or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Racing and Big Mountain Competitions › Just raced Nastar - What would my FIS points be?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

# Just raced Nastar - What would my FIS points be?

OK, so I did Nastar for the first time. My handicap was 23. I think I understand that is supposed to mean that if Daron Rahlves was there to race, I would have been 23% slower than him.

Suppose the whole white circus was there that day? What would my FIS points be?

Do I multiply the 0.23 by 880, and then add Daron's FIS points in GS (currently 5.44) as a race penalty? That would give me an FIS points of about 208.

Did I do the math right?

Second question: Phil Mahre has been getting points of around 75 to 80 in most of his races. If he gets a race score of 80, and I subtract Daron's points (5.44), and then divide the difference by 880, I get a Nastar handicap of 8.5. Is that right? That would get him a platinum, but not by much.
huh???:

Always wondered about the "FIS" points thing ---appears lower is better---like golf?
Last I knew, Nastar has nothing to do with FIS points.

Aren't FIS points calculated by a racer's actual placing in any given FIS sanctioned race?
FIS points have little to do with NASTAR handicaps.

Well I suppose you could concoct together some abstract statistical relation between the two numbers... but I can't imagine it be very meaningful. FIS course sets aren't exactly like NASTAR either.

In short, FIS points are calculated based on time behind the leader and strength of field in a race.
Someone else could answer this better, but...

You really can't compare nastar results with WC. At least not any more than you can compare miniature golf to PGA golf by looking at your score from the local amusement park.

I know what you are asking, and you're thinking along the right lines, but a FIS GS course is light years away from a Nastar course.

Yes, lower is better. Under 100 points is good for a regional racer, under 60 is a good collegiate racer, under 40 and the USST coaches know your name.
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Whiteroom Someone else could answer this better, but... You really can't compare nastar results with WC. At least not any more than you can compare miniature golf to PGA golf by looking at your score from the local amusement park. I know what you are asking, and you're thinking along the right lines, but a FIS GS course is light years away from a Nastar course. Yes, lower is better. Under 100 points is good for a regional racer, under 60 is a good collegiate racer, under 40 and the USST coaches know your name.
trying to compare your miniature golf score to the PGA pretty much nailed it!
Oh for cryin out loud. I know it's not the same thing. I was just asking if I had the math right.
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Richr Oh for cryin out loud. I know it's not the same thing. I was just asking if I had the math right.
No, I think you would need to take the results from an actual FIS race and find a racer that was 23% slower on that particular course. But the probelm with this is there is not going to be anyone that qualified for a 2nd run on a 1:30 course that is 26 seconds behind the leader. And this would only be accurate if the leader had the same oveall all points as rahlves, Becase the winner of a FIS race gets -0- Fis points + the penalty!

Also, you must have 2 results (finish 2 complete races of 2 runs each, except in SG & Dh which is 1 run each)to get any FIS points and those results are averaged. Your points can only get lowered if averaged with your previous points this would create a lowering of your points.

I wown't go into how points and penalty are actually calculated, because i have probably alread lost you!

Needless to say, we won't be seeing you on the World cup or winning a Math constest anytime soon!
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Richr Oh for cryin out loud. I know it's not the same thing. I was just asking if I had the math right.
Hang in there, Richr.

I think you're on the right track by calibrating your handicap to Rahlves' handicap and thence to his FIS points and thence to a theoretical FIS rating for yourself. I'm sure some of the relevance breaks down because of the difficulty of a World Cup course compared to a typical NASTAR course, but I think your basic premise is fairly valid.

There are folks on this forum who understand the FIS math very well. I'll bet one of them will come on and tell you whether you're way off or only a little off.

It's an interesting exercise.

FIS points use the best five racer's points at the start and the best five at the finish to figure out how good the field was and how they did compared to each other. A "penalty" is calculated that is the winners result. The penalty is added to the "race points" (which are approximatly a percentage behind the winner) of each racer. That is your "result". The two best results are averaged to arrive at your seed points (for Daron 5.44)
Often a racer doesn't "ski his points" so the result (penalty) may not be as good as his seed points. The NASTAR formula assumes that the pacesetter always skis his points when it establishes "par".
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Atomicman I wown't go into how points and penalty are actually calculated, because i have probably alread lost you! Needless to say, we won't be seeing you on the World cup or winning a Math constest anytime soon!
You are so cool, Atomicman! You must be REALLY, REALLY smart to be able to figure this stuff out.

