GO TO GLOBAL SITE   se es us fr za it
de ca au no
at br ru ch
gb pl nl sk
Home | News | Videos | Articles | Gallery | Crags | Gyms | Search - Tick List | Forum | Ranking | Blogs | Contact | New Member
Forum: GLOBAL / Editorial / The very best climbers are around 179 cm Login in to contribute
The very best climbers are around 179 cm
OffLine 8a.nu
  2016-02-28 00:00:00    
"The very best climbers are taller". Several guys have said this is not true in the forum. Let us define the very best by the guys who since 2015 have done both an 9b and an 8C and add to that the Top-3 route and boulderers as well as the Top-3 competition climbers in Lead and Boulder. Here is a best climbers and their average is = 179 cm.

Surely, you could replace one or two guys to the list which could reduce the average height to 178 cm, but even so - The very best climbers are taller!

185 Ondra
184 Bertle
183 Sharma
180 Bouin
173 Schubert
172 Megos

T-5 Route/Boulders on rock
185 Ondra - 183 Webb
172 Megos - 173 Hukkataival
173 Amma - 183 Ceria

Top-3 Lead/Boulder WC
185 Ondra - 170 Chon
178 Supper - 187 Hojer
173 Schubert - 185 Ondra

Examples of other shorter top climbers, that lately have almost been performing as high as the listed above.
159 Ramonet
160 Ashima Shiraishi
165 Dai Koyamada
169 Daniel Woods
170 Alban Levier
170 Stefano Ghisolfi
OffLine Sune Hermit
  2016-02-29 12:36:54    
Seems to me that the data shows that:
1) Best climbers are between 172 and 185.
2) Average is 179.

This just shows that both relatively short and relatively tall climbers can be succesfull.

Actually, the average - 179 - must be rather close to the average height of European/US males.

In other words, best climbers just reflect the general population, maybe slightly skewed towards shorter guys.
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-02-29 12:58:19    
I agree that probably 179 is rather close to the average height of the European/US males but as you know the climbing population also consists of a lot of guys from Asia, South America and Africa. The male average around the globe is more like 174 cm.   It also shows that the very best climbers are in general taller compared to other top climbers which has been reported to be around 175 cm.  If we just list the Top-5 climbers in the world. I would think most would mention these guys. Ondra, Sharma, Megos, Webb and Hojer = 182 cm on an average.
OffLine Kenneth Rasmussen
  2016-02-29 14:17:07    
It is funny to see the numbers, but the deviation/spread is just too big to make any statistical conclusion. Just removing one of the tallest guys, and adding the next in line, would complete change things. Examples: Boulder: Adding Daniel Woods instead of Nicole Ceria. Routes: Adding Schubert instead of Ondra. My point is not that the conclusion is wrong, but that average is a really bad measurement, when you only include 3 value, and the the spread is so big.
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-02-29 14:24:33    
I am afraid you are wrong. If we do as you suggest, the average is still 178 cm. If we go by the median it is still 178 cm. 
OffLine eddi
  2016-02-29 16:06:13    
Rasmussen really has a Point. The sample size is simply to small to make a proper correlation.

You have a huge amount of data, just find someone who knows statistics to do the maths for you! On the other hand, there are so many factors, that you probably produce any desired result - but that's a problem with statistics in general.
OffLine Kenneth Rasmussen
  2016-02-29 16:38:41    
I guess I didn't explain my point good enough. The point was this, deleting change one guy in each category and things could change a lot. i.e. if we delete Ondra from all categories, and add the next in line to get the same amount of people (Added Amma in lead, since he might have won, if he participated - who knows). Also we delete Bertle, as I think many would agree that he hasn't proven that he belong in the list, and instead add Ramonet. We take Daniel Woods over Ceria - has he not done a lot more 8C'c? We get





