real biathlon
    • Athletes
    • Teams
    • Races
    • Seasons
    • Scores
    • Records
    • Blog(current)
    • More
      Patreon Content Videos Explanations Shortcuts
      Error Report
      Privacy Policy About
    •     
  • Forum
  • Patreon
  • X
  • YouTube
    Instagram
    Facebook

Recent Articles

  • Junior + U23 Development Index – Men
  • Junior + U23 Development Index – Women
  • The Path to GOAT Status
  • Most improved athletes this winter
  • New biathlon point system

Categories

  • Biathlon Media
  • Biathlon News
  • Long-term trends
  • Statistical analysis
  • Website updates

Archives

  • 2024
    • March
  • 2023
    • March
  • 2022
    • December
    • June
    • May
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2021
    • December
    • November
    • September
    • July
    • June
    • May
    • April
    • March
    • February
    • January
  • 2020
    • December
    • November
    • August
    • June
    • March
  • 2015
    • December
  • 2013
    • August
    • July
  • 2012
    • July

Search Articles

Recent Tweets

Tweets by realbiathlon

Author: real biathlon

Creator of the website realbiathlon.com

Shooting Efficiency comparison: First trimester 2019–20 vs. First trimester 2020–21

Posted on 2021-01-07 | by real biathlon | Leave a Comment on Shooting Efficiency comparison: First trimester 2019–20 vs. First trimester 2020–21

Following up on my last post on skiing speed, this is a comparison of overall shooting quality between trimester 1 of last season and trimester 1 this winter. Shooting Efficiency is an attempt to combine shooting accuracy and shooting time. For more details how it’s calculated, see here.

If you can’t find a specific athlete, you can always look up the complete World Cup field (also available per trimester) for the ongoing season (as well as all previous seasons) here:

  • 2020–21 Shooting Efficiency: Men | Women

Note: Only athletes with at least 4 non-team races in trimester 1 of both the previous and the current season are included in the tables below. Shooting Efficiency is an overall shooting score, combining shooting accuracy and shooting time. It is the theoretical average time an athlete loses through shooting (based on hit rate, range time and potential penalty loops)


Men

Erik Lesser is the most improved shooter among regular starters, losing 2:06.6 min in a theoretical sprint at the range. He has always been fast, which hasn’t changed this year, however, his accuracy is currently at a career high (87.9%). Simon Eder is the best shooter overall (incredible 96.4% hit rate), also much improved over last year. Sturla Holm Lægreid isn’t far behind (1:56.2 min) – he doesn’t show up in the table, because his first World Cup race was in March. Johannes Thingnes Bø has been struggling with his shooting so far, his accuracy is down 4.2% (albeit on a very high level), plus he shoots 2.0s slower.

