Author
Listed:
- Jakob Pietschnig
- Marie Pellegrini
- Junia Sophia Nur Eder
- Magdalena Siegel
Abstract
Wind conditions are well-known to affect results of ski jumping competitions. To alleviate effects of different head or tail winds and differences in inrun length due to jury or coaches’ decisions, the FIS (Féderation Internationale de Ski) has adopted a wind and gate compensation system since January 2010. However, the accuracy and fairness of the resulting compensation points are often questioned by athletes, spectators, and media commentators alike but have not yet been thoroughly investigated. In the present meta-analysis, we present evidence for systematic negative associations of wind points but positive associations of gate points with round scores across all World Cup and World Championship competitions of men in the ski jumping seasons 2016/2017 and 2017/2018 (k = 35 and 30, respectively). Moreover, our results indicate that absolute correlations between wind points and round scores increased in presence of larger wind point variability, thus indicating lower accuracy of compensation systems when conditions are more variable. Additionally, there was a trend for larger wind point malcompensations on larger jumping hills. Our results suggest that the current wind point compensation formula as well as gate factors should be reevaluated to prevent systematically biased point awards within and across competitions.
Suggested Citation
Jakob Pietschnig & Marie Pellegrini & Junia Sophia Nur Eder & Magdalena Siegel, 2020.
"After all, it is an outdoor sport: Meta-analytic evidence for negative associations between wind compensation points and round scores in ski jumping competitions,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-12, August.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0238101
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0238101
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0238101. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.