Yeah, that dude won't be winning any math contests!! That's for sure! Good one. Plus, he sucks as a racer, right? NICE!!

Hopefully he will go away and stop asking stupid questions!

(try to dial down the typical USSA parent attitude, eh?... Please?)
Quote:
 Originally Posted by SLATZ FIS points use the best five racer's points at the start and the best five at the finish to figure out how good the field was and how they did compared to each other. A "penalty" is calculated that is the winners result. The penalty is added to the "race points" (which are approximatly a percentage behind the winner) of each racer. That is your "result". The two best results are averaged to arrive at your seed points (for Daron 5.44) Often a racer doesn't "ski his points" so the result (penalty) may not be as good as his seed points. The NASTAR formula assumes that the pacesetter always skis his points when it establishes "par".
Good post, SLATZ. That was some good information and probably helped answer the original poster's question.
Say for the sake of arguments that you were in a GS race won by Daron Rahlves and he skied his points (around 5.00 FIS in GS) and his winning time was 2:00:00 your points at 23% slower would be 5.00 + 27.6*7.17 = 206.89
Your time would be 120 sec + 23% = 147.6 sec or 2:27:6, 27.6 sec slower than Daron. If my old cheat sheet is right, GS race points per second at a winning time of 2:00:00 is 7.17.
[quote=SLATZ;639313]
Quote:
 FIS points use the best five racer's points at the start and the best five at the finish to figure out how good the field was and how they did compared to each other.
this is part of how the penalty is calculated

Quote:
 A "penalty" is calculated that is the winners result.
That is because the winner gets 0 Race points + the penalty.

The penalty is added to the "race points" (which are approximatly a percentage behind the winner) of each racer. That is your "result". The two best results are averaged to arrive at your seed points (for Daron 5.44)
Quote:
 Often a racer doesn't "ski his points" so the result (penalty) may not be as good as his seed points.
this means he skied slower compared to the field then what his existing race points would indicate he would have. I explained the post above in order to "Score" he would have to have a result that when average with his existing points lowered his points. If he does not "Score" his points stay the same until the end of the season when they adjust the points list to the WC results and add a the Fall adjustment (even for USSA and lower level FIS)

The points list is meant to give all ski racers in sanctioned USSA & FIS races (Not Nastar) the ability to compare themselves to the top racers in the world.
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Norefjell Say for the sake of arguments that you were in a GS race won by Daron Rahlves and he skied his points (around 5.00 FIS in GS) and his winning time was 2:00:00 your points at 23% slower would be 5.00 + 27.6*7.17 = 206.89 Your time would be 120 sec + 23% = 147.6 sec or 2:27:6, 27.6 sec slower than Daron. If my old cheat sheet is right, GS race points per second at a winning time of 2:00:00 is 7.17.
Excellent!!!! exactly what i was getting at, but you put the time in & nailed it.
Who was the NASCAR : pacesetter this year?
Quote:
 Originally Posted by U.P. Racer You are so cool, Atomicman! You must be REALLY, REALLY smart to be able to figure this stuff out. Yeah, that dude won't be winning any math contests!! That's for sure! Good one. Plus, he sucks as a racer, right? NICE!! Hopefully he will go away and stop asking stupid questions! (try to dial down the typical USSA parent attitude, eh?... Please?)
Awww, you hurt my feelings: Not!

I am not a USSA parent, sorry to burst your bubble.

But since you commented, i think it is one of the most ridiculous posts ever.

Nastar is pretty much a joke. Someone running a Nastar course worrying about how they'd stack up in FIS points hit me as pretty damn silly! Even i can get a freakin' gold or platinum, whatever medal they are giving out no Nastar!

