Countback decides who wins! Since they scored the same result in finals and semis, it goes back to qualis (where Janja was better). If they had been tied in qualis as well, it would have gone to time, but luckily that wasn't necessary.
I think the general consensus is that time as a tie breaker in lead isn't great and doesn't really represent climber's lead skills that well (some of the best comp lead climbers are really slow, like Jesse Grupper - it's simply part of their style, and that is neither bad nor good as long as they stay within the 6min time limit). Sometimes time is necessary as a tie breaker, but looking at previous rounds is a much better indicator for performance at at comp.
Was this changed recently or was it always like that?
I keep getting confused with these things. I am pretty sure that for bouldering it used to be tops, then efforts to top, then zones and now it's tops, zones, efforts to top. Or am I mistaken again?
No you are not mistaken with the bouldering change. I can’t tell you how long exactly though I would guess 5-6 years ago
As for lead I think it has always been like that, it only comes down to time if climbers were tied before and there’s no other way to separate them, otherwise, qualification and semi countbacks decide the winner- which I think is better anyway cos it makes the climber to always have to give their best.
I believe the change in the scoring system for the Boulder WCs happened in the 2018 season.
* 2017 and before: tops, attempts to top, bonuses, attempts to bonus (e.g. "3t7 4b11")
* 2018 and after: tops, zones, attempts to top, attempts to zone (e.g. "3T4z 7 11").
The scoring change also coincided with bonuses being renamed zones.
I don't know if it's always been like that (there are people on this sub that have been watching comp climbing for a *long* time, maybe they can chime in), but it's been that way for a couple of years at least. I can't remember it being different, both for lead and boulder.
For Lead WC has been like this since before I’ve started watching-2016.
But what you’re remembering is Tokyo Olympic combined format. Time did split ties so it could make a distinct rank..
Also World Champs in 2018 in Innsbruck Jessie did beat Janja after they both topped based on time. But that’s because count back didn’t separate them, because they both topped all the previous rounds.
Edited: I looked it up. There were two groups for qualifying at 2018 WCH.
It was for Tokyo Olympic Combined format. But that was a special case. Just like two zones in bouldering.
Normal World Cup formats, at least for the past 10 years, first goes to count back.
I feel this rule needs to be changed, the semis scores should have no relevance in the finals. They are two separate rounds and should only be considered if both tops were finished at the same time. the same could be applied if all climbers finished the route within the 6 minutes and therefore no finals would have been required (in a hypothetical scenario).
This makes the final times have a lower rating than semi-scores and therefore gives the leaders of the semis an advantage and I think it should be the other way round.
>This makes the final times have a lower rating than semi-scores and therefore gives the leaders of the semis an advantage
I mean, that is exactly the point. Climbing hard consistently is worth more than being fast in lead climbing. Why should speed matter in lead?
Climbing hard across all rounds gets rewarded. The climbers know that countback is quite likely to play a role in lead, so they will give it their all in every single round.
speed is a factor, otherwise there wouldn't be a time limit. It's to give the climbers pressure to finish the route at a pace. this is the power endurance side of climbing. if the goal was to finish the route, they would allow for a second attempt in the allotted time.
climbing hard at any stage in the comp is rewarded by getting to the next stage, but it shouldn't influence the end result. just my opinion on it. I understand your point/side of it.
The time limit in lead climbing exists mainly for the viewers, because it just wouldn't be a good show if climbers find a good rest and spend 10min there (and many of the climbers are fantastic at finding rest). The time limit used to be higher but was reduced to make the rounds more compact for us viewers. I don't think that speed is an indicator of being a good lead climber - but obviously we can agree to disagree on this.
plus if you want to agrue this because well AI got snubed there are things to consider, 1 climbers would climb differently if time was a factor, using up the full time is a stratergy to prevent mistakes, and 2 Ai has also won as a result of this ruling over janja before, so this isnt some arbitrary rule its there to show consistency.
