Skip to content
2015 English Channel end of season CS&PF stats
loneswimmer
IrelandCharter Member
Forum member Mark Robson, provides his valuable end of season look at the 2015 CS&PF English Channel solo statistics* on his blog.
The really big stat is the big drop in successful solos this year (43 down from 62), proving, as the Channel has proven repeatedly, that anyone who says it's safe and predictable is talking out of their arse.
*Pending official ratification.
loneswimmer.com
Tagged:
Comments
thanks Donal..
Inspired by @mpfmark I had a crack at combining the stats for both the CSA and CS&PF solo and relay channel swims for the last 4 years.
You can also view/download this as a PDF from here:
http://lab.zoho.co.uk/lab/ec-channel-stats/English-Channel-Stats-2012-2015-A2.pdf
Could the drop in solo crossings be due to fewer solo swimmers and more relays?
I'd love to see success and failure rates. By pilot, too.
@JenA the total number of "Successful" relays has actually declined over the last three years: 2013 - 96, 2014 - 90, 2015 - 83. I believe the numbers were down this year because there was poor quality weather for July and Oct.
It is difficult to do a complete analysis of the trends as we only have access to statistics for "successful" swims.
Ideally to completely understand what is going on from year to year you would want to know the records for successful, DNF and DNS. Even than the DNS you would want it split between those who cancelled, those "blown out" and those who failed to complete the paperwork on time.
It would also be good to know the tide booked V's the tide swam so you could see those who where delayed.
@JenA "failure"?
I only use DNF or "not successful".
loneswimmer.com
@loneswimmer: I only meant success/failure in the mathematical sense -- Bernoulli trials, statistical probability, binary outcomes... Not in any sort of judgemental way. In mathematics, "success and failure are merely labels for the two outcomes, and should not be construed literally" (to quote from the Bernoulli article).
Added the Pilot statistics and a few other things. I think I got a bit carried away... :-/
Updated PDF here: http://bit.ly/1jLn6s8
@JenA & @loneswimmer I noticed this afternoon that the CSA Website now publishes DNFs but it calls them "unsuccessful" and "Unratified". It is not displayed by default and only available for 2014 onwards but if you go to the Advanced Search Options you will see that there is an option to:
"Only show unsuccessful swims (available from 2014)"
Selecting it and nothing else shows that there were 59 CSA DNFs for 2014/2015
http://www.channelswimmingassociation.com/swims/?page=1&all=1
Wow, @phodgeszoho... we can suss out from that link that there were 22 solo unsuccessful swims, and there were 53 solo successful swims for the CSA in 2015. That's a 71% completion rate.
Inspired by @phodgeszoho. I grabbed the CSA's data, and the CS&PF's definitions of the neap and spring tides. I excluded one unsuccessful swim in May, because the CS&PF didn't state if it was a spring or neap tide.
This was a pretty manual task, and I'm not immune to copy/paste/formula errors, so it should be taken with a grain of salt. Still... very interesting data, no?
I'm happy to forward my spreadsheet ( @evmo ?) if someone wants to review/analyse/host it.
This is all rather brilliant and beyond my capabilities. BUT.. 4 years in a sport that goes back as a commercial venture to the what? 1950's?.. How far back can anyone of you 'grab data". I know my year, 2000, it was a less than %50 success rate for solos... The breakout by pilots is fascinating as well.
Wouldn't unratified also include successful swimmers who use non standard equipment? i.e. wetsuits? Though can't remember which of CSA and CS&PF allow non standard swimmers.
http://notdrowningswimming.com - open water adventures of a very ordinary swimmer
@dc_in_sf: the 2015 CSA data shows the tracks associated with the swims, and I observed that each swim was aborted mid-channel. The data wouldn't include swimmers who never left shore.
Interestingly, the CSA ratified a wetsuited swim in 2014. It was explained that the swimmer needed the wetsuit for health reasons. (???) [ News bite,
Swim result ]
The CSA posts limited data for all swims (right back to our dear Webb), but pilots and tracks seem to have been introduced in the 2014 and 2015 data, respectively.
this years CSA stats by Pilot have been added post post script to the initial post..
there is huge data on the cspf website under swimmer stats and swimmer stats 2 dating back to webb, every swim is included regardless of organisation, the graphs are fascinating and detailed Boris and the team have clearly spent lots of time doing the maths for our benefit..
go have a closer look:-)
http://cspf.co.uk/solo-swims-statistics
and
http://cspf.co.uk/solo-swims-statistics-2
See, I just got you guys to do my work..I am a DN in the making???
Thanks. It will be good bedtime reading.:)
Great info, very interesting, many thanks.
Phil that is awesome
Another night of insomnia fuelled boredom resulted in a second page being added to the EC Stats PDF. This one details the 2015 successful swims broken down by day, type, sex, organisation and speed.
Also added tide, wind and air/water temp data.
Updated PDF here: http://bit.ly/1jLn6s8
amazing what chloe does to the bell curve!
@greggbolsinger good point. Now I am curious to see how much an effect she had.
If you remove Chloë's 6 crossings than the CSA Female average goes from 12:10 up to 12:51 and the average for all female solo crossings goes from to 13:42 up to 14:19, which is now the slower than the male's average of 14:02.
The overall Solo crossing average goes from 13:55 to 14:08. :-)