how spies is stackin up

http://moto-racing.speedtv.com/article/wsb...rted-territory/

interesting stats.

Thoughts after reading this article. Scott Russell was amazing. Doug Polen was a freak. Sadly, Anthony Gobert wasted away an amazing talent and potential. Doohan is on a short list of greatest all time riders, I'd even put him above Rossi. (ooh controversy)

Spies has certainly had an outstanding start, but so did Gobert, so I'm not ready to hand him any greatness...yet. Lets see what happens by the end of the season.

Rizla Suzuki have made good on their improvements, too bad they screwed up the best chance they could have had to actually contend for the title in GP.

I don't hold percentage based stats in particularly high regard, especially with so little evidence to base them on. Spies' riding speaks for itself for now, its been brilliant. But i don't think we need to hurry to extrapolate where he might be at the end of the season, we'll see soon enough.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Apr 4 2009, 09:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I don't hold percentage based stats in particularly high regard, especially with so little evidence to base them on. Spies' riding speaks for itself for now, its been brilliant. But i don't think we need to hurry to extrapolate where he might be at the end of the season, we'll see soon enough.
Who's extrapolating? Barring injury, he is top three for sure and a serious title contender as a rookie.

Ben = Doohan

I'm as good as Tiger Woods on the opening drive. After that, we have slightly different skill levels.

I don't think we should burden him with expectations. Let him be what he wants. Besides, DORNA have shown they won't let someone win 5 in a row if the racing is poor.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Apr 4 2009, 07:44 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I don't hold percentage based stats in particularly high regard

Yes, I think the forum is quite aware of this. Facts have never got in the way of your opinions.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Jumkie @ Apr 4 2009, 05:21 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Yes, I think the forum is quite aware of this. Facts have never got in the way of your opinions.

I am a big fan of the facts, just not a big fan of misleading statistics and i feel like percentages can be easily used to circumnavigate certain facts.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Apr 4 2009, 03:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I am a big fan of the facts, just not a big fan of misleading statistics and i feel like percentages can be easily used to circumnavigate certain facts.
Any sort of statistic can be used to lie. I don't see how percentages are particularly unique in that fashion. Do you deny that Spies decimated the AMA field, other than one rider, over the past few years?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mattsteg @ Apr 4 2009, 10:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Any sort of statistic can be used to lie. I don't see how percentages are particularly unique in that fashion. Do you deny that Spies decimated the AMA field, other than one rider, over the past few years?

No, statistics cannot be used to lie but they can be used to neglect factors which could be considered significant. Obviously that is true of all statistics, but my particular issue with percentage win rates and such is i feel like winning 3 races in 4 starts is nowhere near as praiseworthy as winning 10 races out of 4 seasons (for example), and the percentages would suggest otherwise.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Apr 4 2009, 04:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>but my particular ssue with percentage win rates and such is i feel like winning 3 races in 4 starts is nowhere near as praiseworthy as winning 10 races out of 4 seasons (for example), and the percentages would suggest otherwise.10 races out of 4 seasons is still a percentage/rate stat, Tom. I thought you disliked those?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Apr 4 2009, 02:20 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>No, statistics cannot be used to lie but they can be used to neglect factors which could be considered significant. Obviously that is true of all statistics, but my particular issue with percentage win rates and such is i feel like winning 3 races in 4 starts is nowhere near as praiseworthy as winning 10 races out of 4 seasons (for example), and the percentages would suggest otherwise.

You dislike the implications of statistics and the reckless forecasts people make by abusing statistics.

It sounds like you enjoy statistics when they aren't being used to mislead people's opinions.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mattsteg @ Apr 4 2009, 10:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>10 races out of 4 seasons is still a percentage/rate stat, Tom. I thought you disliked those?