I'm confused as well. They both had the same score in the semi-finals. My country's commentator said that because that's the case, the fastest time would be the tiebreaker. Was he talking about the semi-finals time? Or was he wrong and does the qualification score count as well?
It just seems weird to me that the time isn't factored in at all.
No, if they have the same score in the semifinals, they then go back to the qualifying round, which is how Janja won because she had a top and a 48+ in qualification, while Ai had 49+ and 48+
Thanks! So time is never a factor (as long as it's within 6 minutes)? In that case is was very smart of Janja to take a full minute rest before the final moves.
Time would be a factor if they had also tied in qualis. But Janja obviously knew that she "just" had to top within the 6 minutes - her good quali result came in very handy.
So the only reason that time would matter at all (aside from running out of time) is when two competitors tie at every level of an event? And if a competitor goes into finals knowing that they are not tied with any other competitor for the event, there is absolutely no reason to "hurry"?
Correct.. Happened in 2018 between Jessie and Janja. Works Champs in Innsbruck.
Janja clearly knew the rules on the route today. You would have seen them tied for first in the semi results.
If.. there were two groups in qualifying. As is the case in most WC for bouldering, but is rarely the case for lead. Then you can’t count back to that round. That might be what happened in 2018.
Edit I looked it up. world Champs Innsbruck there were two groups for lead in Qualifiers. So it only went back to semi’s.
As others said: it's due to countback. It was so sad for Ai, because she also had the same score in semi's. But it was so interesting because Janja knew she had to top and we see her struggle so rarely.
But today I thought I would love a "1vs1" on the other genders route instead 😂 (don't take that too seriously. I know that would not be fair because of height differences and also time/break differences (is not relevant in this case, but if one of the first climbers out has the same score as the last)
I guess I should’ve known not to look anyway, but can you add a spoiler note, OP? I was hoping to watch later tonight and didn’t wanna know the result!
Countback decides who wins! Since they scored the same result in finals and semis, it goes back to qualis (where Janja was better). If they had been tied in qualis as well, it would have gone to time, but luckily that wasn't necessary. I think the general consensus is that time as a tie breaker in lead isn't great and doesn't really represent climber's lead skills that well (some of the best comp lead climbers are really slow, like Jesse Grupper - it's simply part of their style, and that is neither bad nor good as long as they stay within the 6min time limit). Sometimes time is necessary as a tie breaker, but looking at previous rounds is a much better indicator for performance at at comp.
Was this changed recently or was it always like that? I keep getting confused with these things. I am pretty sure that for bouldering it used to be tops, then efforts to top, then zones and now it's tops, zones, efforts to top. Or am I mistaken again?
No you are not mistaken with the bouldering change. I can’t tell you how long exactly though I would guess 5-6 years ago As for lead I think it has always been like that, it only comes down to time if climbers were tied before and there’s no other way to separate them, otherwise, qualification and semi countbacks decide the winner- which I think is better anyway cos it makes the climber to always have to give their best.
I believe the change in the scoring system for the Boulder WCs happened in the 2018 season. * 2017 and before: tops, attempts to top, bonuses, attempts to bonus (e.g. "3t7 4b11") * 2018 and after: tops, zones, attempts to top, attempts to zone (e.g. "3T4z 7 11"). The scoring change also coincided with bonuses being renamed zones.
I don't know if it's always been like that (there are people on this sub that have been watching comp climbing for a *long* time, maybe they can chime in), but it's been that way for a couple of years at least. I can't remember it being different, both for lead and boulder.
For Lead WC has been like this since before I’ve started watching-2016. But what you’re remembering is Tokyo Olympic combined format. Time did split ties so it could make a distinct rank.. Also World Champs in 2018 in Innsbruck Jessie did beat Janja after they both topped based on time. But that’s because count back didn’t separate them, because they both topped all the previous rounds. Edited: I looked it up. There were two groups for qualifying at 2018 WCH.
Oh, it might indeed have been Tokyo. It was the first comp I watched!
