There are lots of benefits to being a member of USAT. Members save the $10 insurance charge at USAT sanctioned events. There are many ways members can work to influence and hopefully improve the nature of our sport. There are opportunities for self-improvement through courses up to and including coaching certification. And one can always hope for free schwag. (Hint, hint for any USAT leadership reading this blog. Hats and large shirts are cool.)
Another cool benefit is the USAT ranking system. With no effort other than that required to complete sanctioned races, I get to know how I rank among other USAT members. Enter a few limiting points and "Blammo," there it is. I'm ranked 210 out of 470 males in the 35-39 age group in the midwest region. My score, 71.0155.
If I read that number correctly, it means that the "par" time for the races I've completed is about 70% of my time. Somehow, that strikes me as fairly useless.
I understand the mentality. Take racers with experience in races, and use their times to establish a "par" time for the course. Kind of like golf. Except in golf, "par" is a fairly standardized variable. A par three on a given course today will be a par three tomorrow. In fact, barring significant changes in green and pin placement, that hole will be a par three next year, too. In the USAT rankings, that target moves dependent upon who races.
So, being ranked 210 out of 470 age group males in this region is fairly ambiguous. The top ranked person in the group has a score of nearly 96. Unfortunately, that means one of TWO things. What it SHOULD indicate is that he is the best performer in the region. And in a relative sense, it does. Relative to the "par" racers in those events he raced, he is pretty quick. What we don't know is the relative speed of those "par" racers.
Obviously, times in a race depend upon a great many variables. Many, namely weather related factors, are beyond anyone's control. But the system used by USAT adds the mix of racers to the pile. Not only is my score based on how well I run, it is based on how well others run, AND who those others are.
I'm not saying USAT should scrap their ranking system. Even if the numbers are somewhat ambiguous, I like having them. I AM saying that people should keep these issues in mind when they review their rankings. Consider the various Ironman races, this year. My ranking at IMKY was 71. At IMCDA, it would have been just over 69. The same with IMWI. Then again, had I raced the Pigman half-IM instead of Racine, my 71 ranking would have been a 74.5.
Of course, my time in Coeur d'Alene, Wisconsin, or Pigman would certainly have differed from what I ran in Loiusville or Racine.
And that, my friends, is confusing.
RSS Feed