UKBouldering.com
places to visit => indoor walls => competitions => Topic started by: shark on November 13, 2020, 02:33:24 pm
-
https://www.thebmc.co.uk/gb-climbing-molly-thompsonsmith-will-bosi-olympic-qualification-moscow
Will Bosi and Molly Thompson-Smith will soon be heading out to Moscow, Russia to compete in the IFSC Europe Continental Championships.
Will and Molly are going to battle it out in the individual disciplines of Boulder, Lead and Speed, before representing Great Britain in the Combined event.
In the Combined event, athletes compete across Speed, Boulder and Lead. This will be their final chance to qualify for the last two places at the postponed Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games, which will now take place in 2021.
Preparing the athletes for this competition, which takes place 19-28 November, has been an unprecedented process due to the global COVID-19 pandemic. With lockdown climbing wall closures, GB Climbing athletes were not able to regularly train together and prepare as they would normally.
However, thanks to UK Sport’s Aspiration Fund Programme, GB Climbing were able to collaborate with Sheffield-based climbing walls The Climbing Works and Awesome Walls. These became defined performance facilities, under elite athlete guidance from DCMS. These walls facilitated GB Climbing athletes in returning to training in a COVID-19 safe environment and provided Molly and Will with the facilities they needed to prepare for the Championship.
Zoe Spriggins, GB Climbing competition programme manager, said:
“GB climbing is attending Moscow 2020 because it is Will and Molly’s final chance to qualify for the Olympic Games. The IFSC have confirmed that the event is going to go ahead and GB Climbing is fully supporting them in achieving their aspirations and dreams of gaining Olympic qualification.”
Tom Greenall, GB Climbing head coach, said:
“In Molly Thompson Smith and Will Bosi, we have a great chance of qualification. We want to go to Moscow because we want to give them the opportunity to fight for those places. We’ve put together a program around our two athletes to ensure that they’ve been able to go from a position of no training at the peak of the pandemic to being fully competition ready in five weeks.
“The measures we have put in place to manage COVID-19 go from the very complicated to doing the basics brilliantly. It’s about sanitising, making sure we wear masks at all times and ensuring social distancing. We have a very robust risk assessment for the Moscow event and plans of how we’re going to manage ourselves in the travel, in the competition, and any transit in between. We are going to make sure, at all times, that our team is safe. We take it very seriously and, back in the UK, our medical team is always on hand to give the team any support needed.”
Will Bosi, GB Climbing athlete, said:
“GB Climbing has been crucial in helping me prepare for this event. They’ve organised the GB Climbing Team training in the run-up, giving me lots of one-to-one sessions with my coach, allowing me to specialise on boulder sessions. It’s made a big difference to my training, and hopefully this will show in Moscow.”
Molly Thompson-Smith, GB Climbing athlete, said:
“This year is the most supported I’ve felt in the last few years of doing competitions. GB Climbing has taken all the stress of organisation away but, more importantly, has been able to set up a dedicated training space for us in Unit E at The Climbing Works in Sheffield.”
-
How many places are they competing for?
Looking at the entry list there are only a few names i recognise in the mens and even less in the women's.
If there are a few places left they should have a good chance to qualify.
-
1 place for men, 1 for women I think... so a big ask but certainly not impossible given the field
-
GLHF!!
Can we have a drinking game where we take a shot every time the press release mentions GB Climbing - will be paralytic half-way through.
Best of luck to Molly Thompson-Smith F8c beast and Will Bosi F9b beast. Hopefully Molly's form in Germany and Will's general strength will stand them in good stead!
-
GLHF?
-
Good Luck Have Fun! (https://liquipedia.net/starcraft2/Gamer_Etiquette)
-
GLHF?
Get Lots of High Feet ;)
What grade does someone have to climb before the “Chris says hi” effect kicks in and they’re only referred to by their first name by the way?
-
GLHF?
Get Lots of High Feet ;)
What grade does someone have to climb before the “Chris says hi” effect kicks in and they’re only referred to by their first name by the way?
All down to # of insta followers now #influencer
-
Livestream for Men's Boulder Quals is here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdkYD3WNoi8
-
And it seems that Charlie has decided to quit, Matt Groom has taken over.
-
Shame, I liked Charlie, thought he was good.
-
How did they do in speed? I find the website not the best to find stuff easily! I read Will qualified...
-
Think Bosi came in about 14th in Speed.
Just watching Women's Boulder quals. Don't usually bother, I find it too crowded on screen but with Covid distancing it's actually quite good entertainment for a piss-wet Sunday.
And it's nearly dark now, so I can justify a beer to watch the Men's comp.
-
Molly came 25th, I think she was 3 seconds off qualifying for the next stage.
They have put the results on the site as PDFs. They include all.of the details for once.
I think how they get the results out is something they need to improve on, their website is terrible for looking up historical information. Tweeting out a link to results and including them on a webpage, instead of hidden in PDFs isn't that hard.
-
^^ this. Exactly.
-
The results are posted here (https://www.ifsc-climbing.org/index.php/component/ifsc/?view=event&WetId=1166).
-
I'm still not clear if they means either of them have qualified for the olympics. Anyone?
-
No they haven't. Yet.
-
Is the scoring for this event in the olympic format? i.e. speed x boulder x lead
-
The first few days are separate events. Friday and Saturday are the combined with Olympic format and scoring.
-
The first few days are separate events. Friday and Saturday are the combined with Olympic format and scoring.
Does that mean anything they do in the first three days is immaterial to their qualification or do they need to qualify out of the first three days for the combined event?
-
It makes no difference for Olympic qualification what happens until the combined starts on Friday.
-
but don't only so many qualify to compete in the combined? based on some aggregation of the single discipline results?
-
but don't only so many qualify to compete in the combined? based on some aggregation of the single discipline results?
That's what I had read somewhere. I thought it was like Hachioji, ie, once all the single events are done the top 20 progress to combined qualifiers, then top 6 to combed final.
-
but don't only so many qualify to compete in the combined? based on some aggregation of the single discipline results?
Yes, I might have jumped the gun on that. It would seem sensible if only the top 20 went through to the combined, I can't actually find a reference to that in any reports or in the IFSC's rules though.
-
Neither will or molly into the final.
Jernej on a different level to everyone else.
-
Bosi said that they have to do the three individual events to qualify for the combined, so it must be top 20 through to combined qualies (or something like that)
-
I believe that in every discipline (Speed, Boulder, Lead), they do a ranking with only climbers that compete in combined (i.e. did all 3 disciplines). These 3 ranks are then multiplied and the best 20 advance to the combined semis.
As per event there were only ~30-35 competitors so far and not all may compete in combined, advancing to the combined semis is not a very high hurdle I believe.
-
I believe that in every discipline (Speed, Boulder, Lead), they do a ranking with only climbers that compete in combined (i.e. did all 3 disciplines). These 3 ranks are then multiplied and the best 20 advance to the combined semis.
I think this is right as it's how it worked before. The only reference I can find in the IFSC rules is that combined events start with 20 athletes in a qualifying round, it doesn't specify how they are chosen.
-
I believe that in every discipline (Speed, Boulder, Lead), they do a ranking with only climbers that compete in combined (i.e. did all 3 disciplines). These 3 ranks are then multiplied and the best 20 advance to the combined semis.
Correct. So Will has an effective rank of 9 for speed as 5 of those ahead of him in speed aren't doing the Combined.
-
Does anyone have a link to who's already qualified? Was wondering which countries have filled their quota but still sent athletes? ie Stasa Gejo - Slovenia have filled their women's places haven't they?
-
Also anyone know what happended to Petra?? Great speed round and blank boulder?
-
Think she got injured (not sure what) in the Boulder qualifiers. Might be bad, she was visibly upset by it. Poor soul.
-
ie Stasa Gejo - Slovenia have filled their women's places haven't they?
Pretty sure she's Serbian (at least according to Google, and she doesn't compete in Slovenian colours)
-
Doh! Apologies for stupid question!
Is there anyone there who's already qualified then?
-
Does anyone have a link to who's already qualified?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sport_climbing_at_the_2020_Summer_Olympics_%E2%80%93_Qualification
I think Iuliia Kaplina, Petra Klingler, Aleksandra Miroslaw are the only qualified climbers who are at the comp.
-
Does anyone have a link to who's already qualified?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sport_climbing_at_the_2020_Summer_Olympics_%E2%80%93_Qualification
I think Iuliia Kaplina, Petra Klingler, Aleksandra Miroslaw are the only qualified climbers who are at the comp.
And 2 of them got injured! Maybe everyone else who is already qualified made the right decision to stay away. Iuliia didn't do boulder so isn't in the Combined.
-
Never imagined I'd be typing this a couple of years ago but was sorry to hear Boscoe's retired from ifsc commentating. Back to the old routine of muted sound in the interests of maintaining steady blood pressure with Groom at the helm which is a shame as the wall mics are great and was enjoying the background europop too.
