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

Olympic medals in biathlon (1960 – 2018)

Posted on 2022-01-12 | by real biathlon | Leave a Comment on Olympic medals in biathlon (1960 – 2018)

All medals (men and women)

Individual gold medals (men and women)

Posted in Biathlon Media, Long-term trends | Tagged results

Is One Shot Like Any Other In Relays In Biathlon?

Posted on 2022-01-09 | by biathlonanalytics | Leave a Comment on Is One Shot Like Any Other In Relays In Biathlon?

Introduction

In my last article, “Is one shot like any other in biathlon?“, I looked at the hit rates for every shot in biathlon for non-team races. The following looks at hit rates again, but this time for Relays. Relays are different in the sense that every shooting has three extra rounds that can be manually reloaded, so determining which shots were hits and which were misses works a little differently.

I also looked at the data to see if I could link the hit rates to pressure. But again the three reloads and also the fact that we are dealing with multiple athletes per relay team, puts a whole new perspective on that.

Data

Unfortunately, I found that the data I used for non-team races to determine per shot if it was a hit or miss, was not usable for determining the same for relay races. What I need for relays is only available since the 2020-2021 season. To be more specific, what I need is tracking of which target is hit by which shot.

For example, since the 2020-2021 season, a shooting result can look like 57621. This means the alpha target was hit with the fifth shot, the bravo target with the 7th shot, charlie with the sixth shot, delta with the second shot and echo with the first shot (biathlon targets are usually listed from left to right, abcde). We can also conclude that the athlete shot right to left with a shooting order of hit, hit, miss, miss, hit, hit, hit and that the athlete used two reloads.

Before the 2020-2021 season, this would have been tracked as 54321, meaning that every target (eventually) went down. But it would not be possible to determine which shot actually knocked the targets down and how many bullets (and reloads) were used. This wasn’t a problem for non-team races as there are no reloads, and thus always five shots only.

What this all comes down to is that I can only use data since the 2020-2021 season, which means we only have data for 24 races including the most recent ones in Oberhof 2022. So a total of 27,702 shots for all teams that finished a race.

Some quick and cool facts

Some initial findings after looking at the data are that the most common shooting is 54321. So shooting right to left and hitting all targets without reloads (15.3%). This is followed by 12345, shooting left to right hitting all targets without reloads (8.8%). On the opposite hand, one of the old school shooting orders that starts with target charlie, the centre target, 32154 only happened 5 times (0.02%) and all by Yurie Tanaka, a 33-year-old soldier from Japan.

To include or not include, that’s the question

As I write this I just saw the single mixed relay in Oberhof, and after watching that race I was debating if I should include the data from the single missed relay races or not. It follows the same pattern as all other team races, but because of the short loops and the fact that only two athletes participate, the shooting seems very chaotic and not very representative of the athletes’ abilities. That would remove another 4 races.

On the other hand, perhaps the Oberhof race was just an exception due to the conditions. And when averaging values out of 24 races, one race that may have been a little out of the ordinary will not have a major impact. So for now, I’ll be including the single mixed relays as well.

Matrix

So let’s look at all the shots (left to right) and shootings (top to bottom) and determine the hit rates for every combination. The bottom left square is shooting 8, shot 1 and the top right is shooting 1 and shot 8. The final three shots of every shooting are the manual reloads, and since not every athlete needs them, there are fewer of those. The total numbers are the averages for the respective rows and columns. Finally, the labels indicate the hit rate, also represented by the colour, total number of shots and number of hits in brackets.

One thing to remember is that all odd-numbered shootings are prone, and all even-numbered shootings are standing, and shots six, seven and eight are manual reloads.

How do “regular” shots compare to reload shots?

One thing we can conclude from the matrix above is that the hit rates for the first five shots are better than the three reloads. One can argue this is not a fair comparison as there are fewer reload shots, but I think there are enough shots to see that they differ. Let’s look at the five regular shots first.

The only thing that stands out to me here is that the 7th and 8th shootings are not the worst for prone and standing shooting respectively. With regards to having more pressure on the last shooting, this doesn’t prove (or deny) anything. But as mentioned before, the additional reloads put a different perspective on pressure. So let’s look at the last three shots for the eight shootings below.