Changes in Shooting Efficiency compared to 2019–20 | World Cup Trimester 1

NoFamily NameGiven NameNationRacesHit RateRange TimePenalty LoopTime Loss
Sprint
Change
NoFamily NameGiven NameNationRacesHit RateRange TimePenalty LoopTime Loss
Sprint
Change
1LesserErikGER
987.8650.021.92:06.6-35.1
2GuigonnatAntoninFRA
990.7152.722.92:06.6-21.5
3StroliaVytautasLTU
780.0055.022.92:35.7-21.4
4EderSimonAUT
996.4349.323.11:46.9-19.4
5SamuelssonSebastianSWE
989.2953.321.32:09.4-16.6
6HasillaTomasSVK
677.5053.723.82:40.9-14.2
7MoravecOndrejCZE
987.1450.622.72:10.3-13.8
8PonsiluomaMartinSWE
981.4350.121.42:20.0-11.4
9NelinJesperSWE
975.7153.321.72:39.3-11.2
10KrcmarMichalCZE
990.0053.621.42:08.5-10.3
11WegerBenjaminSUI
986.4352.622.52:15.8-9.0
12ErmitsKalevEST
876.6753.322.92:39.9-8.4
13GaranichevEvgeniyRUS
593.7552.024.41:59.2-6.2
14DombrovskiKarolLTU
787.0056.622.72:22.7-5.6
15SinapovAntonBUL
680.0051.524.72:32.4-5.2
16HoferLukasITA
982.8651.520.02:17.4-5.1
17FakJakovSLO
992.1451.721.42:00.3-2.0
18DollBenediktGER
987.1450.822.02:09.9-1.7
19Fillon MailletQuentinFRA
992.1450.121.61:57.3-1.0
20ChristiansenVetle SjaastadNOR
990.0053.621.82:09.0-0.4
21FemlingPeppeSWE
881.6750.122.52:21.5-0.1
22NordgrenLeifUSA
681.2553.724.12:32.6-0.0
23PrymaArtemUKR
880.0050.923.12:28.1+1.4
24LatypovEduardRUS
985.0055.121.92:22.9+1.8
25BormoliniThomasITA
587.1452.921.82:13.8+1.9
26HiidensaloOlliFIN
676.2555.723.12:46.1+2.1
27ClaudeFabienFRA
980.0050.921.02:23.8+2.5
28RastorgujevsAndrejsLAT
880.8353.721.42:28.4+3.5
29DohertySeanUSA
880.0052.122.72:29.5+5.4
30JacquelinEmilienFRA
990.0049.220.41:58.7+6.1
31GowScottCAN
676.2550.723.62:37.5+6.2
32EberhardJulianAUT
878.3352.321.62:31.3+6.5
33PidruchnyiDmytroUKR
880.0049.222.52:23.5+9.2
34YaliotnauRamanBLR
769.0054.222.92:59.6+9.6
35PeifferArndGER
790.0052.421.92:06.6+10.6
36DaleJohannesNOR
987.1456.322.22:21.0+11.1
37SeppalaTeroFIN
878.3353.421.52:33.3+11.4
38DesthieuxSimonFRA
983.5751.621.52:18.7+11.6
39DovzanMihaSLO
686.2549.424.12:11.8+11.9
40TkalenkoRuslanUKR
576.6749.422.72:31.7+13.0
41KuehnJohannesGER
880.0056.020.72:33.4+13.1
42LeitnerFelixAUT
784.0058.222.62:32.6+13.3
43IlievVladimirBUL
675.0054.522.02:44.2+13.4
44BjoentegaardErlendNOR
585.7155.720.92:21.1+14.7
45VaclavikAdamCZE
673.7556.123.52:54.0+14.8
46BocharnikovSergeyBLR
880.8353.424.82:34.3+16.4
47GuzikGrzegorzPOL
772.0052.422.72:48.5+17.4
48WindischDominikITA
575.7155.220.92:41.1+17.6
49TrsanRokSLO
685.5649.823.42:13.4+18.0
50EliseevMatveyRUS
990.0049.722.52:01.8+18.5
51BoeTarjeiNOR
985.7153.520.62:16.4+18.8
52BoeJohannes ThingnesNOR
987.8652.021.32:09.8+20.8
53LangerThierryBEL
781.0054.522.32:31.5+23.5
54DudchenkoAntonUKR
680.0055.324.42:39.6+25.9
55ClaudeFlorentBEL
677.5058.521.82:46.2+29.5
56BauerKlemenSLO
774.0049.923.22:40.1+30.4
57LoginovAlexanderRUS
985.0051.722.42:16.9+30.8
58StvrteckyJakubCZE
764.0058.821.73:15.7+38.8


Women

Suvi Minkkinen is the most improved among women – she had a horrible December 2019, where she only managed to hit 66.0% of her targets. World Cup leader, Marte Olsbu Røiseland, is currently 11.9% more accurate than during trimester 1 last season. The results for Hanna Öberg (best shot overall) haven’t changed much, neither has the efficiency of Dorothea Wierer; her problems are almost exclusively skiing-related. Denise Herrmann is roughly 10s faster overall at the range (but in a sprint her 1.5% slower skiing loses her almost twice as much on the tracks).

