Are you kidding me?
If you do a contest of any kind, do it right. For example if you run, you run - you don't shorten the length of the track just to be "faster". If you want to run 100m, run 100, not 90 or 80 or 50. In my mind this is absolutely stupid and defeats the purpose of benchmarking completely. Fastest score yes. But be honest about your methods.
Since yesterday was a holiday over here and I clearly had too much time on my hands, and in the spirit of the upcoming Olympic games (but with tongue firmly in cheek), I present :
"The Decathlon. A true(?) story"
----
Once upon a time there was a small country "A" who decided they wanted to host a fantastic sporting spectacle, as it would contribute to their country's economy and world recognition. On consideration they decided that they would host a decathlon as it would allow the spectators to see the widest variety of events. Unfortunately as they worked on their preparations they discovered that the costs involved were spiraling and becoming a real strain. If they could just find a strong partner then it would really help.
At this point they were approached by a large country "B" who said that in return for some minor considerations they would agree to share some of the costs of promoting the games. This seemed like a great idea to the hosts who felt that with this assistance they would now be able to make a really great event. In addition, since country "A" was so inexperienced in setting up a large event like this, "B" offered to send some of their "Decathlon Organization Specialists" (or DOSsers for short) to help arrange the events and make sure that this was a truly "cutting edge" decathlon. This also seemed like a great deal to "A" at the time and they gave "B" lots of freedom in helping them to set up what would now, surely, be the best decathlon ever.
The time came for the games, but on arriving to compete country "C" took a look at some very recently revised event details and they were horrified. They came to the hosts and mentioned that they had always been rather concerned with "B"s close involvement in the event, since "B"s athletes were also competing in it, but now that they had arrived it appeared that things were worse than they had feared. Even in their worst imaginings they really hadn't been expecting to be presented with a decathlon where several of the traditional events were completely missing and had now been replaced by five separate rounds of the high jump.
It was known that country "B"s athletes were particularly good at jumping, it being ingrained in their DNA by the shouting of their leaders. On checking the rules more closely "C" had also discovered that not only was the high jump being repeated multiple times, but the minimum qualifying bar had been raised to a height which only country
"B"s athletes had ever been known to clear in the past. Anyone who couldn't clear this height would therefore get no points in those events at all. "C" considered their athletes to be very good at the high jump, but the combination of the two changes would make it highly unlikely that they could make up the probable points gap to "B"s athletes after the five high jump stages, regardless of how good they might be in all of the remaining events.
Country "B"'s officials stated that their research showed that the only reason anybody really came to watch a decathlon was to see the athletes jumping not just very high, but
_really, really_ high, so by making these modifications they had simply been ensuring that this would be the best decathlon of all time.
After a long and uncomfortable pause "C"s officials then asked why the 1500 metres was among the events that had been removed - they clearly recalled that in the previous year "B" had been telling everyone that it was a tremendously important event and that their decathletes were the best at it. In such a "cutting edge" decathlon it seemed like a strange omission, and this year "C"s athletes had been training hard and were known to be
_really_ strong in the 1500 metres.
"B"s officials looked a little bit uncomfortable, but stated that while they still thought the 1500 metres was very important under the right circumstances, on reflection they had decided that it was really best left to the specialist athletes and that it didn't have much of a place in a decathlon. On being pressed on the matter they admitted that it was possible that they might change their minds again later in the year when some new athletes were coming up through the ranks.
In the end, since this was an independent event with no third party oversight it was clear that the hosts and "B" were free to set up the events however they chose, and there was no-one truly independent to whom any appeal could be lodged. Country "C" stated that they really didn't think that this was the sort of sporting event that the Greeks had originally had in mind, but they continued to participate since it was clear that their supporters would be pretty unhappy if they didn't get to see their athletes perform having paid for their tickets.
Unsurprisingly the athletes from Country "B" ended up taking both the gold and silver medals in the games, and their spectators went home very happy having thoroughly enjoyed the event. Country "C"s spectators were confused and a lot less happy, and they were left wondering why there needed to be quite so much mindless jumping, and what had happened to all the other events in which they knew their athletes excelled.
The press enjoyed the event a great deal and thought the overall organization had been exceptional, although a few of them did make the comment that there had perhaps been "a few more high jumps than were strictly necessary."
Country "A" was very happy to have hosted a successful games, and any controversy over the unusual arrangements didn't seem to have affected their ticket sales in the slightest.
----
The following year the event was held again, and a strange thing happened. Suddenly country "C"s athletes seemed to be much more competitive in the high jump events. Country "B" was surprised and alarmed by the situation, and after holding a detailed investigation they discovered that "C"s athletes were apparently using a new kind of shoe with four times the spring of the traditional shoes. They complained that such a technological change
really didn't seem very sporting as their athletes were still competing using the original shoes.
On being questioned about this "C" stated that they really felt that last year their spectators had been deprived of the true spectacle of seeing their athletes perform due to all the remarkable last minute rule changes, and that they had worked very hard to come up with a solution for this year so that their supporters could get a lot more enjoyment out of an event which they paid good money to watch. As had been made very clear to "C"s officials the previous year this was an independent event with no oversight, so on investigation they had found that as a result there didn't actually appear to be any official written rules about what shoes the athletes had to wear when competing. "C"'s officials then pointed out that from the stands and on television it was impossible to tell which athletes were wearing which shoes, so now everyone could just watch the athletes from both nations performing five great high jump events.
"C"s supporters were definitely able to enjoy the event much more this time around. "B"s athletes continued to perform just as well as they had before, but in the end the results and the medals ceremony were somewhat different.
The press commented on all the peculiar changes and controversy - it was obvious that "C"s spectators were now enjoying the games much more, although it did appear that some of "B"s supporters were not so happy with the changes. "C"s officials mentioned that they were allowing their spectators to vote on whether or not their athletes should use the new shoes, but they didn't see much chance that any of them would really want to go back to using the old shoes when given the choice.
It was rumored that an official from "B" had been heard to mumble "Next time we sponsor a decathlon there will be at least nine high jump events, and if they are very lucky we'll let them keep the pole vault."
Meanwhile, strange things were also happening elsewhere. More and more independent decathlons were popping up with different sponsors, and each one seemed to have a different mix of events, scoring or both. "B"s athletic federation were definitely upset by some of them where the 1500 metres now featured prominently, grumbling that perhaps the organizers hadn't got the memo that the 1500 metres was "so last year" and that this year it should be high jumps all the way.
After a while it really became very difficult to determine whose athletes were the best at the decathlon, as it was now so dependent on just which decathlon you went to see. Unfortunately by this time no-one was even able to remember what the original set of events was that composed a traditional decathlon, or how they should be scored...
----
Anyway - enough off topic from me. I hope the moderators will choose not to be too hard on me, and I now return you to your regularly scheduled arguments...