-
Bronze for Molly in the lead comp
https://www.bbc.com/sport/amp/olympics/55079558
-
Both qualified for the combined (Will in 8th, Molly in 10th) so still in with a (slim) chance.
-
Both qualified for the combined (Will in 8th, Molly in 10th) so still in with a (slim) chance.
If I were in their position, I'd recognise that I had a few days of competing before the "real" qualification actually starts. They need to complete all the 3 individual events to get into the combined qualification, but could probably do just enough to make sure they're on the start list. 3 rounds of bouldering, 4 (?) lead routes and a few runs up the speed wall will take it's toll - particularly the bouldering I'd have thought. Arriving at the combined qualifications without being totally battered would seem to be the best way to get the Olympic slot. Who knows if that's what they're doing (or if that's what others are doing), but I'm not sure the qualification position will be the best guide.
-
It will be interesting to see who has held back to maintain skin/better recover to improve their chance at the combined.
Molly looked solid in the lead. She was a little unlucky to drop it at the chains in the semis (not that it makes much difference). I thought it was a strange choice to make clipping the lower off reachy. It looked to me like a few sneaky fingers and thumbs keeping people on while they were clipping it, but I might be being unfair.
What was with the downward dyno in the bouldering? I didn't think that was allowed.
-
I'm surprised anyone is bothering at all once they have qualified for the combined.
If they aren't allowed to pull out, I would have expected to see a load of "footslips" by the second bolt.
They really go out of their way to come up with terrible formats.
-
What was with the downward dyno in the bouldering? I didn't think that was allowed.
Yeah I thought that too. The commentator seemed to suggest that if its a downward dyno with a low risk of injury then its OK.
-
I'm surprised anyone is bothering at all once they have qualified for the combined.
Well there’s still the small matter of a European Champion title up for grabs, not a bad thing to be able to add to your palmares.
-
Did notice Molly had quite a few tips taped up in the bouldering. Presumably (hopefully!) preventative with a view to the lead and combined rather than fully necessary. I'm no sports psych guru but I'd have thought gunnning all out for victory in the single events and doing well would provide an edge well worth having compared to holding back once you know you've done enough. The gained confidence, knowing you can beat most of the rest there would comfortably offset any slight increase in fagtigue? That is, as long as you don't completely bugger your skin on those brand new raspy big fibreglass holds I've been wincing at people slapping around on, of course.
-
Bronze for Molly in the lead comp
https://www.bbc.com/sport/amp/olympics/55079558
Well done Molly! 👏👏👏
I have to say I really enjoyed watching the leader finals... both Women and Men.
Men’s route was good and great suspense the whole way through...
-
The gained confidence, knowing you can beat most of the rest there would comfortably offset any slight increase in fagtigue? That is, as long as you don't completely bugger your skin on those brand new raspy big fibreglass holds I've been wincing at people slapping around on, of course.
I think skin management and reduced fatigue would be far more important.
Especially as any boost in confidence would be reduced due to the expectation that others were holding back for the combined event.
This should have either been a combined only competition or they should have scheduled sufficient rest to allow people to give it their all for the individual and combined events.
-
I'm surprised anyone is bothering at all once they have qualified for the combined.
Well there’s still the small matter of a European Champion title up for grabs, not a bad thing to be able to add to your palmares.
True. But with all of the absentees, the title is devalued.
They might as well have renamed it The Olympic Qualification European Playoffs.
-
or they should have scheduled sufficient rest to allow people to give it their all for the individual and combined events.
What's sufficient? Genuine not sarcastic question. They've got a full rest day today and only did/attempted two routes yesterday. Based on my punter levels, I'd say that's about optimum to recover, muscularly speaking. Skin would be more of an issue if it was thin, granted.
-
If they must have separate combined and individual events, I would have gone for the individual events one weekend and the combined on the following weekend. My preference would have been to sack off the idea of a European Championships and the individual events and just had a combined Olympic qualifying event.
The lead isn't going to take too much of a toll, it's the bouldering that does the skin damage.
-
Live on russia climbing yt. Both looking good in the bouldering so far.
-
Live on russia climbing yt. Both looking good in the bouldering so far.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ocl7uqTwin8
-
Looks like no Olympics for Jernej unless he does something unexpected in lead...
-
From what I can see - after Speed and Bouldering, Will is 1st, Molly 14th. (10.5 and 94 points respectively..)
But its in Russian so I am probably missing something.
edit: Despite Molly getting 4 tops in bouldering - she ended up 6th in bouldering hence a big multiplier for her speed performance (14th?). Will was joint 1st in Bouldering and 7th in Speed...
-
Actually I take the jernej comment
back, hadn't seen how good his speed run was.
-
Jernej can still qualify but he needs to win the lead 2nd maybe gets in 3rd hes out.
As long as will gets top 10 i think hes in.
-
Good to see staja back on form, she didn't seem to be saving energy in the individuals but who knows?
-
Good to see staja back on form, she didn't seem to be saving energy in the individuals but who knows?
Any idea what time the lead finals are Duma?
-
Timings here (take off 3hrs to get UK time):
https://www.ifsc-climbing.org/index.php/component/ifsc/?view=event&WetId=1166
-
Tight for Molly, going to need a top 2 finish maybe 3 to get through unless other people fall early. Shes capable of it though and i guess her favorite discipline.
Not sure what her normal speed is but looks like she needs to work on that for the future.
-
But its in Russian so I am probably missing something.
The english version is on the IFSC channel.
Shame the bouldering was a bit easy. Great effort by Will and Molly!
-
As long as will gets top 10 i think hes in.
16th or higher by my calculations, so very doable for him.
1st or 2nd for Molly guarantees her a place in the final. 3rd is probably good enough, 4th and 5th depend much more on other results, but are possible. Any lower and she's out. So it's in reach for her too.
-
Missing that Egyptian made it a bit tight for bosi!
Jernej out, shame not to have him for the Olympics. Sounds like from
-
Nail biter for molly too
-
Molly through i think
-
Overall. Molly 5th. Will 3rd.
Excellent! (I think it means they both qualify for finals!!)
-
top 8 go through :dance1:
and have to do it all again tomorrow :o
-
Both through to finals
Will looks like he has a genuine chance tomorrow. Lead is normally his best discipline but he messed up today. Keep his speed and boulder results up tomorrow and have a normal lead day and it will be close.
Harder for Molly but i dont know if that was just a bad speed day.
-
Yup, both through ok in the end.
Anyone know what happened to Victoriia Meshkova?? Was there a foul?
-
Yup, both through ok in the end.
Anyone know what happened to Victoriia Meshkova?? Was there a foul?
Think the scoreboard at the end of the stream wasn't updated fully. Meshkova is through, Molly bumped down to 6th.
IFSC site (https://www.ifsc-climbing.org/index.php/component/ifsc/?view=event&WetId=1166) has official results
-
Both qualified for the combined (Will in 8th, Molly in 10th) so still in with a (slim) chance.
If I were in their position, I'd recognise that I had a few days of competing before the "real" qualification actually starts. They need to complete all the 3 individual events to get into the combined qualification, but could probably do just enough to make sure they're on the start list. 3 rounds of bouldering, 4 (?) lead routes and a few runs up the speed wall will take it's toll - particularly the bouldering I'd have thought. Arriving at the combined qualifications without being totally battered would seem to be the best way to get the Olympic slot. Who knows if that's what they're doing (or if that's what others are doing), but I'm not sure the qualification position will be the best guide.
That's what a few people did, they dropped out of Lead after the quals claiming little niggles
Chloe and Alma
Alexei and Sergei
-
top 8 go through :dance1:
and have to do it all again tomorrow :o
I'm so confused. I thought the individual events earlier in the week was the qualifying bit??
(I don't usually follow comp climbing)
-
My preference would have been to sack off the idea of a European Championships and the individual events and just had a combined Olympic qualifying event.
And how do you get 20 people for the OQE, you need some qualification pathway.
-
That was to qualify for qualifying. Which is just to qualify for finals. Which is just to qualify for Olympic qualifying. Which is just to qualify for Olympic finals. Which is just qualifying for The Greater Ranges. Got it?
-
Ha!
That actually really helps. Basically, whoever has the most skin, does the least shit in the final final final?
-
https://youtu.be/MusyO7J2inM
-
Question for those who know about the setting.
Speed is always the same yup?
For combined rather than individual - is the setting for lead and Boulder a bit softer - knowing they’re going to have to do all three?
-
For combined rather than individual - is the setting for lead and Boulder a bit softer - knowing they’re going to have to do all three?
and linked to this...
are we expecting the Olympic combined setting to be softer than individual world cup boulder/lead ?