Changes in Shooting Efficiency compared to 2019–20 | World Cup Trimester 1

NoFamily NameGiven NameNationRacesHit RateRange TimePenalty LoopTime Loss
Sprint
Change
NoFamily NameGiven NameNationRacesHit RateRange TimePenalty LoopTime Loss
Sprint
Change
1MinkkinenSuviFIN
785.0052.725.92:24.3-46.1
2FrolinaAnnaKOR
676.2555.725.72:52.4-42.3
3KadevaDanielaBUL
585.0054.927.12:30.4-32.0
4KocerginaNataljaLTU
580.0057.126.82:47.8-31.1
5DunkleeSusanUSA
878.3355.826.22:48.4-28.2
6RoeiselandMarte OlsbuNOR
988.5752.223.92:11.8-26.8
7ReidJoanneUSA
683.751:00.725.12:42.1-20.3
8ColomboCarolineFRA
881.6754.425.52:35.6-19.1
9TomingasTuuliEST
783.0058.025.32:39.0-17.2
10TachizakiFuyukoJPN
885.0059.225.92:37.2-16.2
11AlimbekavaDzinaraBLR
990.0054.724.02:13.4-15.4
12LunderEmmaCAN
991.4352.525.12:06.6-14.2
13CadurischIreneSUI
682.5049.525.82:24.3-13.4
14OebergElviraSWE
986.4353.424.52:20.1-13.0
15SemerenkoValentinaUKR
590.0052.825.62:11.2-11.6
16HerrmannDeniseGER
983.5754.223.72:27.4-10.4
17KlemencicPolonaSLO
675.0056.725.92:58.1-9.0
18HinzVanessaGER
786.0055.125.42:25.7-8.6
19SchwaigerJuliaAUT
787.0056.725.32:26.3-8.0
20KnottenKaroline OffigstadNOR
991.4351.125.52:04.0-7.8
21LescinskaiteGabrieleLTU
585.001:01.125.72:40.7-6.7
22OebergHannaSWE
990.0049.624.32:03.5-5.1
23DavidovaMarketaCZE
982.1457.124.02:37.0-4.4
24KryukoIrynaBLR
791.251:00.325.22:22.6-3.6
25Braisaz-BouchetJustineFRA
980.7156.622.92:37.5-2.7
26WiererDorotheaITA
991.4351.324.52:03.6-1.2
27Hojnisz-StaregaMonikaPOL
686.6755.725.12:24.8-1.1
28GasparinElisaSUI
782.0053.125.12:31.3-0.3
29EganClareUSA
985.0059.224.32:34.8+2.1
30HaeckiLenaSUI
879.1750.324.92:32.6+2.8
31MironovaSvetlanaRUS
678.7555.424.62:43.0+4.9
32TodorovaMilenaBUL
876.6756.824.72:51.2+5.7
33GasparinAitaSUI
784.0053.726.22:29.3+7.4
34HauserLisa TheresaAUT
984.2953.623.42:24.1+7.9
35BescondAnaisFRA
982.8657.823.62:36.1+8.0
36SimonJuliaFRA
982.8650.124.82:22.7+8.6
37BrorssonMonaSWE
885.8354.424.82:24.0+8.8
38SolaHannaBLR
870.7752.924.32:56.8+9.0
39VittozziLisaITA
982.1454.323.92:31.3+9.9
40PreussFranziskaGER
986.4351.823.62:15.7+10.7
41EckhoffTirilNOR
984.2955.723.72:28.5+11.0
42BeaudrySarahCAN
778.0052.626.42:43.4+13.2
43SanfilippoFedericaITA
575.7158.425.62:58.9+13.2
44ZukKamilaPOL
778.001:01.125.72:58.7+14.0
45EderMariFIN
673.751:01.724.93:08.7+14.1
46TandrevoldIngrid LandmarkNOR
985.7156.423.82:26.8+14.2
47OjaReginaEST
571.6753.724.52:56.9+14.4
48PuskarcikovaEvaCZE
780.0051.327.42:37.3+14.4
49JislovaJessicaCZE
778.0057.225.92:51.4+15.6
50GasparinSelinaSUI
675.0058.024.42:57.0+15.7
51BlashkoDaryaUKR
992.1456.926.02:14.1+17.0
52PerssonLinnSWE
985.0054.324.62:25.5+19.9
53DzhimaYuliiaUKR
786.0056.925.22:29.0+20.1
54VoroninaTamaraRUS
584.0052.226.62:27.1+21.2
55PidhrushnaOlenaUKR
584.2955.726.52:33.0+21.2
56ZbylutKingaPOL
774.0056.724.72:57.6+24.1
57CharvatovaLucieCZE
763.7552.123.93:10.9+28.1
58TalihaermJohannaEST
676.251:00.826.33:03.9+31.3
59ChevalierChloeFRA
879.1758.824.52:48.7+32.6
60InnerhoferKatharinaAUT
865.8355.623.93:12.8+38.0