It is supposed to be RECREATIONAL racing, pleez?
Richr, your calcultions are generally correct. The problem is found in the nature of a Nastar course, as compared to a regulation FIS GS course. The difficulty of a FIS GS will spread times more than a NASTAR course will.

Translation; in a World Cup GS race a 23 handicap NASTAR racer would likely be much further back than 23 percent behind the winner. So a straight FIS calculation off a NASTAR race result will not reflect the result you would get in a true FIS race.

This is why Mahre will easily score a NASTAR handicap well under the 8 handicap your reverse calculations indicated. I raced NASTAR last year and had a handicap under 1, and at over 50 years old you can bet I'm not the 8 FIS point racer your calculation would suggest.

Oh,,,,,, final thought. Even if the conversion was dead nuts accurate, at the end of the day you'd still walk away from that white circus race with max FIS points because at 23 percent behind after the first run you'd never qualify for a second.
Really the biggest difference in this whole equation is the difficulty, length and snow conditions of the courses. A WC course is so VASTLY different in every way than a Nastar course that it literally makes ALL the difference. On a relatively short, flat, and straight Nastar course even the best racers can only distance themselves by so much. By contrast, on a steep, icy, technical WC course, the great skiers can REALLY distance themselves.

A 23 handicap (23% slower) would turn into probably hundreds of percentage points slower on a WC course. You'd be really surprised how much even a great regional racer appears to struggle on the toughest terrain and conditions.
HA!! Rick, nice post! Check out our post times!!
Great minds think alike, I guess...
Well,,, I'm not laying claim the a great mind, U.P., just good timing. Snap. Thanks for the confirmation, buddy.
The basic concept of the FIS points isn't too far off from the NASTAR concept. The major differences are:

- FIS points are stated on a different "scale" than 1 point = 1 percent difference in time (and the scale varies from season to season and from event to event)

- As mentioned, FIS points are generally based on best two results in the relevant event, with an elaborate overlay of rules to deal with particular situations (e.g. someone who's injured, and doesn't have recent results doesn't get popped back to 990).

- The system for adjusting the points from race to race (the penalty points) has various ins and outs and adjustments and "adders" and "factors" involved in it.

- It's also jiggered a bit so that it fits with the World Cup standings, i.e. the guy (or gal) who wins the World Cup title in a discipline is set to zero points, and has the lowest FIS points, even though the World Cup title isn't given out based on best two results, but on adding up a grand total of points handed out on the basis of what place you finish in each race.

A little detail on race points

"Race points" refers to the points given out for a particular race, before they're adjusted to take into account the quality of the competion, which is done by adding the "penalty points" for the race. The winner always gets 0.00"race points" for the race.

A particular racer's race points are in fact determined by taking the percentage difference between the winning time and his time, but then they're multiplied by a factor (the "F Value"), which the FIS sets for each event each season. For GS this season, the F Value is 8.8.* So, if Rahlves' GS points are 5.44 (as indeed they are), that would really mean (approximately) that he finishes 0.62 percent behind the best GS racer, which would be, say, .74 seconds over two 1-minute runs.

So a NASTAR handcap of 23 would by something vaguely similar to FIS point of 23 * 8.8 = 202.4. Except, as noted below, it really isn't.

A little detail on penalty points

This rapidly gets complicated, and much more so at the FIS level than the USSA level. There are various adjustments designed to keep people from inappropriately lowering their points in various ways.

Also, the race points aren't figured simply by just taking the winner's FIS points and adjusting everyone else's against them. They're based on the points of the lowest 5 competitors who compete and the lowest 5 competitors who finish in the top 10 (which, of course, may or may not be the same 5 people). This leads to some rather odd things, such as wanting a low-point competitor to finish in the top 10 (even if that pushes you back a place) to improve your own FIS (or USSA) points ... though I don't think the typical racer is really aware of that (though coaches seem to be).

A few more notes

Saying you can do something in 23 percent more time than it takes Daron Rahlves to do it begs the question, "do what"?

Consider this: Have Daron Rahlves stand at the top of a modestly sloped bunny hill in ordinary skis that haven't had any particularly special preparation, wearing ordinary ski clothes. You stand next to him. Both you and he slide to the bottom of the hill in a straight line. Okay, yeah, he'll probably beat you by a little bit, but not a heck of a lot.