-
That was to qualify for qualifying. Which is just to qualify for finals. Which is just to qualify for Olympic qualifying. Which is just to qualify for Olympic finals. Which is just qualifying for The Greater Ranges. Got it?
Can you qualify your response please.
-
Bosi 6th, Molly 7th.
Appears ranking is not based on best time so if you lose yr first race the best you can do is 5th, which is pretty much going to put you out of contention unless you're Ondra...
Speed is so shit.
Is Mollys height a big disadvantage? She looks to be very stretched on some of the moves, and her times seem well down even on other non specialists.
-
Bosi 6th, Molly 7th.
Appears ranking is not based on best time so if you lose yr first race the best you can do is 5th, which is pretty much going to put you out of contention unless you're Ondra...
Speed is so shit.
Is Mollys height a big disadvantage? She looks to be very stretched on some of the moves, and her times seem well down even on other non specialists.
Bosi screwed up in his last one didnt he - sadly - and against one of his stronger rivals... grr
-
Only 3 problems in bouldering and the first one is waaay too easy. Fucks sake.
-
#2 looks heightist (that foot trap)
-
problem 2 dyno, does look morpho. Looks like a good problem, but with only three it'll be a shame if the Olympic place is decided on it.
Classic dab from Staja, worthy of the ukb thread! She'll be gutted if it costs her though!
-
IMO, women’s problems are not very good.
-
Aaaaaaand another coordination dyno. Pretty sure Molly's the shortest in the field by a bit, but this looks pretty hard on her.
-
Aaaaaaand another coordination dyno. Pretty sure Molly's the shortest in the field by a bit, but this looks pretty hard on her.
Yup. Top move looks interesting - but the start.....
Shame.
-
Gah. Unlucky Molly. Bottom and no way back... hope she gets #1 in the Lead though.
-
Big ups to Staša Gejo for the chalk up whilst catching combination dyno!
-
Unlucky Molly!
Thoughts so far:
I hate the speed format. If speed has to be in there at least have a timetrial rather than the bollocks head to head system. Happen to get drawn against a speed climber? Unlucky mate, bottom half of the field before you've even started.
Womens boulders were not great. First one obviously way two easy and the other two both morpho coordination problems. Not a powerful move in sight.
What's the deal with the Stasa towel dab? Can't see how it makes any difference if you dab the mat or your towel?
-
Big ups to Staša Gejo for the chalk up whilst catching combination dyno!
+1. That was the best bit so far.
-
Mens boulders much more enjoyable IMO. I really like a jump now and again but I think three jump starts is a bit much! Unlucky for Will on M3.
-
I'm sure commentary fatigue is setting in....but this is shit!
They need a Rob Warner or Ben Cathro of the climbing world....
-
Molly looked she had it in the bag, I think she's suffering a bit from knowing she wouldn't qualify. I reckon she could easily have got the top.
-
Whatever happened with the WADA ban in Russia is sport? From a quick Google I can't quite understand how Russia was even at this event? Looked like team kit etc rather than competing as an "individual" or whatever..
-
Great final in the men’s lead....
But there’s a few things with the system that are shite.
In both men’s and women’s the best speed climber (specialist I guess) made it into the finals - and was shit in both boulder and lead. It looked really lame...
Also - the multiplier system meant - I think - that Sasha was in first overall (1 point) with the Russian second (2) but when they both got bumped down to 2nd and 3rd that mean the Russian guy was then first over all... stupid system...
-
Great final in the men’s lead....
But there’s a few things with the system that are shite.
In both men’s and women’s the best speed climber (specialist I guess) made it into the finals - and was shit in both boulder and lead. It looked really lame...
Also - the multiplier system meant - I think - that Sasha was in first overall (1 point) with the Russian second (2) but when they both got bumped down to 2nd and 3rd that mean the Russian guy was then first over all... stupid system...
Agree mens lead final was great. Never heard of Yuval before but he is extremely entertaining to watch.
I think whenever you're combining disciplines there is bound to be some weird maths going on in the scoring. Is there a better system, what do they use in track and field for eg? Hopefully all of these issues will be solved after this Olympics, I think in the subsequent one there will be seperate medals for each discipline? Or is it just seperate medals for speed and lead/boulder?
-
Great final in the men’s lead....
But there’s a few things with the system that are shite.
In both men’s and women’s the best speed climber (specialist I guess) made it into the finals - and was shit in both boulder and lead. It looked really lame...
Also - the multiplier system meant - I think - that Sasha was in first overall (1 point) with the Russian second (2) but when they both got bumped down to 2nd and 3rd that mean the Russian guy was then first over all... stupid system...
Agree mens lead final was great. Never heard of Yuval before but he is extremely entertaining to watch.
I think whenever you're combining disciplines there is bound to be some weird maths going on in the scoring. Is there a better system, what do they use in track and field for eg? Hopefully all of these issues will be solved after this Olympics, I think in the subsequent one there will be seperate medals for each discipline? Or is it just seperate medals for speed and lead/boulder?
You could do it additively and that would produce slightly less weirdness. But my memory from when this was all discussed before is that multiplication was preferred because it makes the difference between 1st and 2nd, 2nd and 3rd so much more important than the difference between 5th and 6th or 7th and 8th. It's supposed to really incentivise a win. Which to be fair is exactly what happened today - if Sascha had won the lead, he'd have qualified, but coming second was nowhere near as good for his score, so he didn't. Couldn't help feeling sorry for him after the way he climbed but I think Rubtsov is also very deserving of a place.
-
Whatever happened with the WADA ban in Russia is sport? From a quick Google I can't quite understand how Russia was even at this event? Looked like team kit etc rather than competing as an "individual" or whatever..
According to Wikipedia, although a complete ban was recommended by anti doping organisations, they are only actually banned from athletics, weightlifting and all paralympic events.
-
They are not banned from cycling events.
-
Whatever happened with the WADA ban in Russia is sport? From a quick Google I can't quite understand how Russia was even at this event? Looked like team kit etc rather than competing as an "individual" or whatever..
I've heard mixed rumours that there was no anti doping at this event. But also heard from an ifsc official that there would have been... Take of that what you will. I'm optimistic that all the athletes are clean, hard working professionals.
-
Also - the multiplier system meant - I think - that Sasha was in first overall (1 point) with the Russian second (2) but when they both got bumped down to 2nd and 3rd that mean the Russian guy was then first over all... stupid system...
I don't think this is stupid at all, it's exactly how it should work because it places higher value on winning an event. The fact that Sascha was in the lead is a bit of a mirage, not least because the running order means stronger climbers go last, hence most of the field will change their ranking for the event. He's not actually in the lead until it's done.
-
But it meant Sasha and the Russian guy swapped first and second places because the final guy did better than both of them in lead - even though the final guy finished below them both overall.
If you finish 3, 3 and 3 you get 24 points. Same is if you finish 1, 3 and 9. Or 2, 3 and 6...
Are those equivalent?
-
Mixed feelings about the event. The finals were dramatic, if not always for the right reasons. The camera work was great.
Commentating, largely solo, for hours a day is not easy but Matt Groom should be able to pronounce competitor's names accurately.
The route setting was not as good as it sometimes is with not enough variation in style (did every lead route take an S shape, ending in a big dyno some way above the last draw? I lost count after 6), too many too easy routes (deciding an olympic place by speed on a lead route is tragic), too many bolts getting in the way, and too many donkey-marks.
The Russians did incredibly well.
-
Stayed in and watched the whole thing, thought it was pretty entertaining. On the scoring format the head-to-head 'knockout' in speed is fair enough but can see why you might want to also do it based on best time out of two runs. 6 of one half a dozen etc. If you look at Bosi - he was clearly on course to win his first speed head-to-head if he hadn't slipped. This would've put him in 4th minimum, maybe 3rd best case.
If he'd then only done one or two places better than he did in the bouldering - as many would've expected - he'd have been in with a chance of winning the event and qualifying. As it was he seemingly had a nightmare in the bouldering, which was compounded by slipping in the speed.. Tough gig.. but fine margins are what elite sport is apparently decided by.
Got to feel for Lehmann, pipped to it on time, and beaten by someone who wasn't even in the running for either the olymics or even the event win, just pride. He's probably thinking that's it.. his one and only chance of ever competing in an olympics, dust. He'll be 27 next time it comes around and there'll be swarms of young 55kg 6'2'' comp mutants on the scene with hydraulics for tendons.
Oh and if some of the Russians aren't on something I'll be amazed.. that Sergei guy could have run headlong at machine gun bullets and not felt them.
Edit - also those not liking the speed format.. isn't the list of qualifiers for the olympic finals devoid of any speed specialists who are shit at everything else (at a quick glance?). Which suggests the balance is about right, and the actual olympic speed event should be much more equal so a head-to-head an equitable format.
-
But it meant Sasha and the Russian guy swapped first and second places because the final guy did better than both of them in lead - even though the final guy finished below them both overall.
Maybe imagine how it would feel if the running order were reversed. Sasha would never have been in the lead.
It doesn't matter where Yuval came overall, he beat them both in lead. I think it's fair that they're affected proportionately differently for their relative positions, that's really the whole point of the scoring. It feels unsatisfying because of how it played out, but I don't think its unfair.
-
But it meant Sasha and the Russian guy swapped first and second places because the final guy did better than both of them in lead - even though the final guy finished below them both overall.
If you finish 3, 3 and 3 you get 24 points. Same is if you finish 1, 3 and 9. Or 2, 3 and 6...
Are those equivalent?
Not sure which is most impressive or if they are the equivalent to each other, it’d be personal interpretation I guess. Regardless....
3x3x3 = 27 not 24
1x3x9 = 27 again
2x3x6 = 36
Also Matt Groom was awful.
-
And you can't have a '9' in the mix
-
But 12 can be, and nearly was in this case got in a couple of ways.
1, 3, 4. (Rubstov or a few others could realistically get this if no specialist in finals)
6, 2, 1 (Ondra, Shubert, Garnbret, Megos)
6, 1, 2. (similar list to above)
2, 1, 6. (Someone like Hojer, boulderer but worked hard on speed)
It's not unrealistic to consider a situation with a two or even 3 way tie for gold where all those concerned have won a discipline. Olympic gold on count back anyone?
-
Anyone throwing shit about the Russians care to elaborate? And do you think the same about the Israelis?
I don't really see anything to worry about -
Home event, so larger, better rested, more motivated team.
Depleted field allows more lesser known competitors through.
Strong speed really helpful in combined, Russians unsurprisingly good at this.
Rubstov was no surprise surely.
Meshkova was excellent as a junior in 2018, made a couple of semis in her first senior year, and has continued to improve.
-
No, of course there isn't any more evidence than hearsay.
But it's hardly revolutionary to harbour doubts about Russian athletes doping. When you consider Russia firmly occupies number one spot in sport's hall of infamy for its long-term illegitimate practices, and the effort its government went to cover them up. Their sporting bodies/government made their choices, they were discovered, and that's naturally led to people having suspicion of Russian athletes clean or not. That just comes with the territory of being found guilty of systematic cheating.
Some people would doubt a dubious first ascent on way less evidence. :)
A v.quick google throws up this interesting stat from WADA:
Systematic doping in Russian sports has resulted in 47 Olympic and tens of world championships medals being stripped from Russian athletes—the most of any country, more than four times the number of the runner-up, and more than 30% of the global total. Russia also has the most athletes that have been caught doping at the Olympic Games, with more than 200.
Russian doping is distinct from doping in other countries because in Russia steroids and other drugs were supplied to athletes by the state. Due to widespread doping violations, including an attempt to sabotage ongoing investigations by the manipulation of computer data, in 2019 the World Anti-Doping Agency banned Russia from all major sporting events for four years.
-
But it meant Sasha and the Russian guy swapped first and second places because the final guy did better than both of them in lead - even though the final guy finished below them both overall.
If you finish 3, 3 and 3 you get 24 points. Same is if you finish 1, 3 and 9. Or 2, 3 and 6...
Are those equivalent?
Not sure which is most impressive or if they are the equivalent to each other, it’d be personal interpretation I guess. Regardless....
3x3x3 = 27 not 24
1x3x9 = 27 again
2x3x6 = 36
Also Matt Groom was awful.
My maths oh dear... 😂
-
They could just use an additive system that still incentivises a win and higher positions. Much like Formula 1 and plenty of other sports.
Far easier for spectators and commentators to add up the scores in their heads as the event goes on without making mistakes.
-
It's not unrealistic to consider a situation with a two or even 3 way tie for gold where all those concerned have won a discipline. Olympic gold on count back anyone?
Yet another reason why the 3rd event should have been psicobloc instead of speed.
Then a tie could have been resolved with a psicobloc decider between the tied athletes.
The tension and excitement would have made great tv and it would have been a reasonably fair way of doing it as psicobloc is already a bit of a hybrid between bouldering, lead and speed.
-
Surely the decider would be to ask each climber who had the most fun.
-
I think the tragedy in this event lay mostly in the setting and not the scoring or Russian skepticism.
I simply cannot understand why it is impossible to set hard routes so that nobody tops it and time is much less likely to be a factor. It's a combined event, 2 out of the 3 disciplines should not be speed, ever. I feel awful for Sasha and Stasa, both of which lost their Olympic ticket because another person, not even the person they were contending with, climbed the route too fast or too slow, that's bollocks.
It was the same in the qualification round for the men, and to really twist the knife it also happened to Sasha in the Toulouse finals, his other shot at qualification.
It also happened on the men's route at pan ams, failing to split Sean Bailey and Collin Duffy, it is a recurring theme.
Sure tops are exciting for the crowd, but at a qualification event the fairness of competition should come first every time.
There were issues in the boulder setting too, particularly the womens, though it still more or less allowed the best athletes to shine through.
-
I must be in a minority that like the speed despite thinking it was a shit idea at the start.
The thing that is wrong is that there are no individual medals which I think will be sorted in the future.
The decathlon and heptathon are some of my favourite events at the olympics they don’t detract from the individual events.
I would bet most of the competitors going to the olympics will still enter the combined as well as there favourite individual events.
-
I quite like the speed too Duma. It’s one part that works well on the TV. And I don’t mind the knockout part of it either...
But think the scoring system is wack when the top speed climber (men’s - and women’s) qualifies for the final - then gets zero tops in Bouldering and barely gets off the ground in lead.
If nothing else that didn’t help the ‘spectacle’ of the event...
I guess this partly boils down to the three events being forced together for the olympics... there seems to be much more overlap between Boulder and Lead than there is with speed and anything else. Maybe that’s at the heart of the problem.
Maybe we could modern-pentathlon zizz it up and have them ride on horses between the events - or try and shoot some targets immediately after the lead climb when they’re pumped to shit 😂
-
Because the speed specialists have been such a visible wildcard element during the qualification comps I think what people haven't mentioned (or possibly realised) is that there won't be any speed specialists in the olympic finals.
Nearly all have been whittled away during the olympic qualification comps, and the small number of speed specialists who made it to the olympics will be whittled away during the olympic qualification round.
The only way this won't happen is if one of the speed specialists massively ups their boulder or lead ability in the next 6 months. Unlikely.
Therefore that's going to change the dynamic in the olympic final because there isn't likely to be a speed specialist hoovering up the guaranteed speed win. There's now a good chance a climber who wins either the bouldering or lead may also take the win or 2nd in the speed. During the qualifying comps this probably wouldn't happen and we saw how it skewed the field. So for good boulderers/lead climbers - which all finalists will be - being decent at speed will be a big advantage. Possibly more to gain from improving at speed than at the other disciplines given how closely matched all the finalists are likely to be in bouldering and lead.
Could have done with some pre-qualifying, qualifying comps to whittle away the speed specialists, before whittling away the rest in qualifying, until there were none left to be whittled away during the qualifying round of the olympic finals..
-
I quite like the speed too Duma. It’s one part that works well on the TV. And I don’t mind the knockout part of it either...
But think the scoring system is wack when the top speed climber (men’s - and women’s) qualifies for the final - then gets zero tops in Bouldering and barely gets off the ground in lead.
If nothing else that didn’t help the ‘spectacle’ of the event...
I guess this partly boils down to the three events being forced together for the olympics... there seems to be much more overlap between Boulder and Lead than there is with speed and anything else. Maybe that’s at the heart of the problem.
Maybe we could modern-pentathlon zizz it up and have them ride on horses between the events - or try and shoot some targets immediately after the lead climb when they’re pumped to shit 😂
Nah.
Clip bolts with an 8mtr clip stick, wearing belay glasses and a two mile run back to the car to retrieve the right shoe they left under the back seat. Combined with style marks for the “Verdon-the-fuckinf-ants-are-in-my-fucking-shorts” dance recital.
Should be specific events.
-
Because the speed specialists have been such a visible wildcard element during the qualification comps I think what people haven't mentioned (or possibly realised) is that there won't be any speed specialists in the olympic finals.
Nearly all have been whittled away during the olympic qualification comps, and the small number of speed specialists who made it to the olympics will be whittled away during the olympic qualification round.
The only way this won't happen is if one of the speed specialists massively ups their boulder or lead ability in the next 6 months
Unlikley
I think this wrong.
1)There are a few speed specialists in the Olympics
2) one of these will probably win the speed discipline in olympic qualification.
3) the scoring makes it very unlikely that the winner of a discipline won't progress to the final. Even last place (20th) in the other 2 disciplines would have been good enough in the Europeans for example. And the French speed brothers are both decent boulderers I believe.
-
Because the speed specialists have been such a visible wildcard element during the qualification comps I think what people haven't mentioned (or possibly realised) is that there won't be any speed specialists in the olympic finals.