Posted in Statistical analysis | Tagged 2019–20 season, 2020–21 season, shooting

Ski speed comparison: First trimester 2019–20 vs. First trimester 2020–21

Posted on 2021-01-05 | by real biathlon | 2 Comments on Ski speed comparison: First trimester 2019–20 vs. First trimester 2020–21

In the past, I often compared changes in ski speed to the entire previous season, which might be slightly deceiving, especially at the beginning of a season. Some athletes start particularly strong before Christmas, others might do better late in a season, when parts of the field are already tired. Potentially, it’s a better idea to only compare the same World Cup period. Here I did this specifically for World Cup trimester 1 (roughly December 2019 vs. December 2020).

I used the percentage back from the top 30 median for this. Comparisons against the entire field are problematic this year, because of temporary rule changes (each National Federation can register two athletes who have not fulfilled the qualification criteria). That makes the whole field slightly slower.

If you can’t find a specific athlete, you can always look up the complete World Cup field (also available per trimester) for the ongoing season (as well as all previous seasons) here:

  • Ski speed: Men | Women

Note: Only athletes with at least 5 non-team races in trimester 1 of both the previous and the current season are included in the tables below. “Back from Top30 median” is the percentage back from each race’s top 30 median Course Time (arithmetic mean per season).


Men

Martin Ponsiluoma and Sebastian Samuelsson are the most improved overall. Both lowered their average ski rank by at least 24 positions, plus they are skiing 3.5% and 3.0% faster respectively (compared to their speed last December). Veteran Jakov Fak (his 15th World Cup season) is currently on his best ski form in 5 years. World Cup leader, Johannes Thingnes Bø, is very close to his level from last December (he is slightly ahead).

Quentin Fillon Maillet started the season as one of the favorites, but he is not at his peak form yet; his hit rate is at a career high right now, but his speed has declined a lot compared to December 2019 (average ski rank almost doubled). For this pre-Christmas period, Germany and France have only one athlete each who improved season-to-season: Erik Lesser (only started in 4 races in December 2019) and Fabien Claude, respectively.

