WSM Scoring System Comparison — All Comps
Cross-competition analysis across multiple real-world scoring systems.
Scoring Systems Tested
| System | Origin | 1st/2nd ratio (10-athlete field) |
|---|---|---|
| WSM Linear (10-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1) | World’s Strongest Man (current). N pts for 1st down to 1 for last. Equal gaps. | 1.11x |
| F1 2010-present (25-18-15-12-10-8-6-4-2-1) | Formula 1 (2010+). Steep top, drops off after 10th. | 1.39x |
| F1 2003-2009 (10-8-6-5-4-3-2-1-0-0) | Formula 1 (2003-2009). Top 8 only. Lower 1st/2nd ratio (1.25x). | 1.25x |
| F1 1991-2002 (10-6-4-3-2-1-0-0-0-0) | Formula 1 (1991-2002). Top 6 only. Schumacher era. 1.67x for winning. | 1.67x |
| F1 1961-1990 (9-6-4-3-2-1-0-0-0-0) | Formula 1 (1961-1990). Top 6 only. Senna/Prost era. 1.5x for winning. | 1.50x |
| MotoGP (25-20-16-13-11-10-9-8-7-6) | MotoGP (current). All 10 positions score well. 1.25x for winning. | 1.25x |
| MotoGP Extended (25-20-16-13-11-10-9-8-7-6) | MotoGP scale extended to 15 positions (5-4-3-2-1 tail) for larger fields. | 1.25x |
Cross-Competition Winners
| Comp | WSM Linear | F1 2010-present | F1 2003-2009 | F1 1991-2002 | F1 1961-1990 | MotoGP | MotoGP Extended |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arnold 2024 | M. Hooper (52) | M. Hooper (108) | M. Hooper (44) | M. Hooper (40) | M. Hooper (37) | M. Hooper (111) | M. Hooper (111) |
| Arnold 2024 W | A. Jardine (45) | A. Jardine (74) | A. Jardine (29) | A. Jardine (24) | A. Jardine (22) | A. Jardine (80) | A. Jardine (80) |
| Arnold 2025 | M. Hooper (51.5) | M. Hooper (104.8) | M. Hooper (44) | L. Hatton (35) | M. Hooper (33) | M. Hooper (112.3) | M. Hooper (112.3) |
| Arnold 2025 W | I. Carrasquillo (60.5) | I. Carrasquillo (97) | I. Carrasquillo (40.5) | I. Carrasquillo (30.5) | I. Carrasquillo (29.5) | I. Carrasquillo (104.5) | I. Carrasquillo (104.5) |
| Arnold 2026 | M. Hooper (36) | M. Hooper (83.5) | M. Hooper (33.5) | M. Hooper (26.5) | M. Hooper (25) | M. Hooper (92.5) | M. Hooper (92.5) |
| Arnold 2026 W | O. Liashchuk (50.5) | I. Carrasquillo (109) | I. Carrasquillo (44) | I. Carrasquillo (38) | I. Carrasquillo (35) | I. Carrasquillo (115) | I. Carrasquillo (115) |
| Rogue 2024 | M. Hooper (54) | M. Hooper (112) | M. Hooper (48) | M. Hooper (38) | M. Hooper (37) | M. Hooper (121) | M. Hooper (121) |
| Rogue 2024 W | I. Carrasquillo (53) | I. Carrasquillo (117) | I. Carrasquillo (47) | I. Carrasquillo (41) | I. Carrasquillo (38) | I. Carrasquillo (120) | I. Carrasquillo (120) |
| Rogue 2025 | M. Hooper (46) | M. Hooper (112) | M. Hooper (47) | M. Hooper (39) | M. Hooper (37) | M. Hooper (120) | M. Hooper (120) |
| Rogue 2025 W | I. Carrasquillo (50) | I. Carrasquillo (111) | I. Carrasquillo (44) | I. Carrasquillo (38) | I. Carrasquillo (35) | I. Carrasquillo (116) | I. Carrasquillo (116) |
| SMOE 2024 | M. Hooper (117) | M. Hooper (143) | M. Hooper (59.3) | H. Björnsson (53) | H. Björnsson (48) | M. Hooper (151.3) | M. Hooper (151.3) |
| SMOE 2025 | E. Singleton (93.5) | L. Hatton (106.5) | L. Hatton (43) | L. Hatton (36) | L. Hatton (33.5) | L. Hatton (111.5) | L. Hatton (116.5) |
| WSM 2024 Finals | T. Stoltman (53) | T. Stoltman (112.3) | T. Stoltman (46) | T. Stoltman (37.7) | T. Stoltman (35.8) | T. Stoltman (117.8) | T. Stoltman (117.8) |
| WSM 2025 Finals | R. Nel (47) | T. Stoltman (96.7) | T. Stoltman (40) | T. Stoltman (32) | T. Stoltman (30.5) | T. Stoltman (107.3) | T. Stoltman (107.3) |
| WSM 2026 Finals | M. Hooper (54) | R. Nel (115) | M. Hooper (48) | R. Nel (41) | R. Nel (38) | M. Hooper (121) | M. Hooper (121) |
1st-vs-2nd Gap Per System
How close was the comp under each system? Smaller gap = more sensitive to system choice.
