race is determined by the average ranking
points for the top few finishers, so when Wagner (top ranked) only got 10th
and 16th in the individual start classic and skate races, her points weren't
averaged into the starting values. A similar thing happened in the first
race, no highly ranked/low point women were in the top 5. In reality those
two weekend races were the most competitive ones, with over 160 skiers in
each, but they couldn't provide good points with starting values of 93.6 and
90.11 (before adding more points based on percent back). The last race at
nationals was much less competitive, with most of the top skiers in the
weekend races sitting out/gone home and only 21 skiers finishing, but since
Wagner won and another highly ranked skier Weier was 2nd (also didn't do
well enough in the first 3 races to be counted in the starting score for
those) the starting points for that race was much, much lower at 79.7 and
the points were much better. If the highest ranked women had performed well
in the first three races, Stephen and Arritola (the 2nd and 3rd best
performers at nationals) probably would have had a chance to meet the FIS
requirement. It's almost a no win situation for Stephen and Arritola if
they both do well, because the points for those races will not be low.

Andrew, It sounds like you understand the FIS point system, so would
you mind going a step back and explaining how these points are set up,
and how specifically it's determined within a race so that some count
more than others. Perhaps a simple example of two. I'd finally like to
understand this system and probably others would too. Thanks,

Gene

"Andrew Lee" whatsupandrewathotmaildotcom wrote:

Gene Goldenfeld wrote:
I've read something about the best four races over the
past year for the USST, but don't know much else.

Unfortunately it doesn't even do the four best races (important ones
or not) over the past year. It does the four best point races.
There is a difference, especially for the women at nationals.

The starting value for points in a race is determined by the average
ranking points for the top few finishers, so when Wagner (top ranked)
only got 10th and 16th in the individual start classic and skate
races, her points weren't averaged into the starting values. A
similar thing happened in the first race, no highly ranked/low point
women were in the top 5. In reality those two weekend races were the
most competitive ones, with over 160 skiers in each, but they
couldn't provide good points with starting values of 93.6 and 90.11
(before adding more points based on percent back). The last race at
nationals was much less competitive, with most of the top skiers in
the weekend races sitting out/gone home and only 21 skiers finishing,
but since Wagner won and another highly ranked skier Weier was 2nd
(also didn't do well enough in the first 3 races to be counted in the
starting score for those) the starting points for that race was much,
much lower at 79.7 and the points were much better. If the highest
ranked women had performed well in the first three races, Stephen and
Arritola (the 2nd and 3rd best performers at nationals) probably
would have had a chance to meet the FIS requirement. It's almost a
no win situation for Stephen and Arritola if they both do well,
because the points for those races will not be low.