183 Sharma 
183


180 Bouin 
180


173 Schubert 
173


172 Megos 
172


159 Ramonet
159


average
173




Megos
172


Amma
173


Schubert
173


average
173





Webb
183


Nalle
173


Woods
170


average
175





Chon
170


Hojer
187


Coleman
180


average
179




Amma
173


Supper
178


Schubert
173


average
175 I am NOT saying my numbers are right, and I think your point is interesting. Also it is funny to see all the numbers but the average is a little arbitrary I think.
OffLine . .
  2016-02-29 18:23:51    
There's no reason to include Bertle other than to fit your narrative...  a couple of unconfirmed ascents does not make a career... Here's your top 5 in routes for the last 12 months ondra 185 ramonet 159 ghisolfi 170 kofic 175 marin 172 average 172 From this it's pretty clear that, for sport climbing, it is ideal to be either shorter or Adam Ondra.... for bouders: webb 183 ceria 184 graham 178 rauch 170 stranic 178 average 178 Wow, the average height for the top 5 boulderers is almost exactly the average height for the US and European males.  Imagine that. So for boulderers, it's ideal to be average height for combined: ondra 185 firnenberg 182 kofic 175 webb  183 graham 178 average 180 This is the only data set that supports your theory.  So for routes, shorter is better, for boulders, no trend, for combined, slightly taller is better.
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-02-29 19:01:50    
As we are talking the VERY best climbers, the sample is by definition small. Adam Ondra is the best climber in the world so why should we replace him? If we would add Amma, nothing would change as he already is mentioned once.  If we use grades, Bertle must be in the list. One reason why Ramonet has so great score on 8a, is because of his FA bonuses, which has nothing to do with Who is the best. Sure Woods has done mer 8C's but I have not said The very best EVER are taller. Clearly, we have to base the list as who is the best as of now.  Of course we can not base the list of just who are members on 8a. Of course we could only base it of all climbers.  Do not forget that if we only list the Top-5 climbers as of today, their average are 182 cm. This means in fact that there exist a positive height correlation among the best of the best. 
OffLine Paul Muaddib 3
  2016-02-29 19:14:07    
And where is Ashima? Or is she not one of the very best?
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-02-29 19:20:35    
If we would do some analyses regarding the female, I would think that we would come up with the conclusion that, The very best female are shorter :)
OffLine Ben Iseman
  2016-02-29 19:50:17    
I'm not going to debate the premise, because I find the question that it raises much more interesting; how and who defines difficulty. The 1-5-9 on a campus board is a great example. Small rungs favour smaller hands, but the real challenge is the distance, which favours taller climbers. What if we assigned a V-grade to the 1-5-9 ? For sure we would find what Jens is proposing that more taller climbers will be capable of this feat because the benefit of being taller far outweighs the benefit of the holds being relatively larger. I think Ashima is a great example of this. She has sent incredible climbs, but we are not expecting her to do a 1-5-9. Ever. Her success on difficult climbs is limited to routes where her size is not an insurmountable obstacle. On climbs where the advantage of smaller fingers is not outweighed by distance, the movement may be easier than the given grade and on others it may be harder. She is climbing on routes that have a consensus grade proposed by larger men. It just isn't accurate to say that it is 9a for everyone, finger size and height be damned. If Ashima finds a route where absolutely small finger size is the determining factor she could climb 9c+ without ever climbing 9b. Grades are formed by consensus. We take the consensus and all but forget that the grade is the grade for the group that has agreed upon it. If the consensus is wider (more morphologies) we can say that the grade is applicable to most climbers, and where it is narrow we must come to understand that the grade is applicable to fewer climbers. This has already been done for crack climbing. Yes, there are still published grades, but people understand the difficulty as being elastic and more reflective of how well your hand size matches a crack. That what is hands for one is off hands for another, and that this makes a difference in the grade. 
OffLine . .
  2016-02-29 20:24:11    
Sure, if we use *your* list of the "very best" we get your data.  But I don't think anyone is ready to concede that your list is definitive.  Considering Bertle "one of the very best" but not Ramonet is an insult to Ramonet.  The objective data shows that Ramonet is the second best sport climber that you have data on.  To say otherwise is just your opinion. We can not do analysis of "all climbers".  You have no data for anyone that isn't included here or on hardclimbs.  Anyone that intentionally does not report their hard sends will not be included in your survey.  Based on the numbers that are available, your set of "the best" does not match with measurable reality. 
OffLine Cameron Lane
  2016-02-29 20:36:40    
Jens, Well, here's one problem with the list. Top 3 boulderers on rock should be the 3 with the most 8c ascents.  The list would be: 1. Daniel Woods -169 cm 2. Dai Koyamada - 165 cm 3. Jimmy Webb - 183 cm average - 172 cm If we expand the sample size out to top 5 which would include Nalle Hukkataival (173 cm) and Paul Robinson (177 cm)  the average height of the top 5 would still only move up to 173 cm. Really, all this data shows is that there is large variation in the height of top boulderers
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-02-29 20:43:35    
Ramonet is #2 based on how the scorecard calculation, (which I just invented) is done. If Ramonet is one of the guys actually receiving most FA bonus points out of all the top guys. I agree that Ramonet is an extraordinary climber but if we just use the grades that have been put forward for saying who is the best climber, cleraly Pirmin Bertle has a more impressive ticklist.  Ramonet has done two 9a+ and Pirmin has done one 9b and one 9a+. When it comes to boulders, Pirmin has done one 8C+, one 8C and one 8B+. Ramonet's top score is one 8B.    It might be that Ramonet is a better climber but with the grades of today, Bertle must be ranked higher. It just might be so that if Pirmin was a full time climber travelling a lot, he might be one of the Top-5 in the world, increasing their average height to 182.5 cm.  @ Cameron: You have made a list of the best EVER but I am afraid I am talking who are the very best as of today. I have also said that the very best are getting taller...and this is somewhat confirmed by your suggested list. 
