TDF 2009 Monaco TT Statistics & Chances of Winning

CB breaks down some statistics and winning chances from TDF 2009 opening TT.

3 months ago livingloose 41 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I have a feeling Cancellara will win the Monaco prologue..

I think he will catch his one minute man Menchov! I will bet on it.. Somebody takes the bet?

What do you fear most?
1. coup d’etat
2. putsch

by Frinking on Nov 6, 2009 1:52 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Serious.. That was a weird article.

The beginning of each alinea.

Our last question
Let’s do 2% as a start
Let’s look at what Contador obtained
In other words,
Put in another way,

What do you fear most?
1. coup d’etat
2. putsch

by Frinking on Nov 6, 2009 1:57 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

I like that site a lot. I'm not in any way a bike geek but if I were that would be heaven.

I don’t always understand what I’m reading there, but somehow I know it makes sense and I always learn something. There is an incredible amount of useful information collected there, my hope is that some day I’ll know how to use some of it.
But other than that he did an awesome job compiling the victory salute page.

Cancellara was robbed! There is none better.

by Mark Frank on Nov 6, 2009 12:41 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

yes it's a great site i love it too!

by livingloose on Nov 9, 2009 5:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Wow! 48% went faster than the average time!! Incredible!

Sigh.

Here’s a nice graph which provides a lot more insight in a blink of an eye than that whole page from “cozybeehive:”

(click for larger)
Source

by tedvdw on Nov 6, 2009 8:08 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Insight

Cance is superman, especially on the descent.

by tedvdw on Nov 6, 2009 8:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

that is a cool chart

Moo

by Willj on Nov 7, 2009 6:16 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

But did you check the kurtosis and skewness?

Or did you rely on someone else to do that for you? ;-)

Cancellara was robbed! There is none better.

by Mark Frank on Nov 7, 2009 7:19 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Bah. What insight is there to be gained

from knowing whether the distribution is normal?

by tedvdw on Nov 7, 2009 9:50 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I eat mints

to minimize the kurtosis in my rides

Moo

by Willj on Nov 8, 2009 8:43 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

after reading all the fighting

I’ll repeat: nice graph above …. info rich

Moo

by Willj on Nov 10, 2009 3:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

good but not quite good

This is okay but looks an incredibly messy picture and the average person can’t understand the descriptive statistics behind it. CB does a much better job I thought of breaking the numbers down. If you know whether a curve is normally distributed, the symmetry makes statistical analysis very easy.

by livingloose on Nov 8, 2009 2:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Now see, I reckon that Ted's chart

tells you at a glance everything that you need to know about that TT…

Tony
.
.
.
.
(The Field)

And for those who saw the TT happen, no chart is needed ;-)

by Lou... on Nov 8, 2009 3:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

It's not just that

I love the way that virtually all the sprinters names pop out of the top line of the chart, which supports what was said here before that they are some of the best descenders in the peloton.

by Monty. on Nov 8, 2009 4:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Or,

that they took it relatively easy on the climb …

by tedvdw on Nov 8, 2009 4:30 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

"CB" does not do anything with the numbers

He fed them into Excel and makes some pretty useless observations, that’s it. Not one bit of insight. His biggest mistake is that he assumes that all riders performed at their max, which may make the whole thing meaningless.

The graph may seem messy at first glance because a lot of names overlap, but who’s interested in the middle part anyway? You can look up the numbers if you like. What it really is about, is a sense of what happened. It has the speeds of the first and second half, time differences, legible extremes (who went fast, who went slow, who sped up or slowed down) and an indication of how most of them went (the “distribution”).

by tedvdw on Nov 8, 2009 4:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

ok remind me to give you a nobel prize professor

by livingloose on Nov 9, 2009 2:46 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

By the way,

I apologize for my tone. Not directed at you! If anything, thanks for the link. Kept me entertained for a bit, and that’s what we need in the off season.

by tedvdw on Nov 8, 2009 8:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

you sure are full of hot air though

by livingloose on Nov 9, 2009 2:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Oh fuck off, bozo.

by tedvdw on Nov 9, 2009 2:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

the feeling is mutual

you too.

by livingloose on Nov 9, 2009 4:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

"the average person can’t understand"

hmmmph

by civetta on Nov 9, 2009 6:52 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

we at PdC are an above average lot .....

