[Aussiegav]

Personally I think it comes down to the head to head format of speed in the final being a poor choice as there's too much luck involved. The qualifying format seems fairer imo.

How is the luck in speed any different to the other formats?

Or have I misinterpreted what you are saying? 


Obvs there high risk of screwing your sequence on speed and slipping/falling. But there been a number of athletes who have invested time into speed as they would for onsighting hard routes in prep for the lead format.

[SA Chris]

i think he means having just one shot in head to head, vs 2 shots in qualifier to get your best time.

[Will Hunt]

Highlight for me so far is Laura Rogora on the lead wall. Shambling everything but absolutely grafting and creeping up inch by inch. I don't know how she held on so long. Give her a medal for grit.
When Seo was at the point that Rogora fell off she'd been climbing three minutes less.

[remus]

From my punters point of view it just seems like there is more luck in the speed final than in the other disciplines (not helped by the head to head format).

For example, Tomoa fumbling the clip in the lead qualification didn't instantly relegate him to last place. He didn't do amazingly (it's his worst discipline so you wouldn't expect him to win anyway), but it wasn't fatal. On the other hand it wouldn't take much of a fumble in the speed to put a serious dent in your scores.

Overall it just seems a strange choice of format. Personally I enjoy competitions where the athletes have a chance to demonstrate their prowess within the sport. I guess you could argue that part of performing in speed is being able to knock out respectable scores consistently, but in my very subjective opinion it seems like there's a bigger helping of luck in there than in the other disciplines.

[Will Hunt]

Just spoke to Daisy (non-climber) about the climbing. She saw some of the speed comp and I showed her the pitiful bouldering scoresheet of the top ranked speed punt.

"That's not climbing. They're just like frogs"
"This is a mockery"
"That isn't climbing"

My wife, ladies and gentlemen
 

[Wellsy]

TBH I feel that lead is the most unforgiving. Fuck up an attempt in the bouldering and you can try again. You get two runs in speed. In lead, you fall? Sorry, you've fucked it. Game over.

[JohnM]

TBH I feel that lead is the most unforgiving. Fuck up an attempt in the bouldering and you can try again. You get two runs in speed. In lead, you fall? Sorry, you've fucked it. Game over.

That probably makes it the hardest for the setters. It needs to be hard from the beginning but not so hard that people are falling on moves 3-5 and build gradually to split the field.

[turnipturned]

From my punters point of view it just seems like there is more luck in the speed final than in the other disciplines (not helped by the head to head format).

For example, Tomoa fumbling the clip in the lead qualification didn't instantly relegate him to last place. He didn't do amazingly (it's his worst discipline so you wouldn't expect him to win anyway), but it wasn't fatal. On the other hand it wouldn't take much of a fumble in the speed to put a serious dent in your scores.

Overall it just seems a strange choice of format. Personally I enjoy competitions where the athletes have a chance to demonstrate their prowess within the sport. I guess you could argue that part of performing in speed is being able to knock out respectable scores consistently, but in my very subjective opinion it seems like there's a bigger helping of luck in there than in the other disciplines.

Surely your speed climbing analogy is just like 400m hurdles. Falling over a hurdle would defo damage your overall position. While I have no interest in speed climbing, it is probably the most 'olympic sport'- standardised route and a level playing field (also, easy to understand for the general public).

Someone good at stats/maths answer this! If the winner of individual event got 2 not 1, i.e first in speed gets 2 points, 2nd gets 3, last gets 21 points etc etc). Would that change the overall positions much? Giving it a multiplier of 1 seems a strange to me!

[wasbeen]

For an outsider, I think the climbing has sold itself pretty short. There is the obvious speed vs the rest which has resulted in almost everyone looks a bit shit at some point.

Beyond that, the lead and bouldering lacks entertainment for the newcomer. Lead in particular is very difficult to comprehend without having done it yourself as the BBC website put it ...

"Lead is a little bit like driving an electric car and having route-anxiety. It's all about conserving the power!"