OffLine Dr Gonzo
  2016-02-29 20:58:24    
Contenance, please… You want to define your hypothesis more accurate, Jens. Is it “The best top 20 climbers are taller than the second next best 20 climbers?” Than you should compare these two sets using a non-parametric rank test and report the test statistic. If you want to say “The top 20 climbers are better than a random set of climbers drawn from my data base” than you generate permuations of random data of 20 climbers and compare these. You could define this within a range of the data, for example the upper or lower quantile. Less arbitrary, more elegant and interesting instead would be a generalized linear model with ‘8a_score’ as response variable, ‘age’, ‘size’, ‘country’ as explanatory variables. You want to adjust the model according to the distribution of the variance. You could do this for females and males separately. That way you would test for "correlations" a term used in statistics to predict the outcome of a future datapoint. You should publish some nice looking figures, not that excel crap. This is not very complicated, I think several people would love to have a crack at it if you make a text file available with the following columns: ‘Score’, ‘Age’, ‘Height’, ‘country of residency’, ‘sex’ and ‘year’. No names nor fame required, that is the beauty of it. If you like you can also add them but a name is not a variable, nor a factor, so shit like that cannot go into the model. All very easily done. Cheers, gonzo
OffLine . .
  2016-02-29 21:04:00    
Permin Bertle is your favorite isn't he?  The only guy that's not afraid to put big numbers on climbs.  The guy does one 8B+, one 8C, and has no problem calling 8C+.  His resume does not support his grading.  Remember, all of those top climbs are FA's and none of them have been confirmed by anyone else...  Same story with his 9b and 9a+.  My crystal ball predicts big downgrades in his future.  I'm just sayin you should wait for a couple repeats before you call him the best. Second point, FA's are harder than repeats.  The beta is worse, the climb is harder.  You know that, and included it into your scoring.  The FA bonus was made to reflect the fact that it's harder to get the FA than it is to repeat something.  The actual ability required to FA is greater than to repeat.
OffLine Dr Gonzo
  2016-02-29 21:06:52    
I hope you understand how random this debate is, right? The today is the tomorrow and the past was once a today. you want to make a general statement that holds for some time, not what you just did.
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-02-29 21:10:06    
I am saying that the very best climbers in general are taller than other top climbers. If the "very best" was defined to the Top-5, the average height is 182 cm and if we dig deeper and pick more climbers like Top-10, the average height will go down.  I am not saying that this relates to the 8a members even if it seems to be the case if we take the Top-5 or Top-10 Combined climbers.  @ Dr Gonzo: On the contrary, I am saying that the trend is that the very best climbers are getting taller. Some years ago, Dai Koyama, Ramonet and Daniel Woods were among the very best but this is not the case as of today. The new generation of top climbers are taller. 
OffLine Cameron Lane
  2016-02-29 21:40:02    
How could you possibly say that Daniel Woods isn't among the best boulderers today?  He climbed (in his words) his hardest boulder problem of his life last year (a multi year test piece tried by many top climbers) along with a V15 and a slew of 14's and 13's.  Just because he spent some time resting and found a new interest (or so it appears by his instagram posts) in lead climbing this year doesn't mean he isn't relevant as a top 3 boulderer anymore.  The guy is only 26 years old!  He has MANY years left to climb at a top level if he so chooses.
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-02-29 21:48:05    
OK, fine...let us say that Daniel Woods is #3 best boulder since 2015. That means that the average goes down to 178 cm which means that The very best climbers are still taller. 
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-02-29 22:43:16    
OK, let us make it even more simple and also say: The Top-5 climbers in the world since 2015 are taller than other top climbers. I think everyone could agree that if we did pick the Top-5 climbers in the world they should be.  185 Ondra, 183 Sharma, 172 Megos, 183 Webb and 187 Hojer, which gives 182 cm as the average of their heights. If you do not agree, please motivate who should be replaced. 
OffLine Jesse Bruni
  2016-03-01 00:24:21    
I would imagine that the generally small number of 9b's in the world compared to 8C's affects the numbers quite a bit. Especially considering that most of the climbers who have done 9b have done so on the same few routes (Fight or Flight, First Round First Minute, Chilam Balam)
OffLine User Deactivated
  2016-03-01 01:42:49    
deleted
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-03-01 08:30:12    
During the last four years, only a dozin guys have been doing the full circuit so it is quite irrelevant to include 30 guys in such analysis, especially since we are only talking the very best.  The very best out of 12 guys should be no more than the podium and their average is 177 cm and during 2015 it was 180 cm.  It seems onceagain that Markku has brought forward numbers that confirm what I am saying.
OffLine Philippe Vaucher
  2016-03-01 08:38:48    
@Markku: thanks for the link @Jens: I can't believe you open yet another thread on this subject. It's been what, five times now? Every time there are many people refuting it, and then instead of acknowledging that you cherry-pick your way into being right, or just open a new thread. Just because we get tired of it doens't mean you are right. FYI this is what you do: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/special-pleading @Everyone: please read the other threads. Basically we believe Jens' dataset is too small to infer anything (less than 10 entries), but even if you try a real statistical approach refuting the theory Jens will start cherry-picking the data by removing the smaller climber as "not being the VERY best". Even if he turns out being "right", just repeating his argument over and over without doing a real research is not a way to conduct statistics.
OffLine Leszek Iwan
  2016-03-01 08:57:01    
Hi Guys First of all i do not want to fight with anyone. The top climbers according to Jens and other guys looks like that:



Name
Height
Reason
Group


Ondra
185 
9b
Top Climber


Bertle
184
 9b / 8C
Top Climber


Sharma
183
 9b / 8C
Top Climber


Bouin
180
 9b
Top Climber


Shubert
173 
9b / 8C
Top Climber


Megos
172 
9b / 8C
Top Climber


Amma
173 
9b
Top Climber


Ghisolfi
170 
9b
Top Climber


Marin
172 
 9b
Top Climber


Andrada
173  
9b
Top Climber


Hojer
187  
8C / 2nd
Top Climber


Chon
170
 1st
Top Climber


Hukkataival
173 
8C 
Top Climber


Levier
170 
8C
Top Climber


Ceria
184 
8C
Top Climber


Webb
183 
8C / 2nd
Top Climber
I guess we have consensus with above list. to compare I select guys from sport and boulder ranking game place 300+ Sorry guys If i wrote your name wrong:


Name
height
discipline
ranking


cutler
168
sport
4th 100


luck
182
sport
4th 100


balazs
184
sport
4th 100


littlefair
165
sport
4th 100


hoirshmann
181
sport
4th 100


harker
169
sport
4th 100


ranum
175
sport
4th 100


nasarre
171
sport
4th 100


bonano
169
sport
4th 100


hill
178
sport
4th 100


tkachuk
175
sport
4th 100


denanto
179
sport
4th 100


tribout
173
sport
4th 100


lumineau
177
sport
4th 100


trotta
179
sport
4th 100


TF
180
boulder
4th 100


Peterson
178
boulder
4th 100


axelrad
171
boulder
4th 100


sommers
175
boulder
4th 100


balazs
184
boulder
4th 100


higham
160
boulder
4th 100


fontes
173
boulder
4th 100


gruss
180
boulder
4th 100


wong
172
boulder
4th 100


nunes
174
boulder
4th 100


bakker
188
boulder
4th 100


khalyavko
169
boulder
4th 100


chang
181
boulder
4th 100


raaij
186
boulder
4th 100


padilha
175
boulder
4th 100 Ok so now hypothesis: I call it H0 - there is no difference in height between top and 4th 100 climbers. If i have hypothesis H0 there is also HA (H1) so alternative hypothesis which is: There is statistical difference in height between both groups. Ok, so now what is the risk that we want to accept? Typically when there is no huge consequences risk alpha = 5%. So be it Now we can use 2 sample t test form minitab (statistical software) to check if there is statistical difference. what we are looking for is p value. If P value is below 5% (alpha) then we find out a difference in population height means. Ok! 2 sample t test Processing ;) Results: p-value = 0.515 which means if I'm going to say that there is difference in height between top climbers and others i have to accept 51.1% of being wrong! that is a lot. So I to say that in statistical language: I fail to reject my hypothesis H0. Statistic: TOP CLIMBERS Mean: 177  Standard Deviation: 6.35  95%Confidence Interval (173.6 180.4)OTHER CLIMBERS M: 175.7  SD:6.42  95%CI: (173.3 178.1) That is what statistic has to say about climbers height. If you will have more question please do not hesitate to ask me Regards Leszek PS I do not know why this message looks like that :(
OffLine . .
  2016-03-01 09:01:22    
@jens:  "I
think everyone could agree that if we did pick the Top-5 climbers in
the world they should be.  185 Ondra, 183 Sharma, 172 Megos, 183 Webb
and 187 Hojer, which gives 182 cm as the average of their heights.  If you do not agree, please motivate who should be replaced. " I don't think anyone really agrees with your top 5.  I think Hojer should be replaced by Woods, and Sharma by Ramonet or Ghisolfi.  Then the average is 176 (or 174) cm. You should always be right when you get to choose the sample....
OffLine Vincent Bouillot
  2016-03-01 09:01:22    
So basically, Jens, your statistical sample here is 5 guys, over one year. Everyone told you your sample is way too small, like really too small. So let's explain statistical variance in another way. Let's suppose for a minute that, tough luck, next year Adam Ondra and Pirmin Bertle are both getting injured. Are your conclusions going to be "The VERY best climbers are getting shorter in 2016?". That would go against your hypothesis. You MUST have more datapoints to use an average only, or use a more elaborated estimator, or perform what is called "Extreme Value Statistics". The 30 under 30 diagram published by Markku would give you such an information. You have to look at the occurence of peaks above 180cm within a block of say 30 top climbers compared to the occurence of peaks above 180cm within a random block of 30 climbers.
OffLine Philippe Vaucher
  2016-03-01 10:09:58    
@Leslek: thanks for the statistics! To fix up your post, edit it, switch to the "HTML view" and remove most of the <br> that appear, these are the code that do a new line.
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-03-01 10:15:08    
I am NOT talking about high class climbers but instead the VERY best. Once again. let us define the very best by the Top-5 climbers. This means that the sample can be just five climbers and for me they are: Ondra, Megos, Webb, Sharma and Hojer = 182 cm
OffLine Leszek Iwan
  2016-03-01 10:27:33    
Jens could You please give us reason for your selection?  For example: Jan / Nalle Jan did only one 8C during last 12 motnhs? and Nalle? (personally I should vote for Jan he is almost as tall and fat as I am) Why Chris and not Jakob? Both made 9b and 8C plus Jakob made competition and also few 9a+ You can choose who you wan't but you can't make general statement like that by take sample just to confirm your theory. I could do the same: I will look for guys that are close or even over 190 and i will say that top climbers are not taller. Jens I really enjoy your articles, your comparisons but when it comes to that particular statement about climbers height you can't find statistical proof to say you are correct. Regards Leszek Ps. reason why my previous post looks like that is excel table
OffLine nikfrahou
  2016-03-01 11:08:14    
Ones again Kenneth Rasmussen  is right.  You cannot make any meaningful statistical interference from such a small sample size.For doing such "simple" statistics" you have to provide a sufficiently large sample size (usually n>30).  Please reconsider the initial postulate:   "The very best climbers are taller" --> hypothesis to be tested. (that perfectly fine) "Let us define the  very  best by the guys who since 2015 have done both an 9b and an 8C and add to that the Top-3 route and boulderers as well as the Top-3 competition climbers in Lead and Boulder." --> now you in trouble!!!  Solution! I would suggest Cluster analysis, multi-variate analysis or something similar. Then you can look at how the individual climbers "group" on basis of the performance, weight, height, age,  etc.  
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-03-01 11:33:04    
OK let us include Jakob Schubert in the Top-6 very best climbers = 181 cm on an average Jan was #2 in the Boulder World Cup 2015 and he also won the European Championship. Clearly, he most be ranked higher than Nalle Hukkataival. If we however, include Nalle, we must also include Pirmin Bertle who has gradewise a more impressive ticklist 2015. In any case, even if we expand to Top-7 and only include Nalle, the average is still 180 cm. 
OffLine Leszek Iwan
  2016-03-01 11:44:10    
Jens, so can we agree on list that i posted with statistic and test? Jens i'm sorry to say that, but now it looks like you are trying to select top climbers just to keep your opinion as general truth and in fact there is nothing wrong with that as long you say top climbers by Jens are getting taller. I stop posting any statistical tests or explanation because there is no point of doing that anymore. Paper and post will withstand everything. Oh by the way, from statistical point of view when i take my dog for a walk we have 3 legs in average ;) Regards Leszek
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-03-01 12:12:34    
Let us say we include also Woods and Ramonet to the list = 178 cm which still shows that the very best climbers are taller.  @ Leszek: I have a Bachelor degree in statistics. If you include all the Top-10 or Top-100 guys in a sample you should of course not to 95 % confidence interval. If you want to measure the average height towards a bigger group, using just 30 guys is not good enough. Previously a diagram has been published saying that the average height of the best 8a route members were like 174 cm.