You have missed my point, i think the percentage rate makes the lower total number of wins seem more impressive while i would disagree that it is.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Apr 4 2009, 10:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>You have missed my point, i think the percentage rate makes the lower total number of wins seem more impressive while i would disagree that it is.
I still miss your point

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Apr 4 2009, 04:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>You have missed my point, i think the percentage rate makes the lower total number of wins seem more impressive while i would disagree that it is.You're acting like people believe winning 3/4 races somehow means Spies is a shoe-in to win 75% of his superbike races from here on out.

Why on earth would you deride rate stats as meaningless, and then turn around and present a rate stat to represent what you consider a better performance? No statistical measure is particularly meaningful in a vaccuum, but rate stats are a lot more meaningful than you give them credit for.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Arrabbiata1 @ Apr 4 2009, 10:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>I still miss your point

OK sorry for not being clear. What i'm saying is that i would consider it more impressive to have 10 career wins in whatever class than it would be to have 5 wins, even if the rider with those 5 wins took less than half the starts to achieve them.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (mattsteg @ Apr 4 2009, 10:32 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>You're acting like people believe winning 3/4 races somehow means Spies is a shoe-in to win 75% of his superbike races from here on out.

Why on earth would you deride rate stats as meaningless, and then turn around and present a rate stat to represent what you consider a better performance? No statistical measure is particularly meaningful in a vaccuum, but rate stats are a lot more meaningful than you give them credit for.

My comments about percentage stats are not personal to Spies, i just generally don't think that the amount of time it takes a rider to achieve something has much bearing on how impressive that achievement is.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Apr 4 2009, 10:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>OK sorry for not being clear. What i'm saying is that i would consider it more impressive to have 10 career wins in whatever class than it would be to have 5 wins, even if the rider with those 5 wins took less than half the starts to achieve them.
Disagree...because straight wins like Spies is looking to deliver- back to back wins, constitute consistency, and in this game that secures championships..(it doesnt even have to equate to a win if you stick it in parc-ferme every race weekend.) Haga's has been on the world stage since his storming rookie year in '99, (I think), has been runner in WSB twice and notched up an impressive resume of race wins. Already Spies impresses me more in both his approach to racing and his natural talent.. Spies is devastatingly consistent, and it is this ability to string together a run which so worries the competition, garners BIG sponsorship, and generally gets riders noticed. I'll refer again to BBoz's 5 in a row on the L&M Ducati. Not only did he make a name for himself, but he really caused a stir in the paddock at the time. So in a way I agree, the stats don't always tell the full story, but it's the circumstances behind those results which I find interesting, and may not stand out years later in the record books, but they are so important at the time. If those 5 wins take less than half the starts to achieve then how can that not in itself be significant? Particularly since they mark the start of a tally which could easily surpass the 10 wins that you refer to in one single season alone!

Plus, unlike Haga, Ben can and will ride a GP bike.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Apr 4 2009, 10:39 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>My comments about percentage stats are not personal to Spies, i just generally don't think that the amount of time it takes a rider to achieve something has much bearing on how impressive that achievement is.
Don't backtrack Tom, this thread was started about Spies for God's sake - which you are well aware of, so who exactly were they personal to?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Arrabbiata1 @ Apr 4 2009, 05:02 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Don't backtrack Tom, this thread was started about Spies for God's sake - which you are well aware of, so who exactly were they personal to?
It's also worth nothing that the percentage stats in the article were more about Ben's AMA career. The rest was about his performance so far in WSBK and how it matched up against other WSBK rookies of the past, with no suggestion that the current rate is likely to hold up over time.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Tom @ Apr 5 2009, 04:20 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>No, statistics cannot be used to lie but they can be used to neglect factors which could be considered significant. Obviously that is true of all statistics, but my particular issue with percentage win rates and such is i feel like winning 3 races in 4 starts is nowhere near as praiseworthy as winning 10 races out of 4 seasons (for example), and the percentages would suggest otherwise.
Of course stats can be used to lie... Statistical analysis all comes down to interpretation...

As for your win rate thought... it made me think. I, for example, am much more impressed with Britten's short but successful road racing history as opposed to Kawsaki's long but spotty record...