PBP 2015 results list on ACP website

[Rob Hawks]

Hi, 

I don't know if this is brand new or if this has been up for a while, but I just found out about it (looks like the list may have been finalized on the 5th of January):

http://www.paris-brest-paris.org/index2.php?lang=en&cat=presentation&page=resultats_2015

Date :	16 - 20 août 2015
Distance :	1230 km
Inscrits :	6094 randonneurs
Partants :	5915  randonneurs
Homologués :	4610 randonneurs
Mise à jour : 05 janvier 2016

[Rob Hawks]

Here are the SFR participants (70 total, 59 finishers, one HD (finished over the time limit))

53H30	A120	ANDERSEN	Carl	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
77H48	J216	AURIEMMA	Philip	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
89H23	L041	BEATO	Keith	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
88H56	L069	BECKHAM	Jon	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
83H43	X169	BENNETT	Don	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
89H25	R046	BOWLES	Shawn	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
88H47	L040	BRADBURY	James	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
88H25	K162	BRAMMER	Anton	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
66H54	Y091	BRIER Jr.	Bill	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
77H23	T159	CHALFANT	Michael	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
89H11	M158	DANG	Dzung	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
76H32	F138	DIXON	Emma	GB	F	TM	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
76H32	F137	DIXON	Jonathan	GB	M	TM	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
82H41	Y136	DODGE	Renee	US	F	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
87H41	P185	EHLERT	Gabe	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
88H17	G126	FITZPATRICK	Kevin	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
75H22	X078	FRIEDLY	Gabrielle	US	F	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
87H35	N062	FUNK	Tobias	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
81H22	X155	GERNEZ	Raphael	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
88H57	J192	GOURSOLLE	Kitty	US	F	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
79H11	X143	HAIDINYAK	Grant	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
76H10	B072	HASTINGS	Geoffrey	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
89H36	G125	HATFIELD	Jenny	US	F	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
76H06	X002	HAWKS	Robert	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
88H42	T157	HOLMGREN	John	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
80H20	X177	JONES	Kris	US	F	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
53H15	B087	KILGORE	Bryan	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
87H10	S186	KIZU-BLAIR	Ian	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
86H35	N162	LARSEN	Eric	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
67H16	X141	LAW	Todd	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
81H54	L185	LILES	Robert	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
74H03	H198	LINN	Andrew	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
88H23	H083	LOCKWOOD	Robert	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
89H36	G003	LYNCH	Theresa	US	F	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
86H00	G205	MACFARLANE	Philip	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
70H19	B041	MASON	Aron	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
72H11	C245	MASON	Tim	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
87H06	T023	MERRITT	Gregory	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
88H41	J193	MILLER	Peg	US	F	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
88H57	N179	MOREELS	Pierre	FR	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
79H58	Y090	NORRIS	Eric	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
85H03	S102	PENDLETON	Matt	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
89H05	H126	PLUMB	Alex	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
53H30	A126	POLETTO	Massimiliano	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
76H50	T071	SALYER	Kevin	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
79H37	X168	SCHWARTZ	Barry	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
79H44	Z078	SEXTON	Robert	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
84H58	J191	SHOEMAKER	Ken	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
87H56	F038	SMITH	Ron	US	M	VS	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
82H15	X158	SOKOLSKY	Michael	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
88H22	T195	STRICKLAND	Andy	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
80:38:00	X116	TEACHOUT	Todd	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
88:51:00	T002	THOMPSON	Ryan	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
76:39:00	X132	UZ	Metin	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
89:47:00	S062	VU	Tom	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
86:35:00	T069	WALKER	David	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
86:55:00	T158	WALSTAD	Eric	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
85:21:00	R115	WENNER	Brad	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
88:00:00	F080	WOUDENBERG	Timothy	US	M	VS	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
HD	N063	DE ANDRADE	Andrew	BR	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
AB	J262	BUTT	Clyde	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
AB	Z066	CARDONA	Kley	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
AB	L042	COWAN	H Scott	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
AB	Z095	FEINBERG	Brian	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
AB	T176	GILMORE	John	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
AB	N121	LLOYD	Eileen	US	F	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
AB	G004	RUSSELL	Nancy	US	F	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
AB	M119	SCHROYER	Charles	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
AB	Z084	SOKOLSKY	Lawrence	US	M	VE	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS
AB	F082	WEISS	Robert	US	M	VS	SAN FRANCISCO RANDONNEURS