Changes in Ski Speed compared to 2019–20 season | World Cup Trimester 1

NoFamily NameGiven NameNationRacesSki Rank
(avg)
Changeback from
Top30 median
(in %)
Change
NoFamily NameGiven NameNationRacesSki Rank
(avg)
Changeback from
Top30 median
(in %)
Change
1PonsiluomaMartinSWE
95.7-24.3-1.66-3.49
2SamuelssonSebastianSWE
98.2-25.9-1.13-2.99
3LatypovEduardRUS
918.9-26.3+0.40-2.78
4BocharnikovSergeyBLR
827.5-21.8+1.06-2.49
5FakJakovSLO
920.0-17.5+0.46-1.84
6ChristiansenVetle SjaastadNOR
913.3-12.8-0.63-1.67
7DaleJohannesNOR
96.1-8.9-1.97-1.61
8LangerThierryBEL
751.7-8.7+3.72-1.48
9NelinJesperSWE
912.2-14.2-0.44-1.44
10DombrovskiKarolLTU
761.1-11.5+4.84-1.40
11DohertySeanUSA
849.6-11.7+3.64-1.17
12EliseevMatveyRUS
935.8+4.3+2.15-1.14
13WegerBenjaminSUI
920.2-7.8+0.58-0.87
14LoginovAlexanderRUS
913.7-5.9-0.25-0.76
15GuzikGrzegorzPOL
756.4-11.2+4.29-0.73
16NordgrenLeifUSA
651.8-3.3+3.60-0.67
17GaranichevEvgeniyRUS
533.8-8.2+2.27-0.60
18TrsanRokSLO
667.0-12.8+5.98-0.41
19BoeJohannes ThingnesNOR
92.4-2.1-2.66-0.24
20VaclavikAdamCZE
643.8-1.0+2.78-0.22
21PrymaArtemUKR
836.0+1.0+2.13-0.13
22ClaudeFabienFRA
910.2-1.8-0.68-0.13
23DovzanMihaSLO
678.7+2.5+7.08-0.13
24HiidensaloOlliFIN
647.3-0.7+3.27-0.12
25BoeTarjeiNOR
94.6-1.4-1.79-0.08
26GuigonnatAntoninFRA
931.0+1.7+1.60+0.06
27FemlingPeppeSWE
851.9-2.1+3.65+0.11
28BormoliniThomasITA
544.4+2.0+2.75+0.15
29BjoentegaardErlendNOR
512.6+0.5-0.43+0.19
30PeifferArndGER
718.0+2.2+0.17+0.20
31JacquelinEmilienFRA
910.2+0.9-0.81+0.22
32StvrteckyJakubCZE
733.0+4.0+1.69+0.23
33SeppalaTeroFIN
830.3+4.8+1.39+0.31
34BauerKlemenSLO
747.9-0.9+4.05+0.33
35RastorgujevsAndrejsLAT
820.6+4.1+0.49+0.54
36KrcmarMichalCZE
932.1+9.7+1.59+0.57
37HoferLukasITA
913.3+1.8-0.25+0.62
38DudchenkoAntonUKR
660.2+7.3+4.55+0.75
39EderSimonAUT
939.2+6.2+2.58+0.78
40LeitnerFelixAUT
736.4+8.4+2.00+0.79
41ClaudeFlorentBEL
646.0+14.3+3.05+0.79
42DollBenediktGER
916.0+5.6+0.00+0.84
43SinapovAntonBUL
668.2-1.3+6.13+0.91
44StroliaVytautasLTU
749.4+5.6+3.83+0.94
45Fillon MailletQuentinFRA
911.0+4.1-0.64+1.28
46WindischDominikITA
534.4+13.7+1.87+1.46
47EberhardJulianAUT
821.6+10.8+0.70+1.51
48ErmitsKalevEST
858.0+10.0+4.88+1.67
49KuehnJohannesGER
821.6+14.3+0.57+1.74
50PidruchnyiDmytroUKR
843.5+20.9+2.99+1.82
51DesthieuxSimonFRA
919.6+11.0+0.45+1.98
52TkalenkoRuslanUKR
575.4+20.4+6.16+2.22
53IlievVladimirBUL
641.8+23.3+2.61+2.39


Women

Among regular starters, Dzinara Alimbekava is by far the most improved, 5.0% faster than last season (plus her average ski rank is now an incredible 44.8 positions lower!). Lisa Theresa Hauser and Franziska Preuß stood out more for their (fast) shooting in the past, but they are both among the top 15 skiers at the moment. Hauser’s transformation is particularly remarkable (over 2% faster than any of her previous 7 seasons), Preuß was close to this level before (five years ago).

World Cup leader and overall fastest skier, Marte Olsbu Røiseland, is missing in the table below, because she only appeared in 4 races in December 2019. She is actually slower compared to her speed at the start of the 2019–20 season (+0.5%). Last year’s top skier, Denise Herrmann, is struggling to get going; her average ski rank in trimester 1 last season was 4.5, now it’s 8.3. Dorothea Wierer was the 9th fastest skier last season, now she’s ranked 23rd.

