2016 RIO OLYMPIC GAMES
- Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
- Swimming: August 6-13
- Olympic Aquatics Stadium, Barra Olympic Park, Rio de Janeiro
- Prelims – 9:00 a.m/12:00 p.m PST/EST (1:00 p.m local), Finals – 6:00 p.m/9:00 p.m PST/EST (10:00 p.m local)
- SwimSwam previews
- Day 2 Schedule & Results
- Live Stream (NBC)
After Day 1 there are 5 competitors tied for the lead with 56 points (out of a maximum 64). All of the leaders missed Canada’s bronze in the medley relay and the Gabriele Detti‘s bronze in the 400 free. Points were awarded for exactly predicting medalists. 7 for gold, 5 for silver, 4 for bronze. No partial credit for having Mack Horton second and Sun Yang first in the 400 free.
Spreadsheet of all entries and scores
-The favorites performed well. Katinka Hosszu 87% picked for gold, Kosuke Hagino, 71%, and the Australian women’s 4X100 free relay team 94% all won their events.
-The only upset was Mack Horton 37% over Sun Yang 56% in the men’s 400 free.
-There were a few surprise medalists. Only 5% of entries picked Gabriele Detti to medal in the 400 free, 5% had Canada medaling in the women’s 4X100, and 23% had Mireia Bemonte medaling in the 400 IM.
-Kelsei Worrell, who 89% of entrants picked to medal, missed the 100 fly final
-The average night 1 score was 31.7 points with a standard deviation of 10.4.
-234 of the 500 entries scored 32 or more points out of a possible 64.
I don’t think it’s fair to have such a precipitous drop off in points (7-5-4-all others 0), and no option for partial credit if you guess a medalist correctly but the wrong medal. For example, people that would have guessed Seto-Hagino-Kalisz as the Top 3 in men’s 400 IM would’ve gotten 0 points. The same 0 points that someone gets if they guess athletes from the first heat (4:20+) as the Top 3. Kinda takes the fun away from something that should be fun.
1 alternative that would reward correct medal placement yet still give you partial credit for picking someone you felt was going to be great enough to medal (regardless of color) would be:
Silver:… Read more »
I disagree. The cream rises here and nothing else. giving people a horse-shoe/hand-grenade bonus for being close brings people up who aren’t really the cream. More importantly, it would be harder to keep track of points that way. This way just requires a very simple excel sheet; the bonus for picking a person in the top three would be significantly more complicated. Still doable, but complicated.
Uh, not really. But whatevz.
poor kelsi worrell…i think she cracked under the pressure >-<