UKC

/ NEWS: IFSC Boulder World Cup 2018: Meiringen - Report

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
UKC News - on 16 Apr 2018
The 2018 IFSC Boulder World Cup series kicked off in Meiringen, Switzerland this weekend. A new wave of young athletes, new rules and formats ahead of the Olympics made for a highly anticipated and exciting event.

Read more
stp - on 16 Apr 2018
In reply to UKC News:

It's interesting that after making the effort to reduce the time of finals by axing the 4+ rule they've now almost doubled it by running the men's and women's final separately.

john arran - on 16 Apr 2018
In reply to stp:

But it did make it more predictable, which I assume was the objective.

Except it was shorter because too many women flashed their problems.

And it was longer because the clocks in Switzerland aren't what they're reputed to be!

HfH on 17 Apr 2018
In reply to UKC News:

Could someone explain what the first paragraph actually means to a dense person?

Cheers

john arran - on 17 Apr 2018
In reply to HfH:

1. Highest no. of top-outs wins.

2. If tied, highest no. of zones (a.k.a. bonuses) wins.

3. If tied, fewest attempts to achieve successful top-outs wins.

4. If tied, fewest attempts to achieve successful zones wins.

The order of nos. 2 & 3 above has been reversed since last year, so zone success is now more important than top-out attempts.

 

AndyPagett - on 17 Apr 2018
In reply to HfH:

I'll have a go.....

Previously the scores were ranked thus:

1. Number of tops (more is better)

2. Number of attempts to top (fewer is better)

3. Number of bonus holds (more is better)

4. Number of attempts to bonus holds (fewer is better)

So a climber A who achieved 3 tops in 7 attempts and 3 bonuses in 3 attempts (3t7 3b3) would beat a climber B who achieved 3 tops in 10 in attempts and 4 bonuses in 4 attempts (3t10 4b4). They got the same number of tops, but A took fewer attempts - there is no need to drop down to bonus holds at number of attempts to top were not tied.

This year the bonus hold has been renamed the 'zone' hold (which it was originally called anyway I believe, but don't quote me on that, and the order has been changed thus:
1. Number of tops (more is better)

2. Number of zones (more is better)

3. Number of attempts to tops  (fewer is better)

4. Number of attempts to zone holds  (fewer is better)

The same two climbers' scores would now be A - 3t3z 7 3, B - 3t4z 10 4, and this time climber B wins. They got the same number of tops, but B got more zone holds - there is no need to drop down to attempts as number of zones were not tied.

NB if you don't know, the zone / bonus hold is single hold on each problem, somewhere half way up, marked as such.

thepodge on 17 Apr 2018

I think I prefer the American Nationals scoring. The higher you get the more points you get, extra points for Flashing a problem, if its a tiebreak, whoever got their quickest wins. 

Similar to how the Moonboard Masters was done. 

ChrisBrooke - on 17 Apr 2018
In reply to UKC News:

That move at 2'08" in the highlights video......wtf?

 

In reply to ChrisBrooke:

Yeah, amazing.

Another guy missed the third hold in the sequence and jumped to the jug with just one hand. Total shoulder wrecker!

Graeme Alderson on 18 Apr 2018
In reply to thepodge:

Sorry but the USA system is does not recognise the primacy of tops. That is what should count as the most important thing, the USA system doesn't. 

thepodge on 19 Apr 2018
In reply to Graeme Alderson:

My error. Maybe just use my rules then. 


This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.