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-03-01 12:12:38    
-
OffLine nikfrahou
  2016-03-01 12:39:23    
Can you make a similar diagram for the TOP 20/30 for 1995, 2005 and 2015? Would be interesting to see those diagram...
OffLine Leszek Iwan
  2016-03-01 12:50:09    
Jens so you should know that you can't compare means just like that. You know that there are statistical tests and that is the way we should look for difference. Will you agree on that we should make our sample larger? In that case Confidance  interval are getting smaller so the test will be more precise and it will be easier to find statistical difference if there is any. You made typo mistake at Sachi height on your chart is 175 while in your first post you gave Sachi 173. Anyway, Jens I made test for the guys you picked up... and p value is: 0.122 which means: there is no statistical evidence to say that your top climbers are different form other guys. I'm sorry Jens but You say there is difference and statistic doesn't.  But to be honest the topic now is: The very best climbers are around 179 cm which is true!!! gathering more date i expect with 95% of chance that the mean would change from 175.1 up to 183.5 Regards Leszek
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-03-01 13:11:19    
The Top-12 climbers of 2005 which is not the same definition as the best climbers but even so their average height is 172 cm which again support what I have been saying that the very best climbers are getting taller. @ Leszek: A sample for the 1 000 best climbers or os have already been made saying their average is 174 cm. This would give you a very small confidence interval.  
OffLine Vincent Bouillot
  2016-03-01 13:36:34    
You are comparing your personal ranking for 2015 with the 8a.nu database in 2005. You can't do that.  Several questions: 1) How do you take into account that Adam Ondra was only 163cm in 2005 and 185cm in 2015? Does he get better because of experience, rock trips etc, or just because he grew in size?  2) Why are your samples different in size?  3) How do you compare boulderers and sport climbers in your list of very best climbers?  4) If the point is to say that tall climbers can reach further, why aren't you taking into account the ape index of these climbers instead of their height? 5) Why aren't you using the database to compute that (e.g. setting a cut a 13000 points for the very best sport climbers)? If your conclusion is statistically robust, the absence of several datapoints like Chris Sharma shouldn't change anything. If your "result" is a statistical glitch, the way you're choosing your data will matter. This being said, I think you're definitely convinced of your point. My opinion on the subject, because it's not about statistics but opinion at the end of the day: "Short climbers think it sucks to be short. Tall climbers think it sucks to be tall. Everybody wants to be climb happy, like Adam Ondra."
OffLine Leszek Iwan
  2016-03-01 14:03:01    
From my point of view being tall and fat sucks ;) what is the point of reaching next hold when you are not able to pull from it ;) L.
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-03-01 14:23:32    
@ Vincent: I partly agree on what you say but with so many centimeters in difference it does not matter. Just replace some guys and the stats will anyhow just confirm what I am saying.  Most probably or I would actually say 100 % certain. If Adam stopped growing since 2005 and still was 165 cm, he would not have been such a good climber as he is today at 185 cm, which again just confirms what I am saying. This discussion feels like when I started to say that we had a boulder grade inflation in Ticino. At that time, everyone in the forum said I was wrong and I tried to show facts that supported what I was saying. Anyhow, everyone did disagree but now like 12 years later, 100 % agrees what I said. I am out of the discussion at 167 cm with short apeindex that certainly is no advantage :)
OffLine Klem Fandango
  2016-03-01 14:47:20    
"This being said, I think you're definitely convinced of your point"  Definitely true with this 'discussion', just not sure what the point is supposed to be anymore, or what is was in the first place. Is it how to selectively cherry pick data and people (under the guise of statistics) to suit a personal bias and show a desperation to win on the internet? And yes actions do suggest desperation, this is now the third thread opened in an attempt to push subjective bias. Forum ethics? I apologise if it seems personal but you started this strange height agenda in the very same thread that you banned someone, then proceeded to break the very code of conduct you used as the means to ban this member. Does the code of conduct simply not apply to you?    At the top level of bouldering height makes no difference as evidence has shown; those who are taller than average have climbed not one iota harder than those who are shorter than average, showing the very premise itself is completely flawed. You could pick all of the best tall climbers Jens has selectively suggested to suit his bias (Primin Bertle, really?) and Daniel Woods. It would show that the best boulderer is shorter.  I would however like to see wider statistics on climber's height, but more importantly ape index (as mentioned above) and particularly weight. I will lay a theory down that you would be hard pushed to find a top climber (I don't care what baseline is used to define a top climber) above 85kg, except perhaps the very odd boulderer. I think in time climbing at the top level will pretty much mirror gymnastics in that regard, although it should be noted at a much physically weaker and basic standard. 
OffLine Emanuele Pellizzari
  2016-03-01 15:01:23    
From my 173 cm I should not be an example. But being older than most, and may be wiser, just think. When I started climbing I was "average", actually 1 cm lower than the average of male population (all males were carefully measured due to the compulsory time we had to stay in the Army). I was 70 kg, which was 5 kg below the average. 10 years later the average was 176 for 77 kg. The trend is that we are taller.Second: long ago the it was about pulling the smaller holds the longer possible. You do not do it anymore if you are a 182 cm  guy: you just get a better hold with a better foothold to stand from. Routes style also changed, with more overhangs, and less tiny holds: the bigger the holds, the less disadvantage you suffer if you are bigger (bigger = heavier). Gioia boulder is an example: you do not pull that small things if you are "kind of heavy". So were the style of routes like +20 years ago, some "bigger" climbers might not be able to do them. In fact these routes are "dusted" these days. On the other hand, unless you jump like Ramonet, you can't get these holds so far apart like on "modern steep routes".It is called evolution.
OffLine louis de cornulier
  2016-03-01 22:47:58    
Since we can cherry-pick our samples to suit our need of the moment, I'll do it myself, why bother? I am an average climber (define average: me) and I have an average-sized manhood. This is the ultimate proof that all average climbers are equally endowed by Nature, and, since I am sure we would agree there is somewhere a better climber than myself and more generously endowed, we can safely conclude that the bigger the thing, the greater the climber. Prove me wrong.
OnLine 2big2boulder
  2016-03-02 04:20:14    
This is ridiculous...what does the result of this discussion achieve? Even if there was a truly objective conclusion... Which there is not.
OnLine 2big2boulder
  2016-03-02 04:20:16    
This is ridiculous...what does the result of this discussion achieve? Even if there was a truly objective conclusion... Which there is not.
OffLine . .
  2016-03-02 07:17:58    