Here we also see that the last prone and standing shootings are not the worst of the whole series. One highly important thing to remember is that the shooters are not the same for all shootings. Can we perhaps say something about tactics based on the four groups of two shootings with regards to the quality of shooters?

Let’s summarize this a little

If we aggregate the shots per shooting ( so basically look at the totals per row of the two charts above) we could conclude that the first athlete is the best shooter. Followed by the second shooter, then the fourth shooter and the third shooter being the worst of them. Note that this also includes the single mixed relay as mentioned earlier, which only includes two athletes that each have double shooting responsibilities compared to full team races.

If we take out the individual athletes we can summarize this even further by summarizing the shootings, or columns. Fair to say is that Prone shooting has a higher hit rate than Standing (duh), and Reloads have a lower hit rate than the First 5. This is not surprising as the manual reload of every bullet breaks the rhythm and shooting position every time. I also think (but cannot prove based on the data) that there is some added pressure with Reloads, as you really want to avoid the penalty loop when you have three spares at this level.

These line charts show the same data as the left matrix above, with the first chart showing the “first 5” and Reload shots, and the second chart the Total column. In these charts, orange represents Standing shooting, and blue the Prone shooting. We can more clearly see that the third shooter is typically the worst of the four.

What if we do this for the top 5 (or 10, 15)?

As if we haven’t talked about enough variables yet that impact our possible conclusions, so far we have only looked at data from all the athletes and races. Would this look different if we only looked at the top 5, top 10 or top 15?

Other than the hit rates going up from left to right as we limit ourselves to better athletes, the patterns remain the same. So from that perspective, my confidence is pretty high in saying that…

Conclusion

… also in the relay, a shot is not a shot like any other, especially between shooting from a cartridge/magazine and after loading by hand. But there are just too many factors to say something useful otherwise. And specifically anything about pressure or relay tactics, with only some hints about which shootings have the better athletes, and some of the lower reload hit rates potentially being caused by more pressure.

Do you think I could have come to any other conclusions based on the data and charts above? Please let me know on Twitter or Instagram!

Posted in Statistical analysis | Tagged hit rates, Relay

Most accurate shooters in biathlon (1995 – 2021)

Posted on 2022-01-08 | by real biathlon | Leave a Comment on Most accurate shooters in biathlon (1995 – 2021)

Men’s and women’s top shooters (by non-team shooting percentage) for the last two decades. The videos show a 16-race moving average.

Men

Women

Posted in Biathlon Media, Long-term trends | Tagged shooting

Is one shot like any other in biathlon?

Posted on 2022-01-06 | by biathlonanalytics | Leave a Comment on Is one shot like any other in biathlon?

Introduction

My biathlon coach always tells me to see shooting as one shot at a time, rather than a series of shots. This is to prevent feeling more stressed about the fifth shot if the first four go down, and playing mind tricks if you miss the first shot(s), etc. By seeing them as individual shots, theoretically, they should all have the same odds of going down. But is that the case? Or is there certain pressure put on certain shots, based on the race standings and other circumstances at the time of the shooting?

About a month ago, the guys from Extra Runde (a great podcast with some English episodes worth listening to if you don’t understand German) asked me if I could “compare if there is a difference between 3rd and 4th shooting in mistakes. Especially when they’re shooting for the podium”. The latter part, shooting for the podium is not easily linked, but comparing between different shootings and shots is what I looked into below. It was interesting timing, as Penalty Loop had also mentioned on Twitter that it would be good to look into relay pressure. But unfortunately, that will have to wait until another article, as I focus only on non-team events in this one.

So, the goal of this article is to analyze individual shots in biathlon and see if every shot has the same chance of being a hit. I also want to see if we can use that data to say something useful about shooting pressure in biathlon. I want to reiterate that as I mentioned in other articles, biathlon is a sport of many, many factors. So to hope that any single event could explain something like shooting pressure would be ignorant. But perhaps we can see if these single events are likely to contribute to shooting pressure.