Changes in Ski Speed compared to 2019–20 season | World Cup Trimester 1

NoFamily NameGiven NameNationRacesSki Rank
(avg)
Changeback from
Top30 median
(in %)
Change
NoFamily NameGiven NameNationRacesSki Rank
(avg)
Changeback from
Top30 median
(in %)
Change
1AlimbekavaDzinaraBLR
914.2-44.8-0.33-5.02
2BeaudrySarahCAN
758.9-21.1+4.54-4.11
3ChevalierChloeFRA
822.6-34.7+0.99-3.25
4BlashkoDaryaUKR
943.9-12.1+3.64-2.65
5HauserLisa TheresaAUT
912.7-24.0-0.36-2.47
6OebergElviraSWE
96.7-12.3-1.64-2.33
7PreussFranziskaGER
912.1-8.4-0.56-1.01
8GasparinElisaSUI
745.6-9.2+3.09-0.99
9SchwaigerJuliaAUT
742.9-8.7+2.89-0.94
10EganClareUSA
928.1-8.7+1.25-0.93
11BescondAnaisFRA
916.0-10.5+0.16-0.85
12KnottenKaroline OffigstadNOR
932.9-3.7+1.89-0.79
13CadurischIreneSUI
667.2-2.8+6.03-0.53
14OebergHannaSWE
912.0-1.8-0.72-0.49
15ColomboCarolineFRA
828.4-5.5+1.43-0.41
16TandrevoldIngrid LandmarkNOR
97.1-4.6-1.28-0.29
17PerssonLinnSWE
919.3-3.1+0.33-0.28
18LunderEmmaCAN
937.1-3.7+2.41-0.26
19GasparinSelinaSUI
619.7-1.7+0.44-0.14
20GasparinAitaSUI
747.6+5.1+3.48-0.06
21DavidovaMarketaCZE
96.9-1.1-1.43-0.02
22CharvatovaLucieCZE
722.8+1.1+0.84+0.08
23JislovaJessicaCZE
752.0+3.5+3.77+0.16
24SimonJuliaFRA
919.3+5.6-0.15+0.17
25VoroninaTamaraRUS
568.8+7.4+5.44+0.23
26TalihaermJohannaEST
655.7+0.2+4.88+0.30
27BrorssonMonaSWE
828.9+2.7+1.55+0.35
28InnerhoferKatharinaAUT
821.8+1.4+0.83+0.39
29Braisaz-BouchetJustineFRA
95.8-0.2-1.62+0.48
30ZukKamilaPOL
734.9+6.9+1.99+0.58
31EckhoffTirilNOR
95.6+1.3-1.94+0.73
32VittozziLisaITA
931.4+8.0+1.82+0.84
33OjaReginaEST
576.0+11.0+6.70+0.89
34KryukoIrynaBLR
737.5+11.8+2.20+1.02
35HerrmannDeniseGER
98.3+3.8-1.25+1.09
36ZbylutKingaPOL
761.4+8.9+5.21+1.25
37TachizakiFuyukoJPN
848.3+7.5+3.91+1.33
38EderMariFIN
618.7+7.2+0.30+1.35
39KocerginaNataljaLTU
583.0+14.0+7.64+1.35
40WiererDorotheaITA
921.1+12.0+0.61+1.66
41HinzVanessaGER
745.0+17.0+3.03+1.77
42MironovaSvetlanaRUS
625.5+15.1+1.02+1.79
43SanfilippoFedericaITA
550.8+12.6+4.02+1.85
44SemerenkoValentinaUKR
555.5+17.5+4.22+2.04
45PidhrushnaOlenaUKR
543.6+19.0+3.21+2.14
46HaeckiLenaSUI
832.3+22.7+1.86+2.62
47PuskarcikovaEvaCZE
752.4+27.4+4.42+3.39

One thing that stands out is how well Norway and Sweden are doing (both men and women). Every athlete of those two nations either improved (often significantly), or at least managed to maintain their previous level; not a single athlete got notably worse.

Posted in Statistical analysis | Tagged 2019–20 season, 2020–21 season, skiing

Is Oberhof the most challenging venue on the World Cup tour?

Posted on 2020-12-28 | by real biathlon | Leave a Comment on Is Oberhof the most challenging venue on the World Cup tour?

During the Christmas break, I worked on compiling a new data set: Statistics for each World Cup location. The full stats are available as bonus content (if you are interested in that you might have a look at the real biathlon Patreon page). Here’s a summary and some examples.

The upcoming World Cup stop, Oberhof, is probably not the most popular location among athletes, due to its notoriously bad weather, but the Oberhof shooting range (in parts because of the weather) has always been one of the most interesting. Here’s the data to back that up. Not only is Oberhof the venue with the lowest average hit rate (75.1%), it also has the highest average shooting time (36.8s) of regular World Cup venues (not including Brezno-Osrblie, which held its last race in 2006, when shooting times where generally slower than they are now).