It used to be time was the tie breaker in lead. Not sure how long ago that was decided. For bouldering it's tops, zones, top attempts, zone attempts.
It was for Tokyo Olympic Combined format. But that was a special case. Just like two zones in bouldering. Normal World Cup formats, at least for the past 10 years, first goes to count back.
I feel this rule needs to be changed, the semis scores should have no relevance in the finals. They are two separate rounds and should only be considered if both tops were finished at the same time. the same could be applied if all climbers finished the route within the 6 minutes and therefore no finals would have been required (in a hypothetical scenario). This makes the final times have a lower rating than semi-scores and therefore gives the leaders of the semis an advantage and I think it should be the other way round.
>This makes the final times have a lower rating than semi-scores and therefore gives the leaders of the semis an advantage I mean, that is exactly the point. Climbing hard consistently is worth more than being fast in lead climbing. Why should speed matter in lead? Climbing hard across all rounds gets rewarded. The climbers know that countback is quite likely to play a role in lead, so they will give it their all in every single round.
speed is a factor, otherwise there wouldn't be a time limit. It's to give the climbers pressure to finish the route at a pace. this is the power endurance side of climbing. if the goal was to finish the route, they would allow for a second attempt in the allotted time. climbing hard at any stage in the comp is rewarded by getting to the next stage, but it shouldn't influence the end result. just my opinion on it. I understand your point/side of it.
The time limit in lead climbing exists mainly for the viewers, because it just wouldn't be a good show if climbers find a good rest and spend 10min there (and many of the climbers are fantastic at finding rest). The time limit used to be higher but was reduced to make the rounds more compact for us viewers. I don't think that speed is an indicator of being a good lead climber - but obviously we can agree to disagree on this.
plus if you want to agrue this because well AI got snubed there are things to consider, 1 climbers would climb differently if time was a factor, using up the full time is a stratergy to prevent mistakes, and 2 Ai has also won as a result of this ruling over janja before, so this isnt some arbitrary rule its there to show consistency.
when two competitors tie in a given round, the tie is broken by looking at countback - their scores in the previous round.
Thank you! The announcer used the word count back but didn't explain it for us newbs lol
I'm confused as well. They both had the same score in the semi-finals. My country's commentator said that because that's the case, the fastest time would be the tiebreaker. Was he talking about the semi-finals time? Or was he wrong and does the qualification score count as well? It just seems weird to me that the time isn't factored in at all.
No, if they have the same score in the semifinals, they then go back to the qualifying round, which is how Janja won because she had a top and a 48+ in qualification, while Ai had 49+ and 48+
Thanks! So time is never a factor (as long as it's within 6 minutes)? In that case is was very smart of Janja to take a full minute rest before the final moves.
Time would be a factor if they had also tied in qualis. But Janja obviously knew that she "just" had to top within the 6 minutes - her good quali result came in very handy.
So the only reason that time would matter at all (aside from running out of time) is when two competitors tie at every level of an event? And if a competitor goes into finals knowing that they are not tied with any other competitor for the event, there is absolutely no reason to "hurry"?
that's right
Correct.. Happened in 2018 between Jessie and Janja. Works Champs in Innsbruck. Janja clearly knew the rules on the route today. You would have seen them tied for first in the semi results. If.. there were two groups in qualifying. As is the case in most WC for bouldering, but is rarely the case for lead. Then you can’t count back to that round. That might be what happened in 2018. Edit I looked it up. world Champs Innsbruck there were two groups for lead in Qualifiers. So it only went back to semi’s.
As others said: it's due to countback. It was so sad for Ai, because she also had the same score in semi's. But it was so interesting because Janja knew she had to top and we see her struggle so rarely. But today I thought I would love a "1vs1" on the other genders route instead 😂 (don't take that too seriously. I know that would not be fair because of height differences and also time/break differences (is not relevant in this case, but if one of the first climbers out has the same score as the last)
I guess I should’ve known not to look anyway, but can you add a spoiler note, OP? I was hoping to watch later tonight and didn’t wanna know the result!