Top 10 Sasuke Competitors Ever

[scnoi1217]

Ok, so I remembered an old post I used to write on in the G4 boards:
forums.g4tv.com/showthread.php?t=43929

This was using math to find the top 10 Sasuke competitors ever. Based on Lars072's original system, points were given out like this:
pass stage 1 (1 point); pass stage 2 (3 points); pass stage 3 (5 points) and complete course (10 points)

Here was his results:
1. Makoto Nagano (39 points)
2. Shingo Yamamoto (36 points)
3. Toshihiro Takeda (32 points)
4. Katsumi Yamada (20 points)
5. Kazuhiko Akiyama (19 points)
6. Bunpei Shiratori (19 points)
7.Naoki Iketani (18 points)
8. Shunsuke Nagasaski, Kane Kosugi, Akira Omori, Hiroyuki Asaoka (15 points) - TIE!

I developed a slightly more complex system that went like this:
Beat 1st Stage:
Sasuke 1-4 = .5 pt.
Sasuke 5-12 = 1 pt.
Sasuke 13-17 = 1.5 pts.
Sasuke 18-20 = 2 pts.

Beat Stage 2:
Sasuke 1-6 = 2.5 pts.
Sasuke 7-17 = 3 pts.
Sasuke 18-20 = 4 pts.

Beat Stage 3:
Sasuke 1-4 = 5 pts.
Sasuke 5-8 = 5.5 pts.
Sasuke 9-13 = 6 pts.
Sasuke 14-17 = 7 pts.

Beat Stage 4:
Sasuke 1-4 = 10 pts.
Sasuke 5-17 = 12 pts.

Based on these results (which I recently updated to include Sasuke 21), my results came out like this:
1. Makoto Nagano - 77.5 pts.
2. Shingo Yamamoto - 51.5 pts.
3. Toshihiro Takeda - 50 pts.
4. Bunpei Shiratori - 31.5 pts.
5. Kazuhiko Akyama - 28.5 pts.
6. Shunsuke Nagasaki - 28 pts.
7. Naoki Iketani - 25.5 pts.
8. Hiroyuki Asaoka - 25 pts.
9. Akira Omori - 24 pts.
10. Katsumi Yamada - 23.5 pts.
--------------------------------------------------
11. Jordan Jovtchev - 22.5 pts.
12. Daisuke Nakata - 21 pts.
13. Kane Kosugi - 17.5 pts.
14. Koji Yamada - 16.5 pts.
15. Masaki Kobayashi - 14.5 pts.
16. Kenji Takahashi - 14 pts.
17. Shinji Kobayashi - 10 pts.

I really liked this system a lot, although I still think it can be tweaked and expanded further. How far someone got into a stage should probably count too, as someone who failed the Arm Rings gets the same amount of points as someone who failed the Pipe Slider. So, what do you guys think. What are your thoughts on this list, and how do you think the formula should be improved? Finally, what is your top 10 list?

[lars072]

Ha, I remember this discussion. Your system is definitely more accurate but I suppose more points should be given to competitors who go further into a stage. But I think no matter what system you use, you'll see similar results. How about a point for each obstacle cleared and perhaps you could add a degree of difficulty factor (like in gymnastics) that would give more points for newer competitons. Something like that perhaps...

[davidyko]

One could do something like this for Stage 1, at least:
1 point per obstacle
an 0.75x multiplier for Sasuke 1-4,
1.0x for 5-12
1.25x for 13-17
1.5x for 18-21.

Don't have time now to flesh it out, but I will later. Maybe.

[bigblind168]

I dont like a point per obstacle

because then when akiyama won he's only have 12 pts

[davidyko]

If you want to get really mathematical (again, this is for Stage 1):
Do it instead by how far (as a fraction) they get through the stage. So Akiyama in Sasuke 9 would be 0, Yamada in 15 would be 3/8, Nagano in 21 would be 1. Then multiply it by some difficulty multiplier, and then scale it up by 10 to make it easier to use.
So with the above examples, Akiyama gets 0, Yamada is 4.69 (roughly), and Nagano is 15.

Complicated? Sure. But I like it.

EDIT: In the case of someone getting past stage one, for instance, one adds the numbers for the stages together. So Nagano in 21 would be like 15 + number for stage 2 + stage 3.

This is the list of multipliers I intend to use:
Stage 1:
1-4: 0.75
5-12: 1
13-17: 1.25
18-21: 1.5

Stage 2:
1-6: 2
7-17: 3
18-21: 4

Stage 3:
1-4: 5
5-8: 5.5
9-12: 6
13-17: 7
18-21: 8

Stage 4:
1-4: 10
5-17: 12.5

(Apologies to scnoi for mostly ripping off his list of points, but for the most part, I agreed with him. Hehe.)

Will update with some numbers for competitors later.

[lars072]

Now we're getting way too technical. IMO, there's no perfect solution or system. It's a matter of public opinion I suppose...

[scnoi1217]

Feb 20, 2009 23:03:20 GMT -5 lars072 said:

Now we're getting way too technical. IMO, there's no perfect solution or system. It's a matter of public opinion I suppose...

That's true, but we're trying to come up with some formula that can give a list based on results instead of personal opinion. It's just a different way of looking at it. Obviously there is no "perfect" way to calculate this.

And dave, I like this idea.

