Skip to content

Most Improved: Sprint 2011

Continuing on from my previous posts looking at some skiers who saw a lot of improvement (or not) in distance events last season, we turn our attention to sprinting. You can refer back to those posts for a more detailed look at the methodology we’re using. Of course, with sprinting we don’t have fancy percent back based measures, but I’m still going to use a proportional improvement measure, rather than absolute improvement so that the top skiers get a fair shake.

Here are the men who saw the biggest improvements (click through for larger version):

Fulvio Scola and Alex Harvey are the clear winners here, putting together a very solid season of sprint results over dramatically worse seasons previously. Most of the rest of these folks are sneaking into this list by smaller improvements over already impressive results (Hattestad, Jönsson) or an improvement in their best results rather than their median results (Cologna, Kozisek, Simonlatser, etc.).

As for the women (click through for full version): Continue reading ›

Tagged ,

Should Jessie Diggins Be On The A-Team?

No, not that A-Team, although that’s an amusing idea. I saw some discussion in the comments over at FasterSkier about whether Jessie Diggins ought to have been named to the US A Team rather than the B Team.

Let’s be clear up front that this isn’t the sort of question you can answer by just looking at FIS points. But some data may provide some useful perspective. Let’s start by looking at a collection of women near Diggins’ age (born between 1990-1992). The following two tables summarize the data for sprint and distance events from this past season:

Top Young Female Distance Skiers
Name Median Best Three
WENG Heidi 43.63 34.82
LAHTEENMAKI Krista 49.13 12.45
HAGA Ragnhild 63.25 42.53
SLIND Kari Oeyre 70.96 43.67
HAGEN Martine Ek 72.50 43.67
DIGGINS Jessica 72.77 45.57
RINGWALD Sandra 73.05 55.95
JACOB Helene 74.66 48.17
SOBOLEVA Elena 76.42 57.60
OESTBERG Ingvild Flugstad 76.74 28.80

 

Top Young Female Sprinter
Name Median Best Three
LAHTEENMAKI Krista 39.62 29.25
FALLA Maiken Caspersen 43.14 11.10
KOLB Hanna 46.72 33.14
OESTBERG Ingvild Flugstad 53.93 40.09
BRODIN Hanna 58.63 44.68
SLIND Kari Oeyre 64.39 48.57
ANGER Lucia 68.80 56.13
OJASTE Triin 70.21 49.57
RINGWALD Sandra 83.68 70.69
GRUNDVALL Maria 85.24 76.96
WENG Heidi 86.50 66.21
GODOVANICHENKO Daria 87.23 61.18
DIGGINS Jessica 87.86 80.22

I’ve shown the median FIS points result for last season, along with the average of each skier’s best three results. As usual, all sorts of caveats apply regarding the crudeness of FIS points as a measure of performance. Still, this is an accomplished group of skiers to be lumped together with. I think it’s fair to say that Weng and Lahteenmaki stand out in distance skiing. Indeed, Lahteenmaki is sort of an unusual case as she’s already demonstrated an ability to perform at the WC level over the course of an entire season. There’s no question where she’ll be racing next season. And of course Falla (and a few other of these sprinters) will be WC regulars next season as well.

Then you have this large group of other talented young Norwegian women coming up (Weng, Haga, Slind, Hagen, Oestberg). It’s not exactly like they’re hurting for talent at the moment, so I guess it’s a good thing they get so many start allotments, since they have the talent to back it up on the women’s side.

Whether or not it’s a good idea to send Diggins to Europe for a full season may or may not have anything to do with how other nations deal with their own talented young women. But I think it’s pretty hard to argue that Diggins is at quite the same level as folks like Weng, Slind, Kolb, Falla, let alone someone like Lahteenmaki.

[ad#AdSenseBanner]

Tagged , , ,

Most Un-Improved: Distance 2011

Last time we looked at some skiers who made some big jumps on the WC circuit this past season, so now it’s time to look at some folks who saw big slides in the other direction. Since there are many different ways to measure performance, I’m using a combination several metrics. The methodology is the same as before, so you can go back to that post to read about the technical details.

I do want to remind you, though, that there are generally three ways your results can drop off: you could have fewer top results, you could have more bad results, or all of your results could generally drop.

Here are the twelve men and women (in order, left to right, top to bottom) who saw the largest declines last season over 2009-2010: Continue reading ›

Tagged , , ,

Most Improved: Distance 2011

Last year I took a very simplistic approach toward identifying skiers who’d made strong gains (or losses) in their performance over the previous season. This year I thought I’d do something a bit more sophisticated.