All-time shooting results for regular Biathlon World Cup venues

VenueNationFirst
Year
Last
Year
RacesTotal
hit rate
(in %)
Prone
hit rate
(in %)
Standing
hit rate
(in %)
Shooting
Time
(in sec)
Prone
Time
(in sec)
Standing
Time
(in sec)
Antholz-AnterselvaITA
1975202023877.681.274.132.933.531.9
RuhpoldingGER
1978202023580.683.977.432.933.632.3
HochfilzenAUT
1978202118978.381.675.135.436.134.7
Oslo HolmenkollenNOR
1983201917280.082.577.630.531.829.2
OestersundSWE
1970202016878.481.875.135.337.533.1
OberhofGER
1984202016175.178.971.436.836.736.4
PokljukaSLO
1993202015079.682.976.333.733.434.1
KontiolahtiFIN
199020219578.581.775.433.534.232.4
Khanty-MansiyskRUS
200020167979.282.376.132.933.532.2
Brezno-OsrblieSVK
199620066079.582.976.138.435.341.4
LahtiFIN
198020075578.780.876.531.633.130.0
Nove MestoCZE
201220204179.282.875.731.632.630.6
PyeongChangKOR
200820183377.881.374.334.835.434.2
CanmoreCAN
198720192776.879.574.134.535.533.5
Soldier Hollow, UtahUSA
200120192080.583.977.233.834.333.3
Annecy-Le Grand BornandFRA
201420201883.285.880.728.930.127.7
SochiRUS
201320141783.686.081.130.731.529.9
Cesana San SicarioITA
200520061678.180.975.434.135.332.9
WhistlerCAN
200920101682.184.979.433.434.032.8
Fort Kent, MEUSA
200420111281.184.278.029.230.627.8
Presque Isle, MEUSA
201120161176.980.673.233.934.832.9
TrondheimNOR
20092009683.385.680.929.030.427.7
TyumenRUS
20182018683.785.581.928.629.827.4

Although I didn’t include the data here, it’s worth pointing out that Oberhof isn’t just challenging at the range, it also has one of the most difficult and selective tracks: on average, 13.1 of the top 30 athletes ski outside a +/- 30 sec range of the median – also the highest for any venue with more than 30 World Cup races.

The other German location, Ruhpolding, is almost the polar opposite; arguably the easiest regular World Cup range (average shooting percentage of 80.6%). Le Grand Bornand has an even higher hit rate (83.2%), but has also staged over 200 races less; it’s likely that percentage will regress to the mean at least somewhat if more events are held there. Antholz is noteworthy as well, having a relatively fast average shooting time, but a poor average hit rate; apparently the nice weather there combined with the altitude is deceptive.

Overall hit rate (including relays) | Oberhof vs. Hochfilzen

In the chart above you can see a comparison for overall hit rates (per race, 10 race moving average) for the last and the upcoming World Cup stops. Hochfilzen (on average) had roughly 5% better shooting results in the last 15 years.

Ski Speed (in km/h) in Oberhof | Men’s Non-Team races

Here’s the winner’s ski speed (in km/h) for men’s non-team events in Oberhof. Clearly, there are huge differences between seasons (a good example why the physical speed isn’t a great data point for long-term ski speed comparisons).

Total Shooting Time comparison | Hochfilzen vs. Oberhof

Lastly, I added a chart of the average total shooting times (per race, 10 race moving average). Hochfilzen and Oberhof are actually closer in that category, however, the shooting times in Hochfilzen got faster over the last decade, while there is no such trend in Oberhof.

Posted in Long-term trends, Statistical analysis | Tagged shooting

New features: box plots and course profiles

Posted on 2020-12-10 | by real biathlon | Leave a Comment on New features: box plots and course profiles

I made a few updates to the site, adding box plots to athlete and team stats pages, course profiles for all World Cup 3.3 km loops and an explanation page for the most used stats (courses and explanations can be found in the navigation bar ▷ More).

The box plot allows quick graphical examination of one or more data sets and is useful for comparing distributions between several groups or sets of data. Mathematically speaking, it offers a more robust measure than a single value, which is otherwise used on this site. A box plot is a standardized way of displaying a data set based on a five-number summary: minimum, lower quartile (Q1), median, upper quartile (Q3) and maximum. The box is drawn from Q1 to Q3 with a horizontal line drawn in the middle to denote the median.

The distance between the upper and lower quartiles is known as the Interquartile range (IQR). From above the upper quartile, a distance of 1.5 times the IQR is measured out and a whisker is drawn up to the largest observed point from the dataset that falls within this distance. Similarly, a distance of 1.5 times the IQR is measured out below the lower quartile and a whisker is drawn up to the lower observed point from the dataset that falls within this distance. All other observed points are plotted as outliers.