I hope they shake it up a bit more for next time. I would like to see DWS with technical routes against the clock like the Psicobloc Masters.

[ducko]

Next Olympics - who can hang the most weight on a 10mm edge that’ll get the crowd going.

On another note I hate speed climbing, guff.

[joel182]

For an outsider, I think the climbing has sold itself pretty short. There is the obvious speed vs the rest which has resulted in almost everyone looks a bit shit at some point.

Beyond that, the lead and bouldering lacks entertainment for the newcomer. Lead in particular is very difficult to comprehend without having done it yourself as the BBC website put it ...

"Lead is a little bit like driving an electric car and having route-anxiety. It's all about conserving the power!"

I hope they shake it up a bit more for next time. I would like to see DWS with technical routes against the clock like the Psicobloc Masters.

I think this should be much improved come the finals. The bouldering is basically a standard IFSC World Cup semi-final round, and frankly they are pretty much always a bit crap to watch.

The lead finals should also be much better with fewer climbers to watch and the medals on the line.

The speed has been the absolute highlight so far. The best viewing experience, the biggest drama, and unfortunately the most impressive looking to non-climbers.

[abarro81]

Giving it a multiplier of 1 seems a strange to me!

I think that's kind of the point - winning really matters!

[crimpinainteasy]

I'm surprised Janja came 4th in lead, I was expecting her to top the route.

[Teaboy]

UKC report says Ondra will get a bye, so at worst 4th in speed

This is such a joke.

I wonder if Ondra would actually feel unfulfilled if he wins but only due to this speed circumstance.

If it results in the best overall climber of the last 10 years ending up with the gold as he is less hampered by some irrelevant (to climbing as we know it) novelty round then I would see that as a good thing not a joke.
As it is, there seems such a butterfly effect (e.g. this increases Tomoa’s chances of winning speed) that it’s hard to know if it will have that much of an effect.

[joel182]

Someone good at stats/maths answer this! If the winner of individual event got 2 not 1, i.e first in speed gets 2 points, 2nd gets 3, last gets 21 points etc etc). Would that change the overall positions much? Giving it a multiplier of 1 seems a strange to me!

It changes it slightly, but not that much. In the Women's Meshkova would have qualified instead of Miroslaw. Here's a quick spreadsheet showing the maths.

[crimpinainteasy]

They should replace speed with who can do the most one armers on an 10mm edge.

[GraemeA]

I've been using a vpn to watch it on the Canadian Broadcasting site and had awful male commentators yesterday but the female commentators today (both Canadian) were actually alright. Just a shame on the schedule so I only watch the lead (0610 start)

One of them is a friend called Kimanda who set up the big gym in Central Saanich on Vancouver Island, it hosted World Youths in 2013. She was also Canadian Team Manager for a few years.

[Wil]

It changes it slightly, but not that much. In the Women's Meshkova would have qualified instead of Miroslaw.

The Meshkova maths is interesting (to me).

When Janja starts her run you've got Meshkova 7th, Miroslaw 8th and Jaubert 9th.

As Janja passes Miroslaw and Jaubert's highpoints the order stays the same, but obviously those two scores increase slightly.

Meshkova scored 29+ in lead, so when Janja is on hold 29 she's in the final, and Janja makes the move off it Meshkova is out (Janja is faster) and Janja only makes it to 30. That single move dropped Meshkova from 7th to 9th.

[Nutty]

Yes, I think Meshkova, Miroslaw and Jaubert highlight why the combined multiplication doesn't pass the smell test for me: Meshkova seemed to be in the mix with the medal contenders in bouldering and lead and her speed wasn't awful but Miroslaw (and Jaubert to a lesser extent) was terrible in two out of three events and goes through. Meshkova's average placing was ~8th, Miroslaw's 13th, Jaubert's 10th. From watching the qualification, you wouldn't say Miroslaw or Jaubert were better all-round climbers than Meshkova, but the multiplication sends them through.

[joel182]

I don't think there is any particular problem with the multiplication per se.

The main issue is that it gives equal weighting to the speed as to the boulder and lead, which is something that people on here don't really like.