[Yogy Namara]

I did some statistics by country ( https://www.google.com/fusiontables/data?docid=1sU_DPODbrTwYWvKKKG97iDrlfKrHj5Vfg6CTFLZX#map:id=5 ), and assuming I didn't mess up somewhere, found some interesting factoids:

* The top 5 most represented countries are France, Germany, UK, US, and Italy.

* Among those 5, US has the lowest success rate (75%), slightly worse than France (76%). Italy has the highest (84%).

* There are 21 countries with at least 50 representatives. The most successful is Spain (86%). The success rate gradually lowers down to 75% at 15th (US), but it suddenly drops to 65% (Japan, first Asian country down the list), followed by an even bigger drop down to 50% (China), then sub .5 for Brazil, Taiwan, India and Thailand (all Asian countries except for Brazil).

* Among the 15 countries that have sub .5 success rate, Brazil is the largest, 115 at 48%.

* There are 32 countries with at least 15 representatives. Among these, the US has the largest female ratio (12%). In fact, among the top 5 most represented countries overall, this ratio is anomalously high, with Italy next at 6.8%.

* Comparing US and France, our men did slightly worse (75% vs 77%), our women did slightly better (72% vs 69%).

Yogy

[Yogy Namara]

On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 8:59 AM, Rebecca Clark <rebecc...@gmail.com> wrote:

Thanks for that quick number-crunching, Yogy.  Out of curiosity, was the 6% overall participation by women correct?  I think the US has been doing a great job of encouraging more participation by women, so it's good to see that anomalously high number.  Now to get other countries to step up...

Cheers,

Rebecca

Ah, yes, silly me forgot to do overall men vs women comparison regardless of country, but the Fusion Table makes it easy to ask these kinds of questions:

https://fusiontables.googleusercontent.com/fusiontables/embedviz?viz=GVIZ&t=TABLE&containerId=googft-gviz-canvas&q=select+sum(xx),sum(x1),sum(Fx),sum(F1)+from+1sU_DPODbrTwYWvKKKG97iDrlfKrHj5Vfg6CTFLZX

Result:

sum(xx) sum(x1) sum(Fx) sum(F1)

6049.0 4610.0 356.0 234.0

Thus:

sum(Fx)/sum(xx) = 6% (global female ratio)

sum(F1)/sum(Fx) = 66% (global female success rate)

So, assuming I did this correctly, the women globally represents 6% of PBP 2015, and their success rate is 66%. When limiting only to the US, though, the ratio doubles to 12%, and the success rate improves to 72%. So... can we say that US women randonneurs are awesome?

PS: I'm not a professional number cruncher, I just like searching for my own silly answers to my own stupid questions, so apologize again if I messed something up in my calculations. I can already see that my result shows only 6049 inscriptions, vs 6094 that ACP claims, so we already know that someone messed up somewhere (and it's probably me).

Yogy

 

--
--
This message is from the San Francisco Randonneurs list at sfra...@googlegroups.com
Search the archives at http://groups.google.com/group/sfrandon
For SFR's schedule and general information, visit http://sfrandonneurs.org/
To unsubscribe, email sfrandon+u...@googlegroups.com
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "San Francisco Randonneurs" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sfrandon+u...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to sfra...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Eric Norris]

I’m a bit surprised that the DNF rate was so high. I thought it was usually around 15% overall—in 2007 is was higher than usual, but still around 30% that year as I recall. Perhaps this is a result of opening the event to more people?