| Comp | WSM Linear | F1 2010-present | F1 2003-2009 | F1 1991-2002 | F1 1961-1990 | MotoGP | MotoGP Extended |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arnold 2024 | 11.5 | 37 | 14 | 16 | 14 | 32 | 32 |
| Arnold 2024 W | 0.5 | 7 | 2.5 | 4 | 3 | 5.5 | 5.5 |
| Arnold 2025 | 2.5 | 0.8 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0.3 | 0.3 |
| Arnold 2025 W | 4 | 11.5 | 5.5 | 5.5 | 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Arnold 2026 | 1 | 4 | 1.5 | 3.5 | 3 | 3 | 3 |
| Arnold 2026 W | 1.5 | 7.5 | 3 | 5 | 4 | 8 | 8 |
| Rogue 2024 | 10 | 20 | 11 | 7 | 8 | 20 | 20 |
| Rogue 2024 W | 6 | 30 | 11 | 16 | 14 | 26 | 26 |
| Rogue 2025 | 6.5 | 16.5 | 8.5 | 8.5 | 8.5 | 16.5 | 16.5 |
| Rogue 2025 W | 6.5 | 27 | 10.5 | 14.5 | 12.5 | 25.5 | 25.5 |
| SMOE 2024 | 9 | 3 | 4.3 | 5.7 | 2.7 | 0.3 | 0.3 |
| SMOE 2025 | 1 | 19.5 | 7.5 | 12.8 | 10.8 | 10.5 | 11.5 |
| WSM 2024 Finals | 5.5 | 17.5 | 6 | 8.0 | 7.0 | 13.7 | 13.7 |
| WSM 2025 Finals | 0.5 | 1.7 | 1 | 2 | 1.5 | 2.3 | 2.3 |
| WSM 2026 Finals | 2 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 2 |
Winner Flips Per Comp
How many distinct winners does each comp produce across the 6 scoring systems?
| Comp | Distinct winners | Winners |
|---|---|---|
| Arnold 2024 | 1 | M. Hooper |
| Arnold 2024 W | 1 | A. Jardine |
| Arnold 2025 | 2 | L. Hatton, M. Hooper |
| Arnold 2025 W | 1 | I. Carrasquillo |
| Arnold 2026 | 1 | M. Hooper |
| Arnold 2026 W | 2 | I. Carrasquillo, O. Liashchuk |
| Rogue 2024 | 1 | M. Hooper |
| Rogue 2024 W | 1 | I. Carrasquillo |
| Rogue 2025 | 1 | M. Hooper |
| Rogue 2025 W | 1 | I. Carrasquillo |
| SMOE 2024 | 2 | H. Björnsson, M. Hooper |
| SMOE 2025 | 2 | E. Singleton, L. Hatton |
| WSM 2024 Finals | 1 | T. Stoltman |
| WSM 2025 Finals | 2 | R. Nel, T. Stoltman |
| WSM 2026 Finals | 2 | M. Hooper, R. Nel |
Per-System Winner Distribution
Under each scoring system, who wins how many comps?
- WSM Linear: M. Hooper (7), I. Carrasquillo (3), A. Jardine (1), O. Liashchuk (1), E. Singleton (1), T. Stoltman (1), R. Nel (1)
- F1 2010-present: M. Hooper (6), I. Carrasquillo (4), T. Stoltman (2), A. Jardine (1), L. Hatton (1), R. Nel (1)
- F1 2003-2009: M. Hooper (7), I. Carrasquillo (4), T. Stoltman (2), A. Jardine (1), L. Hatton (1)
- F1 1991-2002: M. Hooper (4), I. Carrasquillo (4), L. Hatton (2), T. Stoltman (2), A. Jardine (1), H. Björnsson (1), R. Nel (1)
- F1 1961-1990: M. Hooper (5), I. Carrasquillo (4), T. Stoltman (2), A. Jardine (1), H. Björnsson (1), L. Hatton (1), R. Nel (1)
- MotoGP: M. Hooper (7), I. Carrasquillo (4), T. Stoltman (2), A. Jardine (1), L. Hatton (1)
- MotoGP Extended: M. Hooper (7), I. Carrasquillo (4), T. Stoltman (2), A. Jardine (1), L. Hatton (1)
Methodological Notes
- Scale length follows the comp’s full roster, including DNS athletes. A comp with 10 athletes uses a 10-position scale, regardless of how many actually competed in any given event. DNS athletes always score 0 but conceptually occupy positions at the bottom of the field.
- Tie averaging: athletes sharing a placement string (e.g. all marked
T2) split the points for the positions they collectively consume. 3 athletes at T2 → positions 2, 3, 4 → each gets(scale[1] + scale[2] + scale[3]) / 3. - Scale truncation in big fields: systems with short scales (F1 1991-2002 has only 6 positions; F1 2003-2009 has 8) zero-pad in larger fields. In a 16-athlete comp under F1 1991-2002, positions 7-16 all score 0. This means the linear ordering at the tail is lost — useful to know if a comp’s mid-pack matters.
- Scale truncation in small fields: systems with long scales (F1 2010+, MotoGP — both 10 positions) get sliced to fit smaller fields. A 9-athlete comp under F1 2010+ uses
[25, 18, 15, 12, 10, 8, 6, 4, 2]— the last1is dropped. This mildly steepens the system. - Event names with markdown-special characters (pipes
|, brackets) will break the rendered tables. Use underscores or plain text in CSV column headers. - No-lift / withdrew rules vary across comps. WSM 2026 treats a
(No lift)on max events as DNS (0 pts). SMOE 2024 treats no-lifts as competing-but-last. The CSVs here encode whichever interpretation matches the comp’s published totals; cross-comp comparison should account for this.