Nearly all have been whittled away during the olympic qualification comps, and the small number of speed specialists who made it to the olympics will be whittled away during the olympic qualification round.
The only way this won't happen is if one of the speed specialists massively ups their boulder or lead ability in the next 6 months
Unlikley
I think this wrong.
1)There are a few speed specialists in the Olympics
2) one of these will probably win the speed discipline in olympic qualification.
3) the scoring makes it very unlikely that the winner of a discipline won't progress to the final. Even last place (20th) in the other 2 disciplines would have been good enough in the Europeans for example. And the French speed brothers are both decent boulderers I believe.
Definietly, I think it is extremely likely that there will be a speed climber in the final. Mickael Mawem is a boulder specialist who is also good at speed, could be a good shout for the win with that combo if he could win one of the two. It's his brother Bassa who is the speed specialist.
-
Barring injury, illness or ill luck I find it hard look past Tomoa for the men’s gold considering his not-shit speed skills.
-
Barring injury, illness or ill luck I find it hard look past Tomoa for the men’s gold considering his not-shit speed skills.
Yeah you are right there. I didn't watch the recent Japanese comp but if he is still on the same form as last year he will be unstoppable!
-
Because the speed specialists have been such a visible wildcard element during the qualification comps I think what people haven't mentioned (or possibly realised) is that there won't be any speed specialists in the olympic finals.
Nearly all have been whittled away during the olympic qualification comps, and the small number of speed specialists who made it to the olympics will be whittled away during the olympic qualification round.
The only way this won't happen is if one of the speed specialists massively ups their boulder or lead ability in the next 6 months. Unlikely.
Therefore that's going to change the dynamic in the olympic final because there isn't likely to be a speed specialist hoovering up the guaranteed speed win. There's now a good chance a climber who wins either the bouldering or lead may also take the win or 2nd in the speed. During the qualifying comps this probably wouldn't happen and we saw how it skewed the field. So for good boulderers/lead climbers - which all finalists will be - being decent at speed will be a big advantage. Possibly more to gain from improving at speed than at the other disciplines given how closely matched all the finalists are likely to be in bouldering and lead.
Could have done with some pre-qualifying, qualifying comps to whittle away the speed specialists, before whittling away the rest in qualifying, until there were none left to be whittled away during the qualifying round of the olympic finals..
Rishat Khaibullin and Ludovico Fossali are in the mens, both speed climbers. Aleksandra Mirosław and Iuliia Kaplina are in the womens.
Rishat got bronze at the world champs combined, with a score of 40, 1 x 8 x 5. Aleksandra came 4th with 1 x 8 x 8. It's quite possible there'll be a speed specialist in the olympic finals I think.
In qualifying a score of 1 x 20 x 20 = 400, which is better than say 8 x 8 x 8.
-
I find the knockout nature of the speed terrible.
I just cannot fathom how a format where the fastest climber is not guaranteed to wind the speed is sensible.
The only thing speed has going for it is the concept that the fastest wins.
Only they might not
-
I find the knockout nature of the speed terrible.
I just cannot fathom how a format where the fastest climber is not guaranteed to wind the speed is sensible.
The only thing speed has going for it is the concept that the fastest wins.
Only they might not
^This. It is unbelievable. Often doesn't make much difference but has potentially cost climbers Olympic places in the past, for example Futaba Ito at Hachioji.
See this very nerdy post from the Olympics thread:
-
I find the knockout nature of the speed terrible.
I just cannot fathom how a format where the fastest climber is not guaranteed to wind the speed is sensible.
The only thing speed has going for it is the concept that the fastest wins.
Only they might not
Being fastest in the 100m heats wins you nothing if you can’t reproduce it in the semis and the final.
-
I find the knockout nature of the speed terrible.
I just cannot fathom how a format where the fastest climber is not guaranteed to wind the speed is sensible.
The only thing speed has going for it is the concept that the fastest wins.
Only they might not
Being fastest in the 100m heats wins you nothing if you can’t reproduce it in the semis and the final.
Yeah but if you do get the second fastest time in the 100m final then you do come second!
-
Being the fastest in the Olympic finals at speed climbing does not guarantee you first place in that round.
Its not another round.
Imagine if they climbed the boulders head to head. You could be the only person to top the second two and still only come 5th.
-
Being fastest in the 100m heats wins you nothing if you can’t reproduce it in the semis and the final.
Usually first two qualify automatically and then a few fastest losers. So being fast has an incentive that it doesn't here.
It's a big problem for the athlete that messes up one round, but it also affect all of the other rankings, which is the real distortion. A footslip by the favourite in round one distorts all of the results by unequal amounts. If you mess up in 1 of your 3 runs which one makes a lot of difference to both you and others.
-
Yes, the bonus multiplier effect.
Previously wafflings:
There is a real issue with multiplying the results of an athlete vs athlete comp with athlete vs the wall. It's the bonus multiplier effect.
The multiplication system transfers and multiplies the quirks of knockout rounds to the results of the other rounds.
So if one person slips and false starts, their direct competitor gets a bonus multiplier across all three rounds, and everyone else is disproportionately disadvantaged, across all three rounds.
And more!
The issue is less with people doing badly, and more with their rival profiting more than the rest of the field from their mistake.
I'm sure there is maths to explain this effect, but I'm not a mathematician, so...
In the speed comp, Bob expects to do badly as he has the slowest personal record. But his rival (the fastest on paper) is disqualified with a false start. Bob gets through to the semis. His next opponent also messes up and Bob is through to the finals. Bob loses by a mile, but even though he records the slowest time of the day, he now has a ranking of 2. So two competitors fluffed it, but Bob benefited more than anyone else (unlike in bouldering or lead where everyone else would benefit equally).
Whatever ranking he now achieves in bouldering and lead will be multiplied by only 2. Which effectively means the false starts have disadvantaged everyone except Bob (and the winner of the speed round of course, who was delighted to face the slowest competitor in the finals!). Everyone else is now playing catch up to someone who did nothing to deserve having such a low score.
The issue is that there are two different ranking systems which don't multiply fairly - the man vs man knockout round of speed, and the man vs wall rounds of bouldering and lead. If the competitors in speed were ranked by the fastest time they achieved (ie. man vs wall), it wouldn't be an issue.*
*Here's an idea - in this scenario you could still have knockout rounds, which would reward those who progressed to semis and finals with more chances to record a faster time. Best of both worlds?
-
Agreed, but this is a criticism of the scoring system rather than the speed format. The same thing could happen in the bouldering, especially with only 3 problems. Say you misread a move on the “easy” problem that everyone else does. I think the criticism of the speed format derives from us not being able to relate to it in the same way as we can with the other events, but the same issue exists across all 3 events.
-
Rishat Khaibullin and Ludovico Fossali are in the mens, both speed climbers. Aleksandra Mirosław and Iuliia Kaplina are in the womens.
Rishat got bronze at the world champs combined, with a score of 40, 1 x 8 x 5. Aleksandra came 4th with 1 x 8 x 8. It's quite possible there'll be a speed specialist in the olympic finals I think.
In qualifying a score of 1 x 20 x 20 = 400, which is better than say 8 x 8 x 8.
Rishat is not a speed specialist, he just happens to be good at speed. he tains in Prague with the Ondrawad.
Ludo is a speed specialist but pretty much fluked his way to winning the World Championships in Hachioji. I could easily see him being beaten in speed by Tomoa or Mickael or even Kai.
Bassa is a possible finalist as he will probably win the speed and is good enough to not finish last in boulder and lead. But he is prone to mistakes in the speed.
-
Ludo is a speed specialist but pretty much fluked his way to winning the World Championships in Hachioji.
How do you fluke your way to a World Championship?
-
Agreed, but this is a criticism of the scoring system rather than the speed format.
The two are linked.
The same thing could happen in the bouldering, especially with only 3 problems. Say you misread a move on the “easy” problem that everyone else does.
No. If someone slips in the bouldering, the other competitors benefit equally. There is no bonus multiplier for one rival, because it's not a head to head event.
I think the criticism of the speed format derives from us not being able to relate to it in the same way as we can with the other events, but the same issue exists across all 3 events.
I actually find the head to head quite entertaining. Just seems a shame that it affects the other other results in the way I described.
I suppose if we had additive, rather than multiplicative scoring, speed climbers might never have qualified for the Olympics? Perhaps that's why it was deemed necessary. Scoring 1+20+20 is going to lose out to all the mid pack climbers, eg. someone with a score of 13+13+13 still beats a speed climber who finishes first in speed but last in the other events.
-
Agreed, but this is a criticism of the scoring system rather than the speed format. The same thing could happen in the bouldering, especially with only 3 problems. Say you misread a move on the “easy” problem that everyone else does. I think the criticism of the speed format derives from us not being able to relate to it in the same way as we can with the other events, but the same issue exists across all 3 events.
r-mans post explains better - but fucking up an easy problem in bouldering does not have the same effect as in speed as it's not knock out.