--Eric Norris
campyo...@me.com
www.campyonly.com
campyonlyguy.blogspot.com

[Yogy Namara]

You may be on to something here. The few countries that have 0% DNF rate have small representation, the largest of which is Hungary with only 10 males and 1 female. So by your logic if we want to lower the DNF rate, we should limit the event to a dozen people per country. Is that how this is supposed to work? I don't remember how to do all this inferential statistics stuff.

It could very well be the case that I got all of this wrong to begin with, because these are just numbers I pulled from the internet, which we all know is full of lies.

Yogy

[Eric Norris]

I'm not suggesting that at all.  PBP should be open to everyone that the ACP can accommodate. 

I was simply wondering out loud whether that larger group of participants is somewhat less "select," and therefore more likely to include riders who weren't able to finish the ride.

Weren't relatively higher DNF rates to blame for the double qualifying that US participants used to be required to complete?

How do this edition's DNF rates compare with '03 and '11? (I would exclude '07 because of the unusually tough conditions that year.)

Eric N

www.CampyOnly.com

CampyOnlyGuy.blogspot.com

Twitter: @CampyOnlyGuy

[Rob Hawks]

Eric,

Some of what you are looking for is here: http://www.rusa.org/newsletter/02-04-07.html

Quick excerpt:

   Year    DNF%            Year    DNF%

     1931    27%             1948     8%
     1951    17%             1956    29%
     1961    30%             1966    22%
     1971    19%             1975    17%
     1979    11%             1983    10%
     1987    19%             1991    20% 

     1995 17% 1999 17%

If you reduce the sample size, you are then more prone to wildly varying results when one case going either way can effect big swings in the rates. The other issue would be if small representation also included poor finish rates. In that case why would you focus on only the successful instances to make the case that entrants from each foreign country should be restricted. Did success rates uniformly stay high for all countries sending small groups?

rob

[Eric Norris]

Just to be clear, I’m not saying that entrants from any country should be restricted. 

Now that we have that clear … 

I don’t know if there’s causality here, but the numbers Rob excerpted reflect what I’ve learned about recent editions of the ride, which is that in recent years been a failure rate of about 17% or so—higher in 2007 because of the atrocious weather. In 2015, with pretty good weather but a larger field, the failure rate is about 50% higher.

--Eric Norris
campyo...@me.com
www.campyonly.com
campyonlyguy.blogspot.com

[Rob Hawks]

Eric,

I totally understood that you were not advocating restrictions.

[Yogy Namara]

Well, I'm late to the party, but in any case I created a Fusion Table using available record from http://www.paris-brest-paris.org back to 1891, with number of registrants, number of starters, and number of finishers for each edition, basically the 3 numbers at the bottom of each result page, which means 2015 has 6094 registrants (despite there being only 6049 entries by my count), pros and non-pros from early years are combined, and finishers include those who are disqualified later.

Here's the success rate chart over the years:

https://www.google.com/fusiontables/data?docid=1y4AJurb-2ifvQ7mdw8LVGJrKvihYYSn4tJvh5yeD#chartnew:id=6

Yogy

[Yogy Namara]

By the way, I noticed some discrepancies between my numbers and the rusa.org article that Rob linked to. The biggest discrepancy is 1948 ( http://www.paris-brest-paris.org/index2.php?lang=en&cat=presentation&page=resultats_1948 ), which according to the article only has 8% DNF rate, but my rather simplistic calculation shows 1-(11+152)/(46+189) = 30% "DNF" rate. Separating the pros and the non-pros, they each have 76% and 19% "DNF" rate, respectively.

Perhaps it all boils down to how you define DNF, how to count tandems/triplets, overtime, non-starters, disqualifications, deaths, etc.

Yogy

[Rebecca Clark]

Yogy, thanks again for the fun plots and analyses (and answer to my earlier question).  Looking at the overall starting number / DNF trend, and disregarding minutae which might tweak the numbers slightly, it does look to me like 2015 trends towards an unusually high DNF rate, especially given the great overall weather conditions. 

