Okay, I can't help myself. I know they say all results are unofficial and exuberance and inexperience are to be expected, plus I have to wonder if the pro's intentionally sandbag the weights to the observers. How did their final posted leaderboard fare against the actual results?
The above list was the unofficial final leaderboard posted before actual weigh-in but after fishing had ceased for the day.
For starters, they got 22 of the top 25 correct with the few misses largely to the bottom half of the list - not bad. Reporters were largely under-guessing weights, to the tune of 19 out of the 25 listed (75%) being reported light. Average difference was 1.1 lbs. light, but the standard deviation was 1.7 lbs. The worst case was Cliff Paces nearly 6 pound difference, but there were several anglers who had weights 2-4 lbs. heavier than reported.
As a percentage difference, the average was 7.5% under guessed. Using that as a guideline, 15 of the 25 reported weights (60%) were off by more than this amount one way or the other. In the diagram above, under reported weight differences are in green, over reported weight differences are in red. This average works out to be 3/4 of a pound +/- at 10 lbs., and 1.5 lbs +/- on a 20 lb. sack, a generous and fair allowance.
By and large they were in the ballpark with their overall reporting, but expect that all future reports over the next couple days will be light. Like somebody mentioned on one of the forums today; guys watching and hanging on every new report and update is a lot like relying on the positional place of a NASCAR race on any given lap at the time. It frequently bears no resemblance to the final outcome of the race.
Posted by: |