The data for each athlete’s box plots can be filtered by season, discipline or even more precisely with a time range slider if you select “Specified Range“. Every single stat category (all except the first five in the dropdown list) also allow a per Season series visualization (the one you can see above).

Forum member PolitiskTeoriFan made these nice looking course profiles and agreed to have them posted here. Thanks a lot for that! I created a new page where you can click through all of them. Unfortunately, visualizations exist only for the 3.3km loops right now. However, they should still be useful, even for other races. At most venues this 3.3km loop is usually just an extension of shorter loops and you can use the split time positions for orientation; they rarely change between races.

Lastly, I added a page with general explanations for all major statistics. This was previously only available (hidden) under the info icon on the seasons stats page.

Posted in Website updates

Support real biathlon on Patreon

Posted on 2020-12-04 | by real biathlon | 2 Comments on Support real biathlon on Patreon

You can now support real biathlon on PATREON. For your troubles, you get bonus statistics, direct database access and the knowledge that your support helps keep the website running and all statistics up to date.

Frankly, I feel a bit strange asking for contributions, but after some pretty high traffic for this site during the initial World Cup weekend, I fear that after putting a lot of time into this project in the summer, I now might have to pay for it in the winter – specifically covering costs for exceeding free-tier database limits. The ads on this site don’t generate a lot of money, so after thinking about it for a while, I decided to give this Patreon idea a try.

Since I didn’t just want to ask for donations with nothing in return, I came up with a few Patreon rewards I believe should be interesting for biathlon enthusiasts. I added a new page realbiathlon.com/patreon – you can get the password as a patron. Also, there’s the option to get direct database access; if that’s something you are interested in.

These are the bonus statistics I set up initially (there will probably be more later):

  • Stats per Nation: All-time results and data for each country in individual events
  • Season-to-Season Changes: Comparisons across seasons for most athlete statistics
  • Race Projections: Predictions for each discipline and event based on season stats
  • Long-term trends: Performance trends in ski speed, shooting accuracy and shooting pace

I hope most of these additional stats are quite useful and interesting. I compiled another data set for each national team, but this time with results not for relays, but for all non-team events per nation, including (averaged) shooting and skiing data.

France Men | Top 3 per race (10 race moving average)

Here are two examples of available bonus statistics: The first chart shows the French results declining a lot after Raphaël Poirée‘s retirement, but currently they are doing a lot better compensating for Martin Fourcade‘s absence. Germany’s women on the other hand had their peak in the mid-2000s (with over 20% of their athletes on the podium), and a steep decline after Magdalena Neuner‘s retirement.

Germany Women | Results per race

I have already used some of the other stats I created in recent posts, namely Ski Speed comparison season-to-season or Projection for the season opener; that should give you an idea what to expect (available for many other categories and seasons). Examples for long term biathlon trends can be seen here.

Should you be interested in digging into the data for yourself, I set up a way to allow direct access to the real biathlon databases in several programming languages (Java, Python, C#, C++, C, R) – please keep in mind you will need at least some programming skill to utilize them. All are MongoDB (NoSQL) databases hosted on MongoDB Atlas (data is in JSON format).

One thing I was especially unsure about was finding appropriate tier levels. I set up the higher tiers more as a joke – please only consider them if you are looking for a quick way to get rid of your money. 😉

real biathlon on PATREON

Posted in Website updates

Posts navigation

Older posts
Newer posts

Recent Articles

  • Junior + U23 Development Index – Men
  • Junior + U23 Development Index – Women
  • The Path to GOAT Status
  • Most improved athletes this winter
  • New biathlon point system

Categories

  • Biathlon Media
  • Biathlon News
  • Long-term trends
  • Statistical analysis
  • Website updates

Archives by Month

  • 2024: J F M A M J J A S O N D
  • 2023: J F M A M J J A S O N D
  • 2022: J F M A M J J A S O N D
  • 2021: J F M A M J J A S O N D
  • 2020: J F M A M J J A S O N D
  • 2015: J F M A M J J A S O N D
  • 2013: J F M A M J J A S O N D
  • 2012: J F M A M J J A S O N D

Search Articles