So then, if you scatterplot "Starters" on the x-axis, and the proportion of finishers on the Y, and then squint real hard, the data fall into two groups: below 1500 participants, there's either no trend or a trend towards greater success with a larger number of Starters.  Beyond that point, Eric's notion is supported - the larger the starting field, the lower the success rate, even if you put a finger over 2007.

It would probably be most fruitful to direct additional speculative analyses (or just speculations) towards data on completion times for the qualifying series.  For instance, I now know that I didn't really get in enough climbing practice in 2011, and that contributed to a DNF for me.  It would be hard to tease that sort of thing (amount of climbing practice) out of the available info on a global scale, but perhaps it's possible to use the US data to check for a relationship.  And then, if one exists, to encourage riders to seek out appropriate training opportunities to improve their chances of success.

Cheers,

Rebecca Clark

[DHK Goes Well With Coffee]

I'm testing some software that was originally designed to hunt down terrorists. it might be fun to put it to work to see if it can help us figure out the predictors of success. 

On Tuesday, January 19, 2016 at 5:56:43 PM UTC-8, Yogy Namara wrote:

I think it'd be fun to crunch on all the data in RUSA's own record and test various hypotheses, but I find it to be no easy task, and in any case statistically inferring how you can improve DNF rate is not something I'm interested in. Currently I'm selfishly crunching the record of all California permanent results in 2015, asking stupid questions like which permanents gets ridden the most frequently, which permanents have the highest DNF rate, which permanents have the most repeat customers keep on coming back, which riders ride the most number of different permanents, which owners have routes in high demand, which permanents have been ridden only by its owners, which owners ride only his/her own permanents, etc.

If there's interest, I'll try to share my work and findings, I'm sure other people can find the good answers to better questions. For a sneak peak, here's the ridership graph from 2015 (stale data scraped on December 26th or thenabout) of California permanents owned by 3 of our esteemed members (Max Poletto, Eric Larsen, Gintautas Budvytis).

http://i.imgur.com/HH7wiCN.png

It's quite a jumbled mess, but you can sort of read the tea leaves and come up with interesting factoids, e.g. Corralitos Castle is popular, Raphael Gernez (6987) rode it multiple times, etc.

Yogy 

[Robert Sexton]

Oooh.  I made the graph!  This will definitely affect how I choose my permanents this year!

On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 11:19 AM, Yogy Namara <yogy....@gmail.com> wrote:

I got sucked in too deep into my own work last night and as a result had to DNS a perm arrangement for this one fine non-raining day. In fact, at this rate I may not even leave the house at all today except perhaps to walk my dog, if she's lucky.

Anyway, some of my discoveries is that among the top 5 California permanents that was ridden by the highest number of randonneurs in 2015, Sarah Burke is special (aww!!) in that she owns two of them. Here's the ridership graph of all three of her permanents:

( https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-YmkE_qjZRKA/Vp_Y7g1XANI/AAAAAAABBOY/pu4AydqYS4I/s1600/SarahBurke.png )

You can see that a few people did only 1, some did 2, no one did only MSR, exactly one person did all 3 (Matthew Fitzpatrick), and he also did the most counting repeats (biggest blue circle). There are a few other repeaters too, like Jesse Marsh (6755) who did both T5B and MSR, with a slight preference for T5B (thicker arrow).

I also did what I call the "love graph", basically how much riders love permanent owners, love being defined as having ridden at least two different permanents. Here's the graph:

( https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-QQu7X593mfQ/Vp_Z8WmAV8I/AAAAAAABBOg/syYZCYitvhc/s1600/LoveGraph.png )

Some observations are:

* Becky Berka is Kitty Goursolle's biggest lover, Ken Johnson is Dean Albright's.

* Some owners love other owners too, like Drew Carlson who loves Dean Albright and Eric Senter, and GB who loves Eric Larsen.

* Roy Ross loves, like 4 people! Way to go, Roy!!

Anyway, I hope I didn't offend anybody, this is all mostly just for fun. I'm not sure if I've learned anything useful yet, though.

Yogy

--

Robert Sexton