Anyone paying attention to the WC field can probably list some skiers who skied considerably faster or slower this year compared to last. The fun part of doing this numerically is that it can provide a bit of objectivity to the matter and also identify some skiers we might not have thought of. In the case of distance events, I now have an embarrassingly large number of ways to evaluate performance: rank, FIS points, percent back from median skier, etc. Last year I used FIS points, but this year I thought I’d satisfy everyone by using all of them.

So what I did was take skiers who’ve done at least four races both this season and last season and measured the change in the their performance using rank, FIS points and percent back from the median skier. I adjusted the change by each measure relative to their performance last season. This means that improving from 80 FIS points to 40 FIS points is considered an equivalent improvement to 20 FIS points to 10 FIS points. This helps prevent the better skiers from being unfairly penalized. The following two graphs show the 12 athletes (1-12 top-bottom, left-right) that saw the biggest improvements across all three measures.

Continue reading ›

Tagged , ,

Applying FIS Point Development Curves To The USST

Last Friday I used an interesting post by Pete Vordenberg as a starting point for looking at how we could expand on the idea of (roughly) measuring athlete development using FIS points. Since the USST announced their nominations last week as well, I thought it might be interesting to see how applying a tool like this might work in the real world.

This isn’t a critique of the USST selections. This is simply meant as a demonstration of how informative (or not informative!) some simple data analysis could be in the context of team selection. I will be pointing out plenty of ways in which the data is ambiguous or unhelpful, trust me.

FIS points as a measure of skier ability have plenty of well known weaknesses, but they can be informative, particularly if we’re aware of their weaknesses, so that we’re less likely to be fooled. Keep that in mind as we do this.

Recall from last Friday that I presented some curves that represented a rough estimate of the ‘typical’ (as opposed to the best) FIS points at a given age earned by skiers who went on to place in the top ten (WC, OWG or WSC). I’ve had a few people comment privately that maybe that’s a little too loose a criteria; there may be lots of skiers with a single top-ten result who we aren’t really interested in comparing ourselves to. That’s a fair point, so let’s restrict things down to people who’ve finished in the top three in a WC, OWG or WSC race. That feels reasonable to me, since medals are such a constant stated goal of the USST.

What we’ll do here is simply overlay the corresponding data for USST members on top of these reference curves, starting with the A team:

Remember:

  • I’m using medians here, not the average of someone’s best five races, which is how we typically think about FIS points.
  • Since this mixes together FIS points earned from WC levels races down to regular FIS races, the amount of ‘adjustments’ I can apply to the FIS points themselves is limited.
  • The black line represents the median FIS point race for a skier at a given age who went on to reach the podium at least once. The black vertical bars represent the 1st-3rd quartiles, so the  middle 50% of the data.
  • The colored lines represent the median FIS points for each athlete at that age. Keep in mind that the ages are approximate, and that I’ve adjusted them, since otherwise an athlete’s races at age 25 would include Jan-Apr of one season and Nov-Dec of the next, which isn’t quite what we want.
  • The colored lines give no indication of the number of races an athlete did at a particular age; at the younger ages this is often quite a low number.

Kris Freeman and Andrew Newell fit the development curves fairly well in their respective specialties. Kikkan Randall wasn’t as strong in qualifying (which is all that sprint FIS points refer to) at some point in her early twenties. It’s tempting to look at this and conclude that Randall’s sprinting ability is being undervalued here, and I think there’s something to that. But then again, the points only measure qualification speed, and the benefit to qualifying 1st rather than 20th is debatable.

Some interesting stuff is going on in the women’s distance panel, though. Randall’s general improvement is of course evident. Notice, though, that using this development curve as a guide, Randall appears well out of the mix until recently. Also, notice that both Randall and Stephen’s medians in their most recent season both sloped up somewhat. That doesn’t seem right at all. This is mostly the Marit Bjørgen Effect. Randall and Stephen both had fairly strong seasons on the WC circuit for them, but on occasion their FIS points were quite low thanks to Bjørgen (or Johaug or Kowalczyk) ditching the field by a minute or more. If you spotted each of them a generous adjustment and supposed that their median results dropped by the amount it actually rose you’d see Randall inching a bit closer to the median development curve, but Stephen would still be well above it (though improving).

Moving on to the B Team folks:

Things look good for Noah Hoffman here, and Jessie Diggins as well, although she’s still quite young. I’m generally less sure what meaning to draw from trends in sprint FIS points, but by this measure Simi Hamilton isn’t far off where you’d like him to be either. One thing this view of the data doesn’t account for is technique specialization. Tad Elliott, for example, is generally better in freestyle races, so looking at all of his races may hide a promising trend in a single technique.

