Okay, maybe this isn't up to Cygarin's standards, but here's what I did. First a little background. I was proud of the Iowa State men's track team finishing second in the Big 12 Championships. Then I was a little bummed out to learn Iowa won the Big 10 Championship. That was a nice accomplishment for them, but I just couldn't believe they could have done that in the Big 12. But I am biased. That feeling could have just been my bias coming through. So I decided to crunch the numbers.
What I did was put all the Big 12 results in a spreadsheet. All placewinners and their points earned for their team were included. I cross-checked my work to see it matched the final scores, which it did. Then I took Iowa's results from the Big 10 meet and put them in the spreadsheet for each event. I used times, distances and scores (in the case of the decathlon) and adjusted the placewinners in each event, recalculating team points as if Iowa were part of the Big 12 competition.
The results confirmed my bias. Iowa would have finished 4th in the Big 12 with their results. My analysis may not be perfect as track and wind conditions can play a part. And in the case of the high jump I had to record a tie as I had no tiebreaker on number of misses in the Big 10 data. That could result in a 1 point swing up or down depending on who won the tiebreaker. Or maybe it would be a tie anyway. For the decathlon I just used the final score. I did not place the Iowa competitor in each decathlon event which would force a recalculation using a points formula that I have no knowledge of. I just used the final scores. It probably wouldn't have mattered anyway as the Iowa athlete finished 10th of 11 competitors in the Big 10 and ended up well behind the Big 12 placewinners based on points. Here are the results of my work. Enjoy.
Here are the actual Big 12 results:
What I did was put all the Big 12 results in a spreadsheet. All placewinners and their points earned for their team were included. I cross-checked my work to see it matched the final scores, which it did. Then I took Iowa's results from the Big 10 meet and put them in the spreadsheet for each event. I used times, distances and scores (in the case of the decathlon) and adjusted the placewinners in each event, recalculating team points as if Iowa were part of the Big 12 competition.
The results confirmed my bias. Iowa would have finished 4th in the Big 12 with their results. My analysis may not be perfect as track and wind conditions can play a part. And in the case of the high jump I had to record a tie as I had no tiebreaker on number of misses in the Big 10 data. That could result in a 1 point swing up or down depending on who won the tiebreaker. Or maybe it would be a tie anyway. For the decathlon I just used the final score. I did not place the Iowa competitor in each decathlon event which would force a recalculation using a points formula that I have no knowledge of. I just used the final scores. It probably wouldn't have mattered anyway as the Iowa athlete finished 10th of 11 competitors in the Big 10 and ended up well behind the Big 12 placewinners based on points. Here are the results of my work. Enjoy.
Here are the actual Big 12 results:
- Texas Tech 164
- Iowa State 126
- Texas 120.5
- K-State 85
- Kansas 79
- Oklahoma 75
- Oklahoma State 59.5
- Baylor 57
- TCU 53
- Texas Tech 158
- Iowa State 107.5
- Texas 108.5
- Iowa 87.5
- K-State 80
- Kansas 69.5
- Oklahoma 70
- Oklahoma State 48.5
- Baylor 46
- TCU 43.5
Last edited:
