[sherlock]

....and that 'old' warhorse Schubert still showing the young whippersnappers a thing or two 

[AndyP]

How are you guys watching it? I can't find a YouTube stream even with a VPN....

[Bradders]

Toby hanging in there, Max out of the picture.
The Japanese looking strong as usual....

Jack Macdougall looking very good for semis though!

[James Malloch]

How does the Olympic selection work?

Will it just be for the combined lead and Boulder or do the individual lead/boulder competitions count towards it too?

https://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/features/paris_2024_olympic_games_sport_climbing_qualification_and_scoring_explainer-15300 good explainer on the other channel, top 3 from the combined qualify, then there's various other qualification events

Cheers. Any idea if a lot of athletes be doing all 3 (Boulder, Lead, Combined)?

[sherlock]

How are you guys watching it? I can't find a YouTube stream even with a VPN....

You can't watch it but you can follow the results live on IFSC.results.info

[teestub]

Cheers. Any idea if a lot of athletes be doing all 3 (Boulder, Lead, Combined)?

Top 20 combined ranking from the individual events qualify for combined https://cdn.ifsc-climbing.org/images/Events/2023/230801_Bern_WCH/BL_guide_Bern_WCH.pdf

[jwi]

Noticed that all five Japanese men are through to the semifinals, all in top seven. All five French selected are also through, but mostly lower down the ranks. Shows how brutal the competition for spots are in those countries, especially Japan.

[edshakey]

A pretty comprehensive highlights video - they seem show all the boulders multiple times. Would imagine the rest of the daily summaries will be similarly good.

Also an extra hint as to why they are not broadcasting qualis - it's in a separate room, not the main arena, so there would definitely not be there setup for live streams.

[sherlock]

Good find, thanks!

[sherlock]

Anybody figure out how the running order for the Women's Lead Qualis is decided? It seems really random.

[edshakey]

Think you might have hit the nail on the head!

My understanding was a random order, and then 1st and (N/2)th person climb first, on route 1 and 2 respectively.

[Duma]

Natalia Grossman going out in qualifying must be a bit of a shock. MTS through comfortably.

[edshakey]

Less of a shock than Natalia, but Eliska Adamovska in 28th is maybe a slight surprise, it's not been her best season but she got silver in Briançon.

Job done for Molly 

Any idea why Holly was a DNS? Hopefully she's not out of the boulder too 

[Bradders]

Hannah Meul out as well, surprising considering based on last season's form I'd have thought this year it would be three way competition between her, Natalia and Janja.

Brilliant for Molly TS though.

[Muenchener]

Hannah Meul out as well, surprising considering based on last season's form I'd have thought this year it would be three way competition between her, Natalia and Janja.

You're aware that this was the lead qualification, right?

[sherlock]

Ai Mori up there. She's finished above Janja before.
Surprised to see Laura Ragora,
MTS, really hope she makes final, so close last couple of comps!

[sherlock]

Hannah Meul out as well, surprising considering based on last season's form I'd have thought this year it would be three way competition between her, Natalia and Janja.

You're aware that this was the lead qualification, right?

Her bouldering season has been disappointing as well.

[Bradders]

Hannah Meul out as well, surprising considering based on last season's form I'd have thought this year it would be three way competition between her, Natalia and Janja.

You're aware that this was the lead qualification, right?

Yeah of course but she's still placed fairly well in lead recently.

[James Malloch]

As it seems different to the UKC explanation, can anyone explain what the numbers on the lead qualification results mean?

https://ifsc.results.info/#/event/1301/cr/7701

Currently it looks like joint first reached a lower point than joint 3rd, but their decimal score is lower…

[edshakey]

The app doesn't make 100% sense to me, not sure how Sorato and Jakob have the same "1" on route two despite falling 4 holds apart...

But ultimately, the description on UKC is just for combined, so won't make sense for these lead qualifiers. It's just the usual lead method, the place you fall leads to a ranking, and there's some method for combining the rankings from the two routes. I appreciate that that's all a bit vague, but basically, the whole "each hold counts for a number of points" thing doesn't happen until the actual combined event later in the championships.

I think maybe one solution to your confusion might be that Adam and Toby haven't climbed route 2 yet, so they have a poor route 2 score (basically like falling on the first hold). Whereas Yufei has climbed both and done fairly well in both, so that counts for more

[jakk]

It's because they're doing it in 2 groups, so they are both currently highest on their group's route 2.

[IanP]

It's because they're doing it in 2 groups, so they are both currently highest on their group's route 2.

I was getting a bit confused by this.



This confirms that there are 4 routes in qualifying with group A and group B doing different routes, so to make more sense of what is happening it can help to look at the scores for the groups separately.

[Stabbsy]

As it seems different to the UKC explanation, can anyone explain what the numbers on the lead qualification results mean?

https://ifsc.results.info/#/event/1301/cr/7701

Currently it looks like joint first reached a lower point than joint 3rd, but their decimal score is lower…

The decimal score is the square root of the product of your ranking (within each group). Jakob is currently 1st on both routes so square root of 1 x 1 is 1, all fairly easy so far. Ondra currently showing as 1st on route 1 and 3rd on route 2 (in a different group to Jakob). However, he was level with Toby Roberts on route 1 so he gets a score of 1.5 for route 1 multiplied by 3 for route 2, giving 4.5. Square root of 4.5 is 2.12, which is Ondra's current score. If you haven't done the second route, it makes an assumption for your ranking. Not quite worked out how that assumption is calculated, but something along the lines of assuming everyone that hasn't climbed yet falls off the first hold.

Basically, it doesn't make much sense until everyone has climbed both routes.

[edshakey]

It's because they're doing it in 2 groups, so they are both currently highest on their group's route 2.

Ah that'd explain it, cheers

As it seems different to the UKC explanation, can anyone explain what the numbers on the lead qualification results mean?

https://ifsc.results.info/#/event/1301/cr/7701

Currently it looks like joint first reached a lower point than joint 3rd, but their decimal score is lower…

The decimal score is the square root of the product of your ranking (within each group).

Any idea why they do the square root? The rankings would be unchanged if they did just the product, and the numbers are fairly meaningless anyway so seems like an unnecessary extra step?

[jwi]

It's because they're doing it in 2 groups, so they are both currently highest on their group's route 2.

Ah that'd explain it, cheers

As it seems different to the UKC explanation, can anyone explain what the numbers on the lead qualification results mean?

https://ifsc.results.info/#/event/1301/cr/7701

Currently it looks like joint first reached a lower point than joint 3rd, but their decimal score is lower…

The decimal score is the square root of the product of your ranking (within each group).

Any idea why they do the square root? The rankings would be unchanged if they did just the product, and the numbers are fairly meaningless anyway so seems like an unnecessary extra step?

To preserve the unit of measurement "Being on (geometric) average around 3rd place" is easier to say (and understand) than "being on average around square placed 9"