-
I think the criticism of the speed format derives from us not being able to relate to it in the same way as we can with the other events, but the same issue exists across all 3 events.
I don't think it does. My criticism of the speed event is that climbers with worse performances can and often do finish in a higher position than those with better performances - if you count getting up the wall quickly as a good performance (thats the point right?), rather than beating a rather arbitrarily selected opponent. This just doesn't happen in the same way in bouldering and lead. If you are drawn against a speed climber in the first round of the final then you can only finish in 5th in the best case scenario - not comparable to misreading a problem or a foot slip IMO.
-
Agreed, but this is a criticism of the scoring system rather than the speed format. The same thing could happen in the bouldering, especially with only 3 problems. Say you misread a move on the “easy” problem that everyone else does. I think the criticism of the speed format derives from us not being able to relate to it in the same way as we can with the other events, but the same issue exists across all 3 events.
r-mans post explains better - but fucking up an easy problem in bouldering does not have the same effect as in speed as it's not knock out.
I totally agree with this. All you have to do is imagine the bouldering climbed as a three round head to head to see how shit it is.
The first two come out and try identical problems head to head with whoever gets higher winning. The winner progresses to the winners side whilst the loser ends up on the loser side. All four pairs climb problem one.
Then they move onto problem two for round two of the knockout (speed style). First problem losers against first problem losers. First problem winners against first problem winners.
You could narrowly fail to top out problem one and get beaten in round one and then be the only climber to top problems two and three and thus clearly be best and yet end up in 5th.
If this is so clearly shit for the bouldering I don't see why its not clearly shit for the speed.
Or maybe people think this is a good idea. You would after all get the head to head aspect of performing monkeys that some seem to like.
-
Or maybe people think this is a good idea. You would after all get the head to head aspect of performing monkeys that some seem to like.
The only reason I can think of for the current format is that they think it makes it more entertaining. Obviously it needs to be entertaining but undermining the integrity of the results seems to be a high price to pay. The ideal solution would be to have an 8 lane speed wall, of course this is logistically impossible - a time trial is the next best thing in my opinion.
-
The only reason I can think of for the current format is that they think it makes it more entertaining.
Isn’t the current format how speed comps have been run for years or have they changed it for the Olympics?
-
The only reason I can think of for the current format is that they think it makes it more entertaining.
Isn’t the current format how speed comps have been run for years or have they changed it for the Olympics?
Not sure how long the current format has been used for but I don't think they have changed it for the Olympics. I guess this could be the real reason they have used this system. Frankly, if speed climbers are happy with the head to head system then fine - I am not really interested in stand alone speed comps, but when it messes up the results in the combined format I think it is worth changing to a fairer system.
-
I agree with the thoughts regarding the scoring system and speed knock-out format. Time trial would be much better, a fairer scoring system could be found - though deffo too late for the Olympics I believe.
But the real scandal in Moscow was the much too easy final lead route. This had quite a big impact on the results, too. For me, in a lead comp, one should be able to climb in the personally most efficient rhythm, rather than having the focus on progressing as quickly as possible. For more endurance oriented lead climbers, going fast certainly is not the most efficient style.
I mean, I only know Sascha from seeing him at the gym when he trains (lead). I only climb ~8a, have very limited route setting experience and only occasionally feel the holds in his gym training routes. But I'm very confident that I could have set a more adquately challenging lead route for him and his peers than the one they had in the Moscow final?!?
-
But the real scandal in Moscow was the much too easy final lead route. This had quite a big impact on the results, too. For me, in a lead comp, one should be able to climb in the personally most efficient rhythm, rather than having the focus on progressing as quickly as possible. For more endurance oriented lead climbers, going fast certainly is not the most efficient style.
Yes it was a shame that the Olympic position was decided on time rather than difficulty of the route. Quite a lot of the setting in Moscow was too easy in my opinion, I think it was the womens final that was essentially a two boulder comp because 5/6 climbers flashed the first problem.
-
In response to Duma’s point, take a situation where we have 3 boulder problems and the setting is a bit off. One is fairly easy and the other two are a bit too hard. One competitor misses the easy problem due to misreading a move or due to height issues or a multitude of other possible reasons and everyone else gets the problem. Neither of the other problems get topped, but our fictional competitor is the only one to get zones on either. That competitor can’t come higher than last, regardless of the fact they did better than everyone else on 2 out of 3 problems. Effectively, the first problem has acted as a knockout because of the nature of problems 2 and 3.
On a similar note, there’s been a bit of a trend recently to have the first move of the lead route being a parkour style move, standing up on a slopey volume into a press type of thing - men’s lead qualifier in the combined was, I think. Same situation, you miss the first move due to a mistake and you’re last. I do realise that this doesn’t illustrate my point as well as the boulder example, but I guess I’m trying to highlight that these early moves can be a bit of a lottery.
Let’s be clear here, I understand the points you’re all making and I recognise that the speed format isn’t perfect. All I’m trying to argue is that there are scenarios in all 3 events that can have similar impacts that would seem “unfair” or give results that seem wrong.
If you remove the head to head from the speed round, you’re removing the one thing that makes it watchable. I can see the value in a setup like the team pursuit in cycling, where you qualify for your knockout position - 2 runs, 5th to 8th ranked on best time, 1st to 4th get seeded and have semis and finals. That would mitigate a lot of the problems, but you’d still be left with the above issues in boulder and lead.
The biggest issue that I can see with the existing structure is not Bob from r-man’s example fluking his way through the rounds, because his opponents will be good enough to back off a bit, be solid and still win. The biggest issue in my mind is if someone like Tomoa gets drawn against a speed specialist in round 1 and gets beaten.
-
Can anybody explain how the speed climbing pairing are determined?
I assume they are seeded in some way.
This must be based on a speed only seeding right?
-
Let’s be clear here, I understand the points you’re all making
You clearly don't.
-
It all comes down to the stupid (yes it’s stupid) scoring system.
Is there another sport in the world that multiplies like this?
Sure - let’s give more reward for coming first - but that could be through points for the position - like F1 (25, 18, 15, 12, 10 etc down to tenth place) that doesn’t skew things quite as much...
Incidentally - is anyone else looking at other (non UK) forums that are debating this..? Same arguments? Same points? Interested if so.
-
Let’s be clear here, I understand the points you’re all making
You clearly don't.
My mistake. In the face of your solid reasoned argument, I concede.
I’m sorry you don’t agree with my views, but that’s all they are - my views. There’s really no need to be rude about it. If you feel you can conclude that I don’t understand from what little you’ve seen and what little you know about me, then fair enough. It’s an opinion, that’s all it is and this isn’t UKC.
-
r-man already explained it better than I could. If you think that a mistake on a boulder problem has a comparable effect you haven't understood. I'm not trying to be rude.
-
I have to agree with Duma - your examples in boulder and lead don't address the core point... In boulder/lead, the second best on the day comes second*. In speed, it's quite feasible for the second best on the day to come 5th due to getting knocked out in the first head-to-head. Blowing the easy problem or dropping the first pokey move of the route means you weren't the best on the day, and while your fuck-up or wonder-fluke might influence the combined results, it influences all other competitors in that particular event in an equal manner, whereas in speed a wonder-fluke/wonder-fuck-up disproportionally influences the results of one athlete (your rival in that round) more than the other athletes.
*this is potentially not true when speed is used to decide the lead event, since in that scenario it can matter a lot whether you're out early or not, as we saw in Moscow - coming out last means you know that you need to smash the fuck on due to multiple tops. This can be mitigated with impeccable setting.
If you wanted to defend the speed format, there might be a vaguely viable argument if it's seeded based on speed qualies (e.g. 1 vs 8, 2 vs 7 etc.) - this means that the likely advantage is gained by doing well in qualies, as per the other events where coming out last might be considered an advantage (at least in some scenarios, like lead where multiple people top). This doesn't address the wonder-fluke/dropper issue, nor that the second best in the round actually comes 5th, but does point out that things aren't entirely equal in the other formats either, and you could then argue that the "best on the day" metric is a combo of both qualies and finals rather than purely the final...
-
Stabbsy, you are talking about one person suffering from their own bad luck within the rules of the game. Sucks for them. Everyone else gets lucky.
My point is that slip ups in speed have a very different type of impact.
If Igor has a slip up in speed, Bob benefits, but only Bob. Because of the multiplication, Bob also gets a boost to his other scores. Igor’s slip has improved Bob’s bouldering and lead scores, but only Bob’s. Seems a little unfair.
If Igor fluffs it in bouldering or lead, Bob does not get rewarded any more than the rest of the field.