Jens: you have a bachelors degree in statistics? please use it to explain why @leszek's analysis isn't damning to your hypothesis.  It seems to pretty clearly indicate that height is not predictive of sending. Also, why is a trained statistician using only using means and a sample of 5 to show anything?  Shouldn't you know better? or is just easier to cherrypick 5 data points.
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-03-02 08:12:22    
If I am saying that the Top-6 climbers are taller, I should of course just use six climbers and take their average. Later you can make a sample of 100 other top climbers and compare their averages.  My Top-6 climbers are: Ondra 185, Webb 184, Schubert 173, Megos 172 and Hojer 187 = 181 cm on an average. The male average and also the Top-500 route climbers are 174 cm on 8a. Please explain who you want to be replaced and why of my list. Do also explain why you think you suggested person should be ranked higher compared to Pirmin Bertle 184 cm, who last year did: 9b, 9a+, 8C+ and 8C.  I guess I am the only guy here in the forum who has a Bachelor degree in Statistics, meaning that I have studied that subject for 1.5 years full time , beside my other 4 yours in the University.
OffLine Philippe Vaucher
  2016-03-02 08:59:58    
> I guess I am the only guy here in the forum who has a Bachelor degree in Statistics, meaning that I have studied that subject for 1.5 years full time , beside my other 4 yours in the University. I'd like to see a photo of said bachelor in statistics. From what I've seen of your lack of communication about P-values, standard deviation etc it seems unlikely you have one.
OffLine Dr Gonzo
  2016-03-02 10:05:23    
a driver's licence does not make you a driver
good lord
OffLine Klem Fandango
  2016-03-02 10:06:55    
strange double post from me
OffLine Klem Fandango
  2016-03-02 10:07:00    
Half the people you are attempting to put down with your bachelor in statistics (really poor trying to use argument by authority) have far higher qualifications than you (I know I do) but aren't so desperate that they feel the necessity to shout about it. It is actually pretty embarrassing to claim a degree in statistics and yet use what can only be described as pre-school maths to assert some crazy theory. I think it is time you banned yourself for repeatedly breaking the forum code of ethics which you yourself put forward. 
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-03-02 10:19:42    
Instead of just being rude, please list the Top-6 best climbers and calculate their average.  Please also explain what you have replaced my mentioned guys; Ondra, Megos, Webb, Hojer, Sharma and Schubert.
OffLine Leszek Iwan
  2016-03-02 10:38:31    
Guys why we are making argument about such a silly thing. We all are climbers instead of talking we should go climb or train. There is no point discussing height (lets go for weight!!!) since we can't do nothing about it. Do we really have to produce more than 100 post about it? There are much better other topics to discuss about. For example something about diet in climbing etc. I'm making experiment and i'm going to make precise notes what and when I eat for at least 1-2 weeks. I hope to obtain my goal weight and % of fat before my trip to Margalef. So we could better start sharing some info about diet training instead pointless discussion. Regards Leszek
OffLine Klem Fandango
  2016-03-02 11:42:14    
Who is being rude? You have clearly broken your own code of conduct and yet it is rude to point that out? Also you claim a high understanding of statistics and yet again you actions suggest the exact opposite. I would say that you Jens are clearly the rude individual as you have ignored all the evidence to the contrary, have ignored all dissenting points to the level that you have broken code 2.2 by repeating opening up threads saying exactly the same thing while ignoring all the evidence to the contrary. So who exactly is rude ? Edit: nevermind answering and stop the private messages to me, I will step away from this 'discussion'
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-03-02 13:56:38    
I asked you to please explain who out of my Top-6 guys in the world, with an average height of 181 cm, should be replaced.  Hojer 187 Ondra 185 Webb 184 Sharma 183 Schubert 173 Megos 173 Bare in mind that if you take out Sharma and replace him with a guy of 165 cm, the average is still 179 cm. If so, you should also explain why your suggested guy has a more impressive ticklist compared to Pirmin Bertle 184 cm, who last year did 9b, 9a+, 8C+ and 8C. 
OffLine John Doe
  2016-03-02 15:02:51    
Why not be a bit brave and humble yourself and add the fact that Pirmin Bertle did FA of two boulders for which he claims to be 8C+ and 8C traverse (but traverses don't count, as you said!!!11). But let's not cherry pick the "small" guys like Koyamanda, Woods and Nalle. Pirmin is of course the "obvious" pick here. And Sharma, are you for real? What has he done in 2015 to deserve being on list? (Pardon me if I'm wrong here). Brave and humble he said...
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-03-02 15:14:50    
Pirmin are using boulder grades also for the traverses he did. Sharma has done a 9b/+ FA which in fact was the hardest route any climber did in 2015 and he has also done an 8C boulder. There are more impressive ascents, but these stick out and surely merits him for the list.  My Top-6 climbers reflect as you say 2015 and clearly Koyamada has not done enough. But OK, let us add Woods and Hukkataival to the list and skip Bertle, the average is still 178.4 cm, i.e. your TOP-8 list just confirms what I am saying - The very best climbers are taller. 
OffLine User Deactivated
  2016-03-02 16:42:19    
deleted
OffLine John Doe
  2016-03-02 16:53:14    
Again, which 8C did Sharma do in 2015?
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-03-02 18:05:38    
Do you not think we should include the ascents of 2016, when saying who are the best climbers? Sharma did his FA of Catalán Witness the Fitness. The Top-6 climbers have been measured to 181 cm on an average. Please make your list and explain who should be replaced from my list.  Do not just complain but show a practical example of a centimeter average.
OffLine . .
  2016-03-02 18:12:34    
Jens:  Only time will tell if Bertle has climbed 8C+ and 9b.  Right now, his grades are unconfirmed, and unsupported by his resume (one 8B+FA, one 8CFA, one 8C+FA? one 9a+FA?).  You'd do well to be a bit more skeptical of unknown climbers claiming fantastic ascents (remember how many 8C+'s get downgraded?). Second: Why was the above statistical analysis not damning to your hypothesis?  Where is the hole in the actual math?  It pretty clearly failed to establish a height difference between the top climbers and the average climber... If you claim that the best climbers are taller, then height should be *predictive* of performance among high performing climbers.  If the statistics don't support this *predictive* relationship, then you've only found a nice coincidence only true in your cherrypicked dataset.  Like if we found that most 8C's were climbed by people wearing red shirts, it's interesting, but not informative. As far as your list:  Hojer should be removed.  He is 7th ranked outside, and second in the WC (i.e. not "the best").  Sharma should be removed for the same reasons Woods is not included, they both were not as good last year as they have been previously.
OffLine Kenneth Rasmussen
  2016-03-02 18:27:34    
If I can choose a TOP-6, I think my choice will be:Ondra 185Webb 184Schubert 173Amma 173Megos 173Woods 172 Average 176,5Median 173 This is based on the premise of what have actually been accomplished in 2015, and I have disregarded competition climbing and only chosen based on rock climbing.Jan Homer is impressive and strong in his style, has lots of flashed, but is not the one with the most hard boulder and FA's, as I see it. I added Woods, who continuously climb 8C's and who have even climbed a bunch with a rope doing 9a+ in flatanger. Sharma is my hero, but he has done ONE hard boulder problems, which he projected for a while, and which was subsequently climbed quicker my lesser known climbers, and it seems it is lower end 8C - maybe 8B+? ... He also did El Bon Combat, and then he didn't do much else - also Klemen Becan just swooped the first ascent of their shared project in Oliana before Sharma, so maybe Sharma is not on the very top of the list at the moment? Who knows, it is all speculative and hard to compare, I instead added Amma who did 9b and several 9a+. Regarding Bertle, he might be great, but his ascents are just still too questionable to be regarded.