Data

I looked at five seasons of non-team races (with the current season only including the first 4 events), analyzing every single shot that was fired (227,227 data points!) by athletes that finished the race. The race disciplines included are Sprint, Pursuit, Individual and Mass Start.

Shot codes

We know that not every shooting and shot is the same, and we know that prone shooting generally has better hit rates than standing shooting. As race disciplines have different shooting orders, the second and third shootings can be prone or standing. To deal with that issue I assigned a shot code to every single shot. For example, shot code PU-3-4-S-1 tells me it was a Pursuit race, third shooting, fourth shot, standing position, hit. Based on these codes I can tell you that the Mass Start, first shooting, second shot in the prone position has the highest hit rate of 86.8% for the whole field of athletes that finished the race. And the Sprint, second shooting, first shot in the standing position the lowest, at 75.6%. If we take all these shots and average them per shot code, we can then throw it into a matrix we get the following:

As you would expect, generally speaking, the averages for standing shots are lower than the ones taken in the prone position. For prone, the lowest hit rates are the first and last shots of the first shooting and the highest are the third and fourth shots of the third shooting. In Standing shooting the lowest is the first shot in the second shooting where the highest is the third shot of the third shooting.

Filtering the data

One thing to remember is that by including all athletes we’re only taking 30 in Mass Starts, between 50 and 60 in the Pursuits, and around one hundred in Sprints and Individuals. This makes the Sprints and Individuals way heavier on the results. So let’s look at the same matrix but only include the top 30 ranked racers with the same colour scale:

As we would expect by only taking the top 30 athletes, the numbers are quite a bit higher than the chart showing the whole field of athletes. For prone we see a similar (but not quite identical) pattern compared to the previous chart, but the standing position looks quite a bit different in pattern with the fourth shooting clearly being the better of the three shootings in the standing position.

Shooting pressure

Since one of the goals is to look at shooting pressure, and as it is kind of hard to look at the data for prone and standing separately, I’m going to look only at Pursuits and Mass Starts, for the top 30 athletes. This gives me data with all shots in the same order and shooting position, and realistically you would expect more pressure when racing (wo)man to (wo)man, rather than against the clock. That leaves us just shy of 100,000 data points (shots) for the following chart:

Since the shooting order and positions are the same we don’t have to separate the prone and standing anymore, knowing that the first two shootings are in the prone position and the third and fourth in the standing position.

We can see that for all four shootings the first and fifth shots have lower hit percentages than the other shots. And, as we discussed before, the prone shots are better than the standing shots. But if I had to look at this chart from a pressure standpoint, I would expect the fourth shooting to be worse than the third, which it is not.

One more thing we can try is to look only at the top 10 athletes, based on the debatable assumption that if you are out of the top 10 there is less pressure.

Although the averages are higher, as we would expect since we are looking at the “creme-de-la-creme” of biathlon, the general pattern is the same. The second shooting is the highest, and the third and fourth are the lowest (and have the same average). And, for the third and fourth shooting, the first and last shots are the lowest again.

One could argue that the fourth shooting is the one that has the most pressure, as it is the final shooting. And I can somewhat see why the first and last shots would be the most pressurized of them all; first coming into the stadium and last because, well it’s the last of the race. But it would be far too easy to assign these numbers directly to shooting pressure alone, as there are so many other factors in play (did I mention that already?) that also have an impact on the hit percentage for any shot. Think of crowds, conditions, etc.

Conclusion

So, although we cannot conclude that the data above tells us anything specific and directly related to shooting pressure, it gives us some interesting information. And it isn’t necessarily completely unrelated to shooting pressure either. But we can conclude that one shot is not the same as the other, even when in the same shooting position. Now the question is: is my coach is onto something new, or do biathletes just not listen to coaches when it comes to shooting one shot at a time?

Use the interactive charts on my Tableau Public site to look for your athlete of choice! But keep in mind when doing so the datasets may be limited.

Did you like this article, or do you have any comments or feedback? Please let me know on Twitter!

Posted in Statistical analysis | Tagged shot codes

Is there home advantage in biathlon?

Posted on 2022-01-05 | by biathlonanalytics | Leave a Comment on Is there home advantage in biathlon?