People would be happy enough to see a 1st place boulderer, 20th speed, 20th lead go through to the finals, but not someone who comes 1st speed, 20th boulder, 20th lead.

Bring on Paris, I guess.

[turnipturned]

I don't think there is any particular problem with the multiplication per se.

The main issue is that it gives equal weighting to the speed as to the boulder and lead, which is something that people on here don't really like.

Personally not interested in speed climbing but I can see how it’s an entertaining and an understandable sport.

I just don’t really get the the scoring. As it’s a combined discipline medal and you don’t have individual medals for each disciplines, you are looking for the ‘best’ all rounder climber. (I guess a bit like pentathlon?). So why have a scoring system that seems to favour winning an individual discipline.

As you say, probably totally irrelevant as it’s changing for Paris.

Anyway, mega props to Shauna. An inspiring journey and sounds like she had a rough old ride recently.

[r-man]

I don't think there is any particular problem with the multiplication per se.

We've been through this before. There is a big problem with multiplying head to head results with athlete vs wall results.

Previous post on the matter...
https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,30968.125.html

But given we won't have to worry about again, I can't get too worked up.

I am quite enjoying the spectacle, but I do feel a bit sorry for the speed climbers, who are awesome at what they do. The boulderers/lead climbers only have to suffer 20 sec of being on the world stage in a sport they are mostly hopeless at. The speed climbers are forced to flounder for a televised eternity.

The combined format does seem to pervert the spirit of the Olympics, which I always thought was about top level competition. Instead we have top level competitors vs athletes gamely attempting a new sport.

But good luck to them all. I'm rooting for the underdogs in every discipline...

[edshakey]

I do feel a bit sorry for the speed climbers, ..... , forced to flounder for a televised eternity.

I fully agree with this as a general point, but got to say that Anouck Jaubert gave a hugely respectable performance on the non-speed disciplines. 2nd in speed, and then managed a top in the bouldering (13th), and fell at the same move as Petra Klingler on lead (15th) - Petra obviously isn't a lead climber, but as a boulderer, is still more closely suited than a speed specialist! 2x13x15 gave 390.

If we compare this to Aleksandra Miroslaw (1st in speed)... not to diminish her achievement in qualifying for the final, but she got 0 zones in boulder (20th), and hold 12 on lead (19th), having to ask her belayer to take - a rare sight in comps! 1x20x19 gave 380.

Due to the scoring system, Aleksandra actually beat Anouck, which I think is pretty unfortunate for Anouck really.

But hey, that's the Olympic format for you! Let's all agree to never speak of it again come Saturday morning

[moose]

Much as it pains me, speed has been by far the most telegenic discipline. A quick succession of 10 second dramas.

Lead next, as it has suspense and simplicity: one go, one at a time, higher = better.

The presentation of bouldering has been poor: too much simultaneous action and badly judged cutting between problems (as climbers are on all four problems at once). Too hard to track the ebb and flow of the round. After watching for an hour, i don't think I saw a single problem completed, just lots of low falls.  I found myself bored and frustrated, despite previously enjoying bouldering competitions.  Hopefully the finals will be better; if less climbers means the coverage can focus on one at a time on the bouldering.

[crimpinainteasy]

I don't think there is any particular problem with the multiplication per se.

The main issue is that it gives equal weighting to the speed as to the boulder and lead, which is something that people on here don't really like.

Personally not interested in speed climbing but I can see how it’s an entertaining and an understandable sport.

I just don’t really get the the scoring. As it’s a combined discipline medal and you don’t have individual medals for each disciplines, you are looking for the ‘best’ all rounder climber. (I guess a bit like pentathlon?). So why have a scoring system that seems to favour winning an individual discipline.

As you say, probably totally irrelevant as it’s changing for Paris.

Anyway, mega props to Shauna. An inspiring journey and sounds like she had a rough old ride recently.

I guess they have the current scoring system to allow the speed climbers a chance of being represented in the olympics, If scoring was based on best al rounder then zero speed climbers would hav even qualified.