-
Clearly the solution is for JB and DanM to discover a fatal flaw in the design concept of autobelays which nullifies their compliance to the relevant EN standard. Meaning no more speed round.. If it wasn't for those pesky kids etc..
Or as others have said just run it as a time trial.
-
Or would it better to run it like some of track cycling events where they do a time trial of the distance which then seeds them in to quarter finals and so on.
-
The ideal solution would be to have an 8 lane speed wall, of course this is logistically impossible - a time trial is the next best thing in my opinion.
Is this really logistically impossible? We are talking about the Olympics, there is a lot of money involved. The speed wall is a simple flat structure and you could squeeze the routes a bit more than currently so I don't see why 4, 6 or even all 8 climbers on the wall together is impractical. I bet the wall would still be cheaper than the best lead walls. You only need it for the top competition venues.
The more climbers at once, the less the unfair relative advantage to competitors from an individual mistake. Obviously if everyone is on the wall at once it disappears completely.
I agree with what others have said about the unfair advantage given to the competitor of someone who makes a mistake in the early rounds. However, I think the race format and the fact that mistakes sorely cost an individual make the whole thing more exciting. I think a straight time trial, especially with multiple attempts, would be really dull. I find the mental challenge of the speed competition more interesting than the physical in terms of the challenge it gives to the best lead/boulder climbers. A race as opposed to time trial is also consistent with other Olympic speed or any other racing) events where the point is not to get the faster time over a day, but to win the race in the 10 seconds that matters.
-
I have to agree with Duma - your examples in boulder and lead don't address the core point... In boulder/lead, the second best on the day comes second.
Agree that my lead example was weak (and I acknowledged it as such in my post). However, my boulder example was a climber who got closest to 2 out of 3 problems (2 zones, no one else getting any) and failed to top the one that everyone else got for whatever reason. That climber would come last based on the value system that we've chosen to adopt - favouring tops over progress on problems - but they were the best climber on the majority of the problems tried. So I'd disagree that the second best on the day will necessarily come second in bouldering because it relies too much on our definition of "best".
If Igor fluffs it in bouldering or lead, Bob does not get rewarded any more than the rest of the field.
So here's where we disagree, because I'd say how much Bob gets rewarded depends on his bouldering position. If Igor's slip up means he drops from 1st to 8th, then the person in second jumps to first and their score halves. The person in third jumps to second and their score reduces by 33% and so on, with the person in eighth jumping to seventh and getting a 12.5% reduction in score. Disproportionate effects depending on relative position. Whether those disproportionate effects on score translate through to disproportionate effects on position is less obvious, but you would expect that it would to some extent.
If Igor has a slip up in speed, Bob benefits, but only Bob. Because of the multiplication, Bob also gets a boost to his other scores. Igor’s slip has improved Bob’s bouldering and lead scores, but only Bob’s. Seems a little unfair.
Again, I don't agree here. Let's say Igor is the best speed climber in the final and he's drawn against Bob in R1. You also have the second best speed climber, Jakob. Jakob has never beaten Igor in a speed comp. Assuming all goes to form, the best Jakob can hope for is 2nd if the draw works in his favour and he doesn't meet Igor until the final. Igor has a slip up and, you're right, Bob benefits. But so does Jakob, because he's gone from second to first and his bouldering and lead scores have just halved.
Like I said in an earlier post, I don't think the speed format is perfect, but I do think the multiplicative system is the bigger issue.
-
I think the speed climbing format is fine as it is. Look at hurdles or to a lesser extent steeple chase. On paper, you could be the fastest but execution when it matters is essential. Which arguably is the same as lead climbing.
I’d never watched the speed climbing prior to the weekend. I think it’s very exciting, but IMO, it’s probably better as an individual stand alone event. It’s a very different skill set to lead climbing.
I think the current system is like a pentathlon. Where those who are very effective in all formats will do best.
I’d like to see some kind of heptathlon where speed, lead and bouldering is included with some extra events.
I’d also throw in dry tooling as an event, a campus event and fingerboard event.
-
Stabbsy - your response still kind of misses the point. Create any scoring system you want for boulder, and the second best under that system (tops, progress, whatever) comes second.
The same is not necessarily true in speed, where the second fastest can come 5th. Surely in no world is the consistently second fastest not the second best at speed simply because of luck of the draw?
Igor/Bob: As I pointed out, while combined may be altered disproportionately, the results of the individual discipline are not. Which is what r-man was pointing out. Your argument against multiplication doesn't address the argument about disproportionate impact within a discipline, which is a separate issue, and which is where the head to head is an issue
-
It also seems *more* disproportionate due to the existence in climbing of climbers who only excel at speed, versus climbers who excel at both boulder and lead. The speed specialist has a very high probability of beating anyone who isn't a speed specialist. (Barring slips, but that goes for anyone). The same probability of beating everyone else isn't there for bouldering or lead rounds, where climbers are more equally matched - even Ondra etc.
Perhaps that difference between the proportion of climbers who excel at speed, versus the proportion who excel at boulder and lead will lessen over time due to the pressures of trying to conform to comp formats that disproportionately reward speed. Perhaps not.
You could think of it another way: a final comprised entirely of speed specialists (who are 'relatively' poor at lead and boulder), except for one competitor who excels at lead and who virtually always wins their round, and who can be relied upon to consistently come last in the other two rounds. They'd still end up with 64 points. The speed climbers would probably think it's a fair format.
Which suggests it isn't the format per se that's the problem, it's that the values which the format gives to different disciplines don't align with the skillsets we as climbers value most highly.
-
I'm torn. I like the fact that having a multiplier means that a win is massive and it really incentivises high ranking. I also think the head to heads is the only way of making the speed round a "spectacle" but being the second best speed climber but only getting 5th is an annoying scenario.
I guess the way to look at speed is that the "Final" is the actual last race and the rest of the rounds are just heats you have to win.
-
Is the problem with comparing head to head speed with heats in a sprint not that speed climbing involves an element of risk which increases significantly as you try and give a better effort?
Runners might have to expend more or less effort depending on who they're up against in a heat, and this might affect their recovery for the next round, but it's unlikely that they'll have to try hard and end up tripping over and getting eliminated. As speed climbers go faster they have to use sequences that might be riskier or they might catch a hold badly/miss a hold etc which will result in them being knocked out.
Slopestyle gets around this by letting everyone have three runs where they can go for the risky stuff in the first ones and do something more conservative in the last if they've fucked up the first. That's the suggested time trial format for speed, but comes with the obvious disadvantage of being even more boring to watch than head to head speed. To mitigate the boredom and indignity of watching the world's best climbers trying to go up a 5+ faster than each other, could you set them off in reverse rank order and superimpose a horizontal line on the wall that climbs to the top at pace of the fastest individual so far? Like watching downhill skiing and seeing if they're green/red going through the splits.
-
Downgrading the speed route now, cant help yourself can you, you lanky scrittle botherer :offtopic:
-
Is the problem with comparing head to head speed with heats in a sprint not that speed climbing involves an element of risk which increases significantly as you try and give a better effort?
Runners might have to expend more or less effort depending on who they're up against in a heat, and this might affect their recovery for the next round, but it's unlikely that they'll have to try hard and end up tripping over and getting eliminated. As speed climbers go faster they have to use sequences that might be riskier or they might catch a hold badly/miss a hold etc which will result in them being knocked out.
The biggest difference for runners or swimmers is that their heats have 8 people, not 2, and that the fastest 2 or 3 go through, together with a small number of fastest losers.
This massively reduces the variance and the advantage of being in a particular heat over another.
There is still potential for one athlete to make an error and get knocked out by pushing too hard (false starts, disqualifications etc). This isn't a problem there as there isn't one specific person who gets a massive boost from it despite having done nothing to earn it. Similarly, getting a bad draw and drawing Usain Bolt in the first round isn't such a problem because there is more than one place up for grabs from the heat.
The problem with the speed climbing format is that the heats are 1v1 so the luck of the draw plays a much bigger part, with someone's speed score relying massively on who they are drawn against, not on how well they performed. The multiplication then amplifies the effect so someone who benefits unfairly in the speed might not need to do that much in the bouldering/lead to win the overall title, despite not being the best performer by any reasonable metric.
It's just a shit system. Hopefully it will be the last time it is used.
-
I'm pretty sure there us seeding for the spend round in combined finals? Based only on the pairings for the recent Euro Champs where I'm pretty sure the fastest four speed climbers in the final (based on combined qualis i think?) each faced one of the slowest four.
Partly why Bosi's first round race against Sascha (4th & 5th fastest in qualis if i remember correctly) was so crucial.
I still don't like the format though, i like the suggestion above of following a similar format to that used in track cycling - best of both worlds imo.
-
I'm pretty sure there us seeding for the spend round in combined finals? Based only on the pairings for the recent Euro Champs where I'm pretty sure the fastest four speed climbers in the final (based on combined qualis i think?) each faced one of the slowest four.