After seeing the races in Le Grand Bornand a few weeks ago, and especially some of the French athletes, I wondered how much impact a home crowd and venue has on an athletes performance.

As with most research projects for biathlon, it is impossible to isolate certain factors and exclude others. With that in mind, I realize that my research below has some influential factors that are not included; the sample size for home races is too small. Some of the more recent events had no spectators. The home events are not evenly spread over the time period of the used data. A home venue based on the nation is not necessarily the true home venue for all athletes. The conditions at certain venues may just be better or worse, generally, and suit some athletes more than others. Etc., etc. This all said, I still think the research below shows some interesting results. Just set aside your natural “well yeah, but…” reactions and continue reading.

Data

I took five seasons of data from RealBiathlon, starting with the 2017-2018 season, up until (and including) the fourth event in Le Grand Bornand this season (2021-2022). I removed all non-finishers from the data, and all team events. And for the final results, I focused on those athletes that are active in the current season. Then, as mentioned above, I assumed that when the nation of the athlete and the event are the same, it was a home event for those athletes.

In the given timeframe, we are talking about 222 races in total, with 581 athletes participating in one or more events. Of the 222 races, 206 had representation from the home nation, and generally, the home athletes represented about 4-5% of the total number of athletes per event.

The measure to show performance in this research is the overall ranking per athlete per race.

Nation averages

As athletes differ in how they deal with pressure and if they perceive a home crowd as an advantage or disadvantage, looking at the nation’s averages should be taken with a grain of salt. But it is still interesting to see how nations do on average for men and women. The chart below shows men in blue and women in pink, and the lines between dots, the average rankings, should be read from top to bottom. Going down and left means the nation performs better when in other countries, and going down and right means they do better at home.

Interestingly some nations are very similar for men and women, whereas others are completely different. It also shows how some nations, like France, are similar in performance whether racing at home or in another country. Other nations significantly over-or underperform when at home.

However, as mentioned, looking at averages comes with many caveats. Take the French team for example. At the nation’s average level they look like this:

But when we look at the individual level, we can see that there are many differences between athletes:

Individuals

So, now that we are looking at the individual athletes, we can plot every athlete based on their average rank at home compared to their average rank when not at home. The darker the green, the better they do at home; the darker the red, the better they do when not at home. Circles are women, and squares are men.

Roughly looking at this chart, we can say that there is no clear tendency toward benefitting from performing at home or away from home. But this includes all athletes that have at least one race at home and at least one away from home, which can give a skewed picture. For example, the dark red square at the bottom right is Johannes Dale from Norway, who had only one race in Norway. He finished 63rd, where his average of 55 races outside of Norway is 15.23. Not really fair to say he does not do well at home based on one race there.

So let’s apply some filtering, saying that the included athletes must have raced at least 25 races in the given timeframe. And of those, at least 5 must have been at home. We also want to exclude any ranking above 40. And lastly, we want to only show athletes that are active in the current season. This gives the following picture:

Based on this chart we could conclude that for example, Hanna Oeberg does typically not do well at home, whereas Julia Simon does do well at home. Let’s double-check that by looking at all their rankings of their races, in which the size of the bubbles indicates the number of races (larger is more races; blue are home races):

Although Hanna Oeberg has some strong results at home, her three worst results were at home too. Contrarily, Julia Simon had only six races at home, but they were all strong with 17th being her lowest rank at home.

Conclusion

So, still knowing that many factors not included in this research can play a role in these results, I think it is fair to say this gives at least some indication of who is strong at home and who is not, over the five-season period. And that leaves us with seeing which athletes do best at home versus who do worst at home. We can show this simply by dividing the home average rank by the not-home average rank minus one. Anything below zero is better at home, and anything above zero is better away from home. The line thickness indicates the number of races participated in.

Some notable names are JT Boe, Emilien Jacquelin, Julia Simon and Doro Wierer in the positive sense. Hanna Oeberg, Tiril Eckhoff, Martin Ponsiloma and Thomas Bormolini stand out on the negative side of the scale.

What do you think? Based on this information, can we say that some athletes prefer home races over races in other venues? Let me know on Twitter!

Posted in Statistical analysis | Tagged home advantage

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