Re: Re:
Yep. I went through wiki and grabbed all the values, think I mentioned somewhere upthread that you lose podiums and half podiums for a few Olys.
As an analysis tool, I maintain it's duplicitous in nature, unless someone wants to elucidate a reason for doing it like this - the predetermined outcome seems pretty obvious.
I looked for a link between the uni and WADA and Aaron, but not for too long. Would be interesting to find some sort of link somewhere as to why someone would pump out a few of these spurious studies. Very Coylesque.
Catwhoorg said:Dear Wiggo said:Catwhoorg do you mind editing a copy of the graph to remove all 9.98+ times ? Would be interested to see what happens - if you can keep the years along the bottom but remove the times at or above?
I think this constraint causes a distinct loss of value to the analysis, which maybe why they looked at it that way to get to a preordained conclusion.
For a starter, you lose two olympic finals entirely. (1980 and 1984).
Yep. I went through wiki and grabbed all the values, think I mentioned somewhere upthread that you lose podiums and half podiums for a few Olys.
As an analysis tool, I maintain it's duplicitous in nature, unless someone wants to elucidate a reason for doing it like this - the predetermined outcome seems pretty obvious.
I looked for a link between the uni and WADA and Aaron, but not for too long. Would be interesting to find some sort of link somewhere as to why someone would pump out a few of these spurious studies. Very Coylesque.