OffLine nikfrahou
  2016-03-02 19:43:02    
The more I think about it, I personally think  multivariate-analysis/PCA will be the best option in this case. Then we can see if performance groups with height/abe index/BMI/sex/(shoes size!!!)/age/etc. (However, the sample should still be larger than 6, and someone has to gather the data!)...
OffLine Mike.
  2016-03-02 20:11:50    
Dai climbed Horizons in 2015, and called it hard V15 or 16. Unrepeated. He also has several other V15s that are unrepeated from the past couple of years. Woods did "The Process," also unrepeated V16 in 2015.
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-03-02 20:42:24    
@ Kenneth: I have not said that the very best ROCK climbers are taller. I have based my analysis of rock and competition performances.  Regarding the ascents on rock, we can only base it on the suggested grades. We can not start saying that Sharma's FA is just 8B+ and that we disregard Bertle's 9b and 8C+ etc. Sharma did further more do the hardest route ascent in the world in 2015. To say that he should not be on the list because Klemen climb better than him on one 9a+ and because of that he should not be included, is really lame. Any how, is we still add your suggested guys, the average is still 179 cm.   @ nikfrahou: If I say that the Top-6 climbers are taller, surely we can not increase the sample to more than the mentioned guys! @ Mike: If we based the list on bouldering performances like five years ago, I also think that Dai should have been included but since 2015, he has not been so productive. Woods has done one unrepeated 8C+ so has also Pirmin Bertle who also did one 9b. On what premises do you say Bertle's routes and boulders should not be validated by the proposed grades?
OffLine D
  2016-03-03 06:12:19    
This thread is ridiculous. Why limit the very best to 6 climbers? Who define these very best? And to whom are they compared? The results are totally meaningless.
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-03-03 08:04:22    
I have suggested the Top-6 guys, based on the grades and comp results, and I am saying that they with 181 cm on an average is taller than other top climbers. I find it very interesting that contrary to what most think,  The very Top-6 climbers in the world are taller.  Some years ago, this was not the case some we can also say that The very best climbers are getting taller.
OffLine Vincent Bouillot
  2016-03-03 08:18:25    
And what about top female climbers? I guess the idea is to say that being taller helps to grab the next good hold. But I think that with Ashima and Laura Rogora, the average height of the very best of the world TOP-6 female climbers decreased compared to 10 years ago. Another point:  please list the Top-6 best climbers and calculate their average.  Please also explain what you have replaced my mentioned guys; Ondra, Megos, Webb, Hojer, Sharma and Schubert. I'm going to answer like this:"Jens, please list some 6 (to keep the sample the same size) elite climbers and calculate their average."  My list of random elite climbers is: Marc Bourdon (183cm), Mattias Braach-Maksvytis (186cm), Jerome Mowat (183cm), Johnny Sauerkraut (185cm), Mark Mercer (182cm), Guilherme Costa (181cm).  My average is: 183,3 cm. So, statistics spoke, the very best climbers are shorter.  PS: you are mixing everything: bouldering, sport climbing, women, men, traverses, average etc. You want to have some data that you can reproduce throughout the years i.e. an objective list/ranking just as what 8a.nu provides. Otherwise, this IS cherry-picking. So if you want to have some conclusions, draw some subcategories, pick the 30 top climbers, compare your sample to many random samples drawn from other subcategories, do some extreme value statistics since you are looking at extremes.
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-03-03 08:31:36    
It might be that the very best female climbers are shorter nowadays.  If I say that the Top-6 climbers are taller than we can not make a sample of the Top-30 guys. I am not saying that the Top-30 guys are taller.  The Top-6 average of 181 cm should be compared by the whole population of other top climbers, climbers in general or male in the globe. All these groups have been calculated to around 174 cm.  The 8a ranking is by no means objective as you suggest. It is just me who has come up with the idea to count the Top-10 ascents giving points to grades including bonus points for FA and onsights etc. However, if you want to use the 8a ranking, you should base it on the Combined ranking which again very strongly confirms what I am saying as the avergae of the Top-5 is like 182 cm and the average of the Top-10 is like 180 cm. 
OffLine Robert Kasper
  2016-03-03 08:47:16    
seriously jens, about 20 comments and 10 users have been banned from the 4 threads you opened on the subject. Everybody that opposed the hypothesis. I think this is really getting out of hand here.  and i would really like to see a copy of said degreed in statistics. Because you bring this up every 3 month. Quite some people are curious 
OffLine Robert Kasper
  2016-03-03 08:47:24    
double
OffLine Philippe Vaucher
  2016-03-03 09:23:02    
@Jens: can you PLEASE admit, that after 150+ messages about this topic, that MAYBE the truth is not as simple as "the very best climbers are taller"? Just you saying "Ok, maybe it's not completely obvious from the data but deep inside I feel I'm right" would already be quite an improvement over what you have been saying the last weeks.
OffLine nikfrahou
  2016-03-03 11:11:38    
"Everybody"- agrees that we cannot use "classic" deterministic statistical metric to quantify the question asked for such small sample size:  "the very best climbers are taller" 1a) Gather data of a reasonable sample size 1b) is the data representative!  2) do more advanced statistic  3) see if the "TOP-6" climbers cluster(correlates) together with height.   Very simple, one just have to gather the data, and then we can stop arguing and discuss hard facts instead of discussing subjective selected "TOP-6" climbers.  you don´t need a phd to figure that out...
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-03-03 11:45:29    
Great so just suggest who should be replaced from my list and calculate the average height. If we can agree that the average is 178 cm or more, we can say that the Top-6 climbers are taller, i.e. the very best are taller. The guys you should replace are either; Ondra, Megos, Sharma, Hojer or Webb...be my guest :)
OffLine nikfrahou
  2016-03-03 13:54:00    
my list would consist of all climbers and not a subjectively selected list. The answer should be data driven and not subjectively pick at "random". over and out 
OffLine Vincent Bouillot
  2016-03-03 14:32:52    
Sorry Jens, but I don't understand why you want to compare your Top-6 climbers to the overall population height?  We need to keep the sample of the same size aren't we? If you pick 6 random climbers in the elite like I did, you can find that they are taller than your TOP-6. PS: What can you say about my previous remarks? 8a ranking might not be objective but it's a ranking which is made out of brute force (and ignorance). No subjectivity there. Climb hard, log your ascents and you'll be the very best climber.
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-03-03 18:10:27    