Moo

by Willj on Nov 9, 2009 5:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah I have to agree with tedvdw on this one...From the data that CB is using, he thinks that every rider is going 100% while

most of them are just riding it so that they can start the next stage and save energy. The graph ted supplied has a much bigger effect because instead of a percent it actually shows you how Cancellara gained the advantage, on the downhill. He did not kill himself on the climb and then with his sheer power, stormed the descent.
Sure, CB does show some cool stuff in the article but when you feed it into excel, it really is not original and your just looking at numbers a computer gives you. Not saying that he never has good stuff on the site but this time it just seems like it is nothing special to give us terms that have nothing to do with how dominate Cancellara really was.
And livingloose, you really need to get over yourself. You seem to be defending this blog to the death just because one person had a very logical argument that what he was doing was not complicated math and just simple computing know-how.

by Vlaanderen90 on Nov 10, 2009 2:01 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

take it for what it's worth

not what it could have done. i’d like to see someone else cover the pitfalls, spend as much time as write a comprehensive analysis. all for free.

by livingloose on Nov 10, 2009 11:47 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

another argument

another argument can also be made that most racers were performing to their max, as it was the first day of a grand race and the prize money was an economic incentive to produce good results. any reason why that’s not the case? i guess you could take the question of effort in many directions, its not a black and white question…

by livingloose on Nov 10, 2009 12:32 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

You can forget that argument

I have no idea about the rest of it but that assumption is just incorrect. Of course 75 % of the field are going nowhere near their max. Either they are preserving energy for the coming stages where they do have a chance at money and/or glory or they are under orders to do so to be in shape to help those who are. That’s fact, not speculation.

by Jens on Nov 10, 2009 12:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Hiw sure are you about 75%?

If its a fact, it has to be based with numbers.

by livingloose on Nov 10, 2009 1:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

"a majority" then

fixed

by Jens on Nov 10, 2009 1:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

we knew that...

read the article again. 52% to be precise.

“52% of the 180 performed under par, with about 8% of those 52 giving exactly average times. The probability is 0.52 that a cyclist was at average time or above it on this course.”

by livingloose on Nov 10, 2009 1:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

and i agree my theory of max effort is wrong but analyzing incentive is complex

by livingloose on Nov 10, 2009 1:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I was looking up the numbers for the money on the stage placings and only the top 20 make any money.

The breakdown is here. I can see your argument for incentive but again, it is early in the Tour and managers don’t want their riders to use too much.

by Vlaanderen90 on Nov 10, 2009 2:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

take it for what it's worth

sure maybe he made some assumptions about effort given during the race. but perhaps the same thing could be said of the last ITT (stage 19?) when most are fatigued out and not giving their everything as in when they had fresh legs? the fact is, most of the racers were doing better than average as indicated by the left skewness. all sports, card games, exam scores can be described with well with statistics. i’ll let you know if i find a better analysis anywhere else.

by livingloose on Nov 10, 2009 12:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Nothing like ganging up to make someone feel welcome

… and over statistics…

"How strange it was to see men doing something beautiful. Something pointless and elegant." Tim Winton, 'Breath'

by Seahorse on Nov 10, 2009 3:50 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

I don't read it like that

I see a lack of common language ;-).

You know – the pitfalls of text-based communication in a ‘cultural melting pot’, type thing…? ‘Regulars’ here get to know eachother’s style of communication, over time… and the process is not always without it’s little ‘teething problems’. Even then, there can be mis-interpretation (‘McCarthyism’, anyone? LOL). OK, I’m gonna STFU now – I’m tired, so this has the potential to turn into one hell of a ramble…

by Lou... on Nov 10, 2009 4:27 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Hey Lou... voice of reason as usual

and i don’t want trouble either, but it all feels unfriendly. Never mind – tired and crabby. Lots of flood damage and markers’ cars missing in action… maybe that’s where my sense of perspective went too? First day off for ages and the sun shone :)

"How strange it was to see men doing something beautiful. Something pointless and elegant." Tim Winton, 'Breath'

by Seahorse on Nov 10, 2009 4:32 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

For the first time

I am tempted to create a .sig …“Lou… voice of reason as usual”, ROFLMAO! Horray for sunshine and days off – I reckon that you deserved both, especially at the same time :-)

by Lou... on Nov 10, 2009 4:47 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

That seriously is the way I see/hear you....

Of course it helps that I normally agree with you ;)

"How strange it was to see men doing something beautiful. Something pointless and elegant." Tim Winton, 'Breath'

by Seahorse on Nov 10, 2009 4:50 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

BTW,

How are things in your neck of the woods? Not still getting about in galoshes, I hope…?

by Lou... on Nov 10, 2009 4:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs

TMUI - Too Much Useless Information

Cozy Beehive doesn’t factor in who’s trying and you still don’t know who is who without more information.
tedvdw’s chart doesn’t factor in who is trying and you can’t read names that might matter like Sastre for instance.

I’d like to make a chart that would quantify the number of people who have made negative comments and the frequency of such comments. I would also include posters who had something positive to say or saw the potential for too many negative comments and tried to point out something positive or injected something humorous. Also included although a tad more difficult to quantify would be the number of people who had a peek at the goings on in here and immediately went back to the Benna Barbie post for their sanity’s sake.
I think (I know it actually) it was Chris who said Podium Cafe will be what we make it.

Cancellara was robbed! There is none better.

by Mark Frank on Nov 10, 2009 10:24 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

its useless to those who don't get the point

I’d suggest you read up on the introduction to the article mentioned. Clearly its stated (unless I’m reading something else) that the author was only trying to analyze what sort of distribution it is and the probabilities associated with top positions, not give an analysis of every single person’s statistics.

by livingloose on Nov 10, 2009 11:40 AM EST reply actions 0 recs