And finally the D Team folks:

These guys are still young, but they aren’t far off in sprinting.

 

[ad#AdSenseBanner]

How’d We Do? USA/CAN Season Review 4

Last, but not least,  the women’s sprinters, which was easily the highlight of the season for the Americans:

The Canadian women recovered somewhat after two rough seasons. While they didn’t have the eye-catching results of Kikkan Randall, the Canadian women have three different skiers (Crawford, Gaiazova, Jones) who qualified for the heats more than once, and each of the three advanced to the semifinals on one occasion. It’s nice to have more than one skier capable of making a run into the heats, but the news isn’t all rosy:

Gaiazova has improved her sprinting compared to 4-5 years ago, but didn’t see much improvement over last year, although her best result was slightly better. Crawford has been fairly inconsistent from year to year, including a season lost to injury, and her best seasons are now 3 and 5 years in the past. It was neat to see a third Canadian able to advance past the quarterfinals, but it’s not clear from Jones’s trend whether that will prove to be an anomaly or not.

For the American women, it was obviously a banner year for Kikkan Randall. I’m not going to spend much time singing her praises, since I think we’re all pretty familiar with her season. Instead, let’s look a little more closely at the fact that there’s Kikkan Randall, and then there’s everyone else:

‘Other’ refers to American women other than Kikkan Randall. Randall’s median performance slipped a bit back in 2009 thanks to a few more sub-par races than usual, but she’s turned things around dramatically since then. Some people have noted that both of the folks who finished above her in the sprint World Cup points (Follis and Majdic) are retiring next year. However, we should also note that Marit Bjørgen was only 24 WC points behind Randall and did two fewer sprint races this season. With Bjørgen likely to do the Tour de Ski next year, and with the sprint races evenly split between classic and freestyle, I think Bjørgen’s a safe bet for an overall sprint podium. The next closest women to Randall were Kowalczyk (113 points back) and Falla (122 points back). Kowalczyk did 10 races, the same as Randall, but Falla only did 8.

I’m betting that in order to repeat her overall sprint podium next year, Randall will have to outpace one of those three: Bjørgen, Kowalczyk or Falla. (And of course there’s always the unpredictable newcomer.) But to do that, Randall will surely have to raise the level of her classic sprinting, as all three of those ladies had much more balanced results between techniques this year and the schedule will be evenly split 6C/6F next year, not 5C/7F.

Getting back to the graph above, it’s clear that Randall’s sprinting success hasn’t really filtered down enough to show up in WC results, at least not yet. Along with quite a few others, I was excited by Ida Sargent’s early season racing this year, but an unfortunate car accident seemed to gum up the works. On the one hand, I’m optimistic that Sargent might have some success if she earns some WC starts next year, particularly in classic sprints. On the other hand, I’m following the classic sprint stage of the Sun Valley SuperTour final as I’m writing this, and while Sargent was the closest American to Randall in qualifying by a hefty margin, she was still slightly more than 4 seconds back. Sargent beat Randall in qualifying in her one classic WC sprint (in 33rd), but when Randall has qualified, 4 seconds generally would push her Sargent of the top 30.

This is all pretty negative for what was easily the best season by a US skier in recent history, and probably the best since the days of Bill Koch and Co. So let’s end on that reminder of what a fun season it was!

[ad#AdSenseBanner]

Tagged , , , , , ,

How’d We Do? USA/CAN Season Review 3

This week it’s the sprinter’s turn in the limelight, starting with the men. As you might imagine, there are quite a few more cheery topics when talking about North American sprinters. As before we’ll begin with a simple plot showing the number of results per race over time:

The American men have seen a steady decline in top thirty sprint performances, mostly due to the recent struggles of Torin Koos. For about three seasons, the US men had two skiers regularly qualifying for the heats, but Koos’s results have dropped off, leaving only Andrew Newell as the top performer. Simi Hamilton, while surely talented, hasn’t yet made up the difference created by Koos’s absence. Hamilton only did five major sprint races this season and qualified twice, but was well back of 30th the other three times. It has sounded from the news reports like he has struggled a bit with injury and illness this season, so perhaps he can show that he can be a regular in the heats next year if he stays healthy.

Outside of Newell, the US men have seemed inconsistent. Of the top thirty performances from someone other than Newell since 2002, 27 belong to Koos, and another 11 to Chris Cook and Garrot Kuzzy. All three either didn’t ski particularly well, or in Kuzzy’s case didn’t ski well enough to get a real chance at any big starts. As for Newell himself, his results were actually fairly similar to what he’s done over the past 3-4 years: Continue reading ›

Tagged , , , , , , ,