If I am saying that the top-6 climbers are taller than the rest, we can not take a sample of 30 climbers. The top-6 are not random of the elite, they are the six best climbers in the world. We need to define the Top-6, then we could make a random sample of 200 climbers and compare their height.
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-03-03 18:10:37    
If I am saying that the top-6 climbers are taller than the rest, we can not take a sample of 30 climbers. The top-6 are not random of the elite, they are the six best climbers in the world. We need to define the Top-6, then we could make a random sample of 200 climbers and compare their height. And as a matter of a fact, it has already been done: 181 cm vs 174 cm.
OffLine Kenneth Rasmussen
  2016-03-04 15:45:14    
Yes, you are right Jens. We could also take the TOP-1 climbers, and then compare to a random sample of 1 out of top-200. Then we get average of TOP-1 (Adam Ondra) is 185 cm, compared to 174 cm. In 2006 the numbers were average of TOP-1 (Chris Sharma) 183 cm., compared to still 174 cm (I think?). So we see that your theory still holds, even though the increase is only 2 cm compared to 2006.
OffLine Kenneth Rasmussen
  2016-03-04 15:45:21    
Double poste
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-03-04 16:21:43    
I agree and this is what I have tried to say from the very beginning :) but possibly we could now add Woods to the list the Top-7 but even so the average height is 180 cm. 
OffLine Vincent Bouillot
  2016-03-04 17:16:19    
So let's suppose that the very best climbers are on average taller and are getting taller . Now, we should ask ourselves the following questions: 1) Is this difference in height statistically significant (i.e. vis-à-vis some other statistical tools)? 2) What do we learn from your conclusions? When does it end? 200cm? 210cm?  3) I would like to know if your conclusions are holding for subcategories i.e. the very best boulderers and sport climbers separatively (and for women).  3) If I'm taller, is climbing easier for me? Why should it be? Do you have some sort of morphological understanding why the ape index is irrelevant regarding the question? Please, for once, try to answer some of the questions. That would be awesome to develop a discussion...
OffLine arno schmidt
  2016-03-04 17:25:35    
Facts: - Jens personal top-6-climbers are 181 cm in average height - the top 100 climbers (excluding Jens top-6 of course) on 8a.nu are 174 cm in height (has somebody actually calculated this?) Conclusions that can be made from the above stated facts: - Jens personal top-6 in march 2016 are taller than the average top-100 on 8a.nu. Statistical significance unclear/not calculated. Conclusions that can not be made from the above stated facts: - the best climbers are taller than the top-100. This can only be stated for Jens personal Top-6 (though without statistical significance) - the best climbers are getting taller - being tall makes climbing easier - all tall climbers are best - there is a trend that top climbers are getting taller No data at all for that hypothesis is presented until now -... Jens this whole discussion could have been so much more pleasant and interesting if you instead of your wrong assumptions just would have started a discussion with the topic: "isn´t it interesting that quite many of the top climbers (ex Sharma, Ondra) are rather tall for being climbers. What do you think about that?"
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-03-04 17:45:18    
1. Of course, the difference between 174 cm and 180 cm is statistically significant and it can be calculated and measured in different ways.  2. We do not learn anything but saying that the old rumor saying that it is a disadvantage being taller is wrong. It certainly does not say anything about a future 200 cm average. 3. I would guess that it holds better for boulderers compared to female. I have not done any further measurement and I do not think it holds for women.  4. A taller person can reach further.  Other than that, I agree on what Arno says, beside that it seems that the very best climbers are getting taller. Some years ago, almost just Sharma was 183 cm and above and now some of the very best climbers are taller than him like Webb 184 and Hojer 187 cm. Why do you think that quite many of the very best climbers like Ondra, Sharma, Webb and Hojer are rather tall for being climbers?
OffLine arno schmidt
  2016-03-04 18:26:11    
To answer your question: I don´t know why some of the best climbers right now are rather tall. I guess it´s just coincidence. There is no reason to believe in other causes. Maybe in one year the Jens-Top-6 will be around 170 cm? Nobody knows... To your points: 1: Show me the statistics. P-value? 2: What is tall? I am 192 cm. Sometimes it is an advantage, sometimes it is a disadvantage. The important/interesting thing is: It always matters! 3: No comment 4: Your statement is correct. A short person is lighter.
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-03-04 18:53:16    
It seems we agree that right now some of the best climbers are rather tall.  This is the only thing I have tried to say so I am glad we agree upon that. I do not think it is coincidence and I do not think that the Top-6 in one year is 170 cm on an average but of course I can speculate.  
OffLine arno schmidt
  2016-03-04 19:05:49    
That is a very typical assumption that you often do. I do not agree with you that the best climbers are rather tall. I never said that. I agree with you that Jens Larsens choice of best climbers is rather tall!
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-03-04 20:33:58    
Please make a suggestion which are the very best climbers in the world and calculate their average height. 
OffLine . .
  2016-03-04 21:25:40    
Do you actually read what you reply to?? To recap, everyone but you has agreed that: 1) your top-6 selection is cherry-picked based on arbitrary criteria.  2) your statistical analysis is meaningless 3) better analysis is possible, and did not support your claim 4) your statements about trends over time are unsupported 5) you know how to do averages but not P-values If you would like to continue to assert your opinion as fact, please address these 5 points that have been made over and over again.  Otherwise, just admit that your hypothesis is in fact and *opinion*.
OffLine User Deactivated
  2016-03-04 21:35:41    
deleted
OffLine Dr Gonzo
  2016-03-04 23:03:14    
strong similarity (p<0.05!) here:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkI2JT6kr_8
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2016-03-04 23:55:52    
Of course this is not a solid theory as it just might change over time and of course it can be considered an opinion. However, I personally thinks that we also in the future will see that the very best climbers are taller,,,but of course I might be wrong. 
OffLine Endre Verden
  2016-03-05 16:45:58    
Sad thread...
OffLine fridlyst
  2016-03-08 11:28:57    
Climbing is pretty unique in the sense that there are so many young tiny light kids that are making very hard ascents, there are not many other sports where you see kids doing better than  older more experinced athletes, apparently kids have some sort of advantage and the only thing i can see is that they are smaller.
OffLine fridlyst
  2016-03-08 11:41:38    
Post removed
OffLine fridlyst
  2016-03-08 11:41:47    
Post removed
OffLine fridlyst
  2016-03-08 11:41:55    
Post removed
OffLine fridlyst
  2016-03-08 11:42:04    
Post removed
OffLine fridlyst
  2016-03-08 11:45:31    
6 best climber junior ranking Guilino 180 cm age 19Baptiste 182 cm age 18Ashima 136 cm  age 15Mirko  172     age 15Felipe  160   age 17Dimitri ni infoMegan 153 cm age 19 average 163 cm
OffLine CrazyAss
  2017-01-27 08:21:17    
Sample size is too small. You should be taking the top 1000 or 100 climbers before you can even start statistical analysis. You are only taking the very best. 
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2017-01-27 09:32:28    
I was only taking the very best as this what I said in the head line. "The very best...