Partly why Bosi's first round race against Sascha (4th & 5th fastest in qualis if i remember correctly) was so crucial.
I still don't like the format though, i like the suggestion above of following a similar format to that used in track cycling - best of both worlds imo.
Yes they do use seeding and that probably helps a bit, but there are still major descrepancies sometimes. To reuse my example from the other channel: in the pan american comp womens final, the climber with the second fastest time came 7th in the speed round, whereas the second slowest climber came 2nd - doesn't seem right to me when its so easy to implement a time trial system. The caveat here though is that there are a few reasons why people can win with a slow time, for example racing a much slower climber, the other climber falling or false starting - so in the head to head system climbers will not record their fastest times in every run.
From what Graeme posted on the other channel it sounds like the IFSC weren't allowed to change the rules by the Olympics people. Hopefully once the Olympics is over a better solution can be found (like not trying to combine speed with the other disciplines!).
-
In a slight defence of the current system, it does usually sort the climbers by time ~+/- 1 place. In Tolouse, the ranking was exactly the same whether you used head to head or time trial.
-
Ludo is a speed specialist but pretty much fluked his way to winning the World Championships in Hachioji.
How do you fluke your way to a World Championship?
He qualified in 10th, which is about par for him. Then in his 4 races in the final there was 1 FS and 2 falls (or visa versa) and in the other race there was a massive mistake by his opponent, or something like that.
-
The only reason I can think of for the current format is that they think it makes it more entertaining.
Isn’t the current format how speed comps have been run for years or have they changed it for the Olympics?
there is a slight modification. In World Cups there are no run off's to dertermine 5th/6th or 7th/8th, qualification times are used.. In Olympic format these race are run so that all athletes do the same number of races.
-
Can anybody explain how the speed climbing pairing are determined?
I assume they are seeded in some way.
This must be based on a speed only seeding right?
Qualification times are used to determine the seeding. The theory is that the gold medal race is between 1st and 2nd fastest from the quals
-
In defense of speed.
It's a head to head event not a time trial.
Like the FA cup. You draw the eventual winner in the 3rd round and lose when otherwise you would've made it through to the final. well tough luck.
Sometimes the best don't make it and a plucky minnow does. That's what makes it so great.
-
If its so good, why don't we pair up the climbers for the bouldering and run it the same?
Its not the speed climbing that I object to per say, its the fact that its assessed using a totally different methodology. Its like doing a decathlon where pole vault and hurdles are head to head whilst the rest are standard.
-
If its so good, why don't we pair up the climbers for the bouldering and run it the same?
Its not the speed climbing that I object to per say, its the fact that its assessed using a totally different methodology.
Speed is clearly less similar to the other two... but IIRC Speed has quite a long standing history / series of competitions so the combined event is there because the IOC wouldnt allow climbing to have three separate events. (even though it would seem it would take just as long to run!!)
-
In defense of speed.
It's a head to head event not a time trial.
Like the FA cup. You draw the eventual winner in the 3rd round and lose when otherwise you would've made it through to the final. well tough luck.
Sometimes the best don't make it and a plucky minnow does. That's what makes it so great.
I think that logic works OK when it's a standalone event - e.g. the FA Cup, where it doesn't really make a difference if you get knocked out in the 1st round or the QFs, you still haven't won.
The problem is that for a combined format, these placings do matter because they have a big impact on your overall score, and as others have pointed out the scoring system can be very unfair - performance doesn't necessarily correlate with position, and a poor performance by one athlete can disproportionately benefit another random competitor.
-
the combined event is there because the IOC wouldnt allow climbing to have three separate events.
As I understand it (from a talk by the bloke who made the film Need for Speed from the 2018 Reel Rock) the IOC’s interest was purely in speed as they consider(ed) it to be the only discipline with any appeal to non-climbing spectators. The three-part format is a result of subsequent bargaining by the IFSC.
-
I guess they’ve considerably changed their tune since then as there’s 2 separate events for Paris I think (boulder lead combined plus speed)?
-
I imagine that the IFSC were just trying to get their foot in the door. Concede one Olympics with a rubbish system, and hope that in subsequent ones that climbing has been proved popular enough to have different medals (with Climbing growing in popularity perhaps they were happy to give it a couple of medal for Paris before seeing how it performed in Tokyo?).
I'd have thought they decided to have the Speed segment run like this is because that is how it has been done historically, and when the events are run under separate medals in the future it will be run in this format. Perhaps they are hesitant of introducing new viewers to a system and then having a different system in place in all other events/ future Olympics. Or maybe the Olympic committee refused to have the Speed format changed and demanded that Boulder & Lead be fit around it.
Whether this really justifies having a rubbish scoring system in place is another matter.
-
Good interview with Jacky Godoffe on route setting including his thoughts on the speed route (https://blog.tenaya.net/en/2020/12/02/interview-jacky-godoffe-climbing-route-setter/)
You created the universal speed climbing competition route—can you tell us more about it?
The idea of the speed route was to make something absolutely different from the rest of climbing. The unique holds are designed to be grabbed in three different ways, and they are supposed to be a caricature of a bird flying. [laughs] I don’t know if it’s that obvious, but, yes. I set the route in a couple of days, and in total with the hold design, I would say, it was done in three months. I think for how fast it was, it was cool.
Do you think they should change the speed competition route every now and then?
Oh, yes. It was not my idea at the time to create a route that lasted for 15 years or longer. When I was on the IFSC commission I asked them, maybe three or four times, to change it after five years or so. But now that every gym or team in the world has bought all these holds, I think they were probably afraid if they change everything it could be a mess. In my opinion, it should be changed to be more connected to our world now, because it exists in the world of 15 years ago.
-
Just caught up on the Combined Finals (and Combined Bouldering Qualies). Haven't read the thread. A few things stand out:
The climbing was generally great. A bit dynoey on M Boulder final but otherwise a lot of good entertaining climbing.
The whole Olympic pressure thing and people getting shuffled around as lead positions change was a bit grim to watch. It's an overly stressful aspect that I don't like as much as seeing people try really hard on really cool moves.
Speed being part of combined is still a massive pile of dick, including for the speed specialists.
#bringbackboscoe
-
Having watched a couple of combined comps, I think that the format works but only when the three rounds are distinct, not speed-Boulder-speed. The lead routes in finals were far too easy but why, was the lead wall too small, not steep enough or just a route setting mistake? I appreciate it must be hard to set a route where speed specialists can safely make it to the third clip without decking out, perhaps stop worrying and pull over the crash pads from the bouldering to make the start of the route safe.
-
the third clip without decking out
Someone did deck out in the mens semi IIRC!
-
Catching up on some stuff...
Never imagined I'd be typing this a couple of years ago but was sorry to hear Boscoe's retired from ifsc commentating. Back to the old routine of muted sound in the interests of maintaining steady blood pressure with Groom at the helm which is a shame as the wall mics are great and was enjoying the background europop too.
Quoted for truth. TBF, Boscoe was a bit annoying at first in a vaguely similarly banal sort of way, and got a LOT better over the course of a season (to the point that I genuinely liked his presentation and reliable one gem of a quip per round), maybe Matt G can do the same although he does seem to have more of a starting handicap on the banality stakes. Jernej (sp?) co-commentating later on was very good though.
What's the deal with the Stasa towel dab? Can't see how it makes any difference if you dab the mat or your towel?
I was wondering this too. I had presumed there was a "no dabbing anything on the mat rule" to prevent the chance of a carefully dropped chalk-bucket being used to help kill a swing. But maybe starting towels are an exception or there's some judges' discretion??
Big ups to Staša Gejo for the chalk up whilst catching combination dyno!
+1. That was the best bit so far.
That was class but I think the best bit I saw was in the bouldering qualies with Chloe hands-off tapping the top off of a knee bar rest on that fluoro orange / green problem. Barrows would be proud!!
And you can't have a '9' in the mix
:lol: That slipped beneath the radar a bit.
Anyone throwing shit about the Russians care to elaborate? And do you think the same about the Israelis?
I don't really see anything to worry about -
Home event, so larger, better rested, more motivated team.
Depleted field allows more lesser known competitors through.
Strong speed really helpful in combined, Russians unsurprisingly good at this.
Rubstov was no surprise surely.
Meshkova was excellent as a junior in 2018, made a couple of semis in her first senior year, and has continued to improve.
Good post. As much as the whole Olympic stress and watching Sascha / Stasa's reactions was a bit horrible, I'm glad Alexei got through, he's a beast and I respect his determination and grumpiness.
Groom on Alexei's tears of joy: "That's the most emotion he's shown all week"
Chez Fiend shouting at the monitor: "That's the most emotion he's shown since we've seen him compete!!"
Agree with other comments about the quality of the camera work, I thought the setting was pretty good if too dyno-heavy as usual. No further comment on speed "climbing".