Now consider this: Do the same thing, but make the slope a steep sheet of ice with rollers and side-hills, and instead of going straight, you're going to make hellacious turns at 45 mph, some of them fallaways or cranking turns just over the crest of a roll. The amount of time by which Rahlves would beat an average skier can't really be stated, as the average skier would have difficulty even completing the course. The amount of time by which Rahlves would beat a very good, experienced racer would be substantial.

NASTAR, obviously, isn't at either of these extremes. The courses on which FIS points are calculated are either at the latter extreme, or at least somewhere towards it.

________
*The official formula is (Tx / To - 1) * F, where Tx = this guy's time, To = winner's time and F equals the current "F value" for the relevant discipline. Note that Tx / To isn't stated as a percentage but a decimal, so the actual "F Value" for GS isn't 8.8 but 880. In case you're wondering, the F Values for the other events are 1350 for DH, 1030 for SG, 610 for Slalom and 1000 for Super Combined.
So are you guys trying to say Nastar is to FIS racing what Mini Golf is to PGA golf??
sjjohnston
Good post. Regarding the FIS point calculations, what I should have added to my earlier post was that "if Daron skied his points and that the penalty calculation resulted in a 5.00 FIS penalty" etc...
sj,

You sound like a typical FIS parent!

Just kidding, basically what i was getting at without going into so much detail. I guess UP Racer is alittle uptight today!

Excellent post!
At least it no longer takes a scientific calculator with natural logrythms to figure points these days (like it did over 25 years ago when I first got into this) Instead they came up with those "adders" and "factors" that probably do the same thing.
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Richr Oh for cryin out loud. I know it's not the same thing. I was just asking if I had the math right.
It's complicated. NASTAR is a short, easy course that resembles GS, and the skill differential between racers isn't as great as there would be in a longer, more technically challenging course.

Club racing has longer, more difficult, more technically challenging courses than NASTAR. As a practical matter, a roughly 23 NASTAR handicap is about a 40+ handicap in club racing. (I skied 33-40 handicaps in club racing a few years ago when I skied 15-21 handicaps in NASTAR.)

USSA Masters racing, in turn, has longer, more technically challenging courses than club racing. A couple of class 2 club racers (with theoretically 26-33 club league handicaps) I skied with in a racing camp this year ran a Masters GS race last year (on their home mountain where they trained five days a week) and finished with times about 130-135% of the fastest skier's. (On a different mountain, I suspect they would not have been that competitive.) Had they been competing in that race in the men's open seed (rather than as a 60+ woman and 70+ man) they would have had over 200 points not including penalty points because of the lack of world class competitors.

And NorAm, Europa Cup, and World Cup courses are (way) more difficult still, with even a steeper separation between the great skiers and the rest of us.

All that said, a 23 handicap in NASTAR is a nice start. Stick with it, improve, and run more difficult courses and you can start worrying about your USSA and FIS points.
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Atomicman sj, You sound like a typical FIS parent! Just kidding, basically what i was getting at without going into so much detail. I guess UP Racer is alittle uptight today! Excellent post!
SJ had a nearly PERFECT post. Great information.

I'm sure you know this Atomicman, but I wasn't referring to the amount of knowledge possessed about points when I said that.
Quote:
 Originally Posted by Atomicman But since you commented, i think it is one of the most ridiculous posts ever. Nastar is pretty much a joke. Someone running a Nastar course worrying about how they'd stack up in FIS points hit me as pretty damn silly! Even i can get a freakin' gold or platinum, whatever medal they are giving out no Nastar! It is supposed to be RECREATIONAL racing, pleez?

I thought this would be a fun little math exercise, to see if I understood how FIS points worked. I'm sorry to have been such a bother.
And it was! ....

Don't worry about some of .... ahem ... the "Nattering Nabobs of Negativism" ....

from the gospel of Saint Spiro T. Agnew
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Return Home
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Ski Training and Pro Forums › Racing and Big Mountain Competitions › Just raced Nastar - What would my FIS points be?