[davidyko]

Okay, so this thing took way too long to calculate, but barring errors (I probably made a couple, but I'll check later), for the All-Stars I have:

1. Nagano - 127.31
2. Takeda - 92.04
3. Yamamoto - 77.34
4. Shiratori - 59.34
5. Yamada - 49.05
6. Akiyama - 45.45

Notes: I decided not to scale up by 10, as it seems the numbers are fine as is. I counted Yamada in 15 as passed the Cross Bridge, as he technically did, ditto with Takeda in 19 with Warped Wall.

I'll do some non-All-Stars tomorrow; I'm tired.

[Badalight]

How do you average it out so that people who've been to every Sasuke "Shingo" are equal to people who've only done it maybe once or twice but made it really far?

Say technically someone named Paul Stewart only tried once, but he made it to the final stage. He'd only have a few points, but somelike like Shane kousugi who hasn't been to the final stage would have more points because he's been in more Sasukes.

Or do you guys just divide by the number of comps they've been in?

[davidyko]

Well, what I think is that to make the "Top 10" or whatever list, they have to do well AND be consistent about it. If they've only participated once or twice, then they can't really be called a top competitor, in the big picture.

[Badalight]

That's what I'm saying, so how do you figure that out into your calculations?

[davidyko]

Maybe I was unclear, but what I meant to say was that people like that shouldn't count as top competitors at all.

[scnoi1217]

In the original formula I had, I excluded anyone that didn't compete 5 times or more, so people like Levi weren't on the list.

[scnoi1217]

O dave, a couple of questions:

For the Shin-Sasuke first stage, did you count that as 9 obstacles?

Also, did you count the Brick Climb as an obstacle?

Finally, if someone fails the Final Stage, how did you calculate that? Did you divide the number by 2 if they failed the Rope Climb?

I calculated (probably with some mistakes) Shunsuke Nagasaki's score if these are true. He has 44.5 pts.
Shinji Kobayashi has 23.3625 pts, sucks that we don't know more results from him.
Kongu has 24.675 pts.
Kane has 32.016 pts.
Jordan has 30.85 pts.
Also, just for fun I calculated Levi's score, he has 10.67 pts.

[davidyko]

1. Yea, 9 obstacles.
2. I counted it as one, even though I know TBS really doesn't. But I think it's substantial enough.
3. If someone fails the Spider Climb, then I don't give 'em any points, if they failed the rope climb, then yeah, 6.25.

So yes, Shunsuke is 44.5. I have two more people to calculate, and then I'll put up my list.

EDIT: My list:
1. Nagano - 127.31
2. Takeda - 92.04
3. Yamamoto - 77.34
4. Shiratori - 59.34
5. Yamada - 49.05
6. Akiyama - 45.45
7. Iketani - 45.4
8. Shunsuke Nagasaki - 44.5
9. Asaoka - 39.92
10. Nakata - 34.1
11. Jovtchev - 32.62
12. Koji Yamada - 32.57
13. Kane Kosugi - 30.35

The positions of the ones below I'm not sure about:
14. Kenji Takahashi - 24.68+ (two other appearances we don't know about?)
15. Shinji Kobayashi - 23.21+ (don't know scores for 12, 18, 19, 20)
16. Omori (Monkey) - 24.54

[lars072]

Feb 22, 2009 14:43:54 GMT -5 scnoi1217 said:

In the original formula I had, I excluded anyone that didn't compete 5 times or more, so people like Levi weren't on the list.

I totally agree with that assessment. You can't be considered a serious competitor unless you have a minimum of 5 appearances and, IMO, at least 50% of your runs are to the 3rd stage (maybe 2nd stage with newer competitions).

[gazzawhite]

Feb 25, 2009 5:23:13 GMT -5 lars072 said:

Feb 22, 2009 14:43:54 GMT -5 scnoi1217 said:

In the original formula I had, I excluded anyone that didn't compete 5 times or more, so people like Levi weren't on the list.

I totally agree with that assessment. You can't be considered a serious competitor unless you have a minimum of 5 appearances and, IMO, at least 50% of your runs are to the 3rd stage (maybe 2nd stage with newer competitions).

If you applied that criteria strictly (without the 2nd stage concession), then I can only see at most 6 serious competitors: Nagano, Takeda, Jovtchev, Nagasaki, Kane Kosugi, and Masâki Kobayashi (don't know if I missed anyone).

[VenusHeadTrap]

Feb 21, 2009 0:53:41 GMT -5 davidyko said:

Okay, so this thing took way too long to calculate, but barring errors (I probably made a couple, but I'll check later), for the All-Stars I have:

1. Nagano - 127.31
2. Takeda - 92.04
3. Yamamoto - 77.34
4. Shiratori - 59.34
5. Yamada - 49.05
6. Akiyama - 45.45

Notes: I decided not to scale up by 10, as it seems the numbers are fine as is. I counted Yamada in 15 as passed the Cross Bridge, as he technically did, ditto with Takeda in 19 with Warped Wall.

I'll do some non-All-Stars tomorrow; I'm tired.

Beating the final stage has to mean something for Akiyama, he just can't be the lowest on that list.

[scnoi1217]

Well, the lowest All-Star. But cmon, his performance after he beat the course was by far the worst out of the All-Stars. Obviously, if he didn't even beat the course, he would be way farther down on the list.

[bigblind168]

if he didnt beat the course, would we even be mentioning him right now?