Hope you brought your abacus!
The WSL has released the Margies heat draw and it is a doozy. I’m particularly keen for heats two (Kolohe vs. Fanning vs. Leo), six (John vs. Wiggolly vs. wildcard (#prayforJackorJay)), and eleven (Julian vs. Italo vs. Ethan).
But thinking about the event’s seeding, an important question comes to light. Why is world number one, Owen Wright, in the seventh seed? He’ll be wearing the yellow jersey in WA, but he won’t be facing wildcards. Instead, John retains the number one seed, followed by Gab and Jordy at two and three — though they actually switched spots since Snapper.
So, if Margie’s seeding isn’t based on this year’s standings nor last year’s end of season’s ratings, how does the WSL decide to rank individual surfers? Surely all the CT surfers must be asking, “What’s my seed?!” I contacted the WSL’s velvety mouthpiece, Dave Prodan, to find out.*
As it goes, beginning-of-the-year seeding functions within a specific algorithm. It looks like this:
Event 1 (Gold Coast): 100% 2016 / 0% 2017
Event 2 (Margaret River): 80% 2016 / 20% 2017
Event 3 (Bells Beach): 60% 2016 / 40% 2017
Event 4 (Rio de Janeiro): 40% 2016 / 60% 2017
Event 5 (Fiji): 20% 2016 / 80% 2017
Event 6 (Jeffreys Bay): 0% 2016 / 100% 2017
Because Owen started the year in the #1 Wildcard seed of thirteen and went on to win the Snapper event, his Margies seed will come 80% from the number thirteen and 20% from number one. When averaged and compared to the other surfers at the top of the rankings, Owen falls into the seven slot. Meanwhile John, who is working off 80% of one and 20% of three, retains the top seed.
The scale is slowly shifted throughout the season until JBay, when the 2017 standings take over the current seeding structure.
I will say, tentatively, that I agree with this system. Much like round three’s questionable reseeding plot, it’s a bit capitalistic in nature — the rich stay rich, the poor stay poor etc. But for the sake of the world title race it’s probably better than letting Snapper wholly dictate the seedings. Though, I can see how a 2017-centric seeding system would create more interesting heats earlier on in events, which is always a plus.
Now I’m all ears, kids. Is the WSL correct in maintaining the status quo, or should they open up the seedings and let all hell break loose? The latter is beginning to sound infinitely more fun…
* Technically this convo took place in 2016, and a similar article was written for Surfing Magazine (now residing on Surfer‘s site), but I figured this topic was worth rehashing on BeachGrit’s enlightened forum!
Here’s hoping the comp is at heavy, dredging barrels at The Box
The best surfer will win the comp
I won’t have to read Mike explaining mathematics or seeding again
Hearing certain pro surfers whine about surfing real waves would be honey to my hears though
What I want to know is how to avoid losing half my fantasy surfer team in later rounds when they end up surfing against each other. I seem to remember someone explaining this once, but I got bored and stopped listening.
Nothing like adding meaningless arbitrary numbers on the back of there jerseys to provide even more confusion for viewers; its a little like this: https://www.youtube.com/wat…
mullet, are you talking about ex-pro porn stars?
New father Owen should be asking the question “Where’s my seed?”
more than “What’s my seed?” Otherwise the “seed” may get all self conscious and shit.
Great article, but a little pessimistic. “They’re either never wrong, or they’re never right.” This seems too absolute. Even if the scores aren’t changed after they are offered, surely there should be a mechanism in place for correcting the judging errors that led to bad decisions in the first place/ sacking bad judges?
Maybe there is. I am pretty ignorant of the process, and it would be great to have some nuts and bolts of the means by which surfers eat shit and grin through a loss, even though they know they’ve won.
Everything can be refined. Do CT surfers vote on who judges them over the course of a season? Maybe they could look at other subjectively judged sports, and see how they deal with these problems?
Where’s wardo?
“One of the classic bits of magical surfer thinking about this is that if only the panel was made up of retired super-pros, rather than pretty good surfers who’ve made a life out of trying to make the paradox function, then everything would be just terrific. As Ottz put it to me recently in the Qantas lounge at Sydney airport: “At least they’d know what it feels like to be on the other end.”
exactly! (as Nick states here) its like when i hear Johnny Miller announcing PGA shit and he’s talking like he’s Jack Nicklaus instead of the one-major tourney winner guy he really is. judges have too big of an effect for them to be these nobodys. ex pros would still get it wrong but they could say “i’m fucking Curren, and that’s a 6.17. end of story.”
the “Qantas” lounge at Sydney airport??? Phonetically would that be “Cunt As ____ “?? This sounds like some nefarious spec op forward operating base.
Without meaningful transparency in the judging itself, this is all kabuki. Few people trust the judging decisions, and with good reason. When judges decide not to enforce interference rules (eg. Medina and Slater), when crap surfing gets a higher score than superior surfing, and when narratives rather than performance seem to drive judging decisions, it becomes extremely frustrating.
How about a three part series on the judging process? How about an article on tough, but correct judging decisions, and then one on bad calls that ruined a title run, etc.
As much as they try to remain in the background, the judges are the real stars of the show.
Part 1, 2 and 3 by MC and Longtom but without us knowing exactly which of the 2 write each part. And under this system, sack Sabre Norris, who never got started, subject to MC/Longtom FOC submissions – would be reasonable to give them each an Aloha Akabar or Defend Surfing Beachgrit T.
I don’t see why they just don’t do event by event. If you have a shocker at one event you get a shit seed for the next etc. Would mix it up and be a true reflection of how your year went.
The latter for sure. Robo and Jay both need to be the wild cards. The WSL needs that. Bad.
yeah, this is still the best system. can debate about how having last year’s result matter is good for continuity. could also argue that each year should be a new chapter and that everything should re-seed after Snapper. as long as the guys who didn’t do well the prior year are getting the tough draws in Rd 3, it doesn’t matter much.
You have every right to rehash old content, particularly when you get zero pay to provide them.
plus it’s actually somewhat useful
REALLY!?? Where’s my goddamn diary…..MOM!!!!!! DID YOU TOUCH MY DIARY!?