I'm working on a SASUKE and KUNOICHI spreadsheet

[subtleagent]

Okay so I've created a spreadsheet with formulas that documents the averages of each competitor based on three things:

How far they make it on the course (ex. Nagano failed the Pipe Slider in SASUKE 9, and completed 16 obstacles out of a possible 19 prior to that so his SASUKE 9 result would be entered as 16/19).

How many people attempted the obstacle (ex. 51 competitors failed the Jump Hang in SASUKE 6 out of 63, therefore those who failed will be listed as 37%. This is a bit of an estimate for Stage 1 as I am going by SASUKEpedia's results which aren't entirely accurate).

The clear to fail ratio, which will be listed with 1 extra value for every clear (ex. Takeda has cleared Stage 1 19/31 times, and Stage 2 13 of those 19 times so his formula will be 19 divided by 31 and 13 divided by 19 times 2).

Also only those who have competed 10 times (be it SASUKE or KUNOICHI) will have their formulas calculated normally. All with less than 10 will be listed with their formulas relative to their number of appearances (ex. Daisuke Matsuda has competed 7 times so his average and clear ratio will be multiplied by 0.7).

Here is the spreadsheet, anyone should be able to access it. Let me know if you have any suggestions and I will take them into consideration.
docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1KgslGE4905kYPDv1FwMLORt3nCOMKR9jEss61WgMJ-c/edit#gid=1669221164

[dakohosu]

Just to say the approach of taking an average of both absolute performance as a percentage of all obstacles cleared as well as relative performance as a percentage of competitors that that competitor did better than was my idea

Nah but the reason I thought of that was that I think both are important as some people see a Stage 3 run as a Stage 3 run while others (myself included) would consider a Stage 2 run where only 3 people cleared Stage 1 to be more impressive than a Stage 3 attempt where 10 people reached the stage. The producers also arguably value relative success more as they tend to base numbers on how well a competitor did relative to others in the prior tournament (eg why Okuyama got #95 in Sasuke 21 despite failing early on Stage 2 in 20). However ultimately I tried to be as objective as possible and not make it based on my own opinions so I just averaged the two as I know some feel that the former is more important.

And yeah as far as accuracy goes it’s just best to rank everyone that failed the same obstacle as the same value, otherwise it just becomes too subjective as to who went farther than who etc. So it 75 people made it past a certain obstacle, everyone who failed it would get a relative score of 0.25. It also means that competitors who failed the first obstacle get 0.00 which is hilarious lol.

[subtleagent]

Yep, dakoosu suggested the absolute average. Sorry I forgot to mention that (I thought I did, silly me).