I'm guessing that you are the expert @Ianiceman is seeking (although I'm certainly open to any questions you have Ian - PM me). I'm a user of statistical analysis rather than a scholar of them. However, I agree that compared to the general population, FC participants in SF challenges are likely high in the top tail, but just because any sample can be a subsample within a broader population does not mean that it could not itself be normally distributed. There may well be a very shallow distribution in this population, but I would still argue that a more meaningful test of difference would be non-parametric.It would also be the far simpler analysis. Perhaps I'll give it a go this week in between the real statistics I will be doing.
However, I predict that the number of people on this forum who have any interest in, or even understanding of, this conversation is very very small. We need someone to jump in with a discussion about whether style can be viewed as an objective or subjective property and display their philosophy scholarship posthaste.
I'm not an expert, but would also be happy to answer any questions to the best of my knowledge @Ianiceman. I also used statistical analyses in my research for my MSc thesis, but don't do research anymore. My post was pretty much just for laughs, but a fun one to write. Funnily enough, my undergraduate degree was actually a combination of philosophy, and kinesiology. I could go on at length about how style is subjective in the broadest sense, that exists in a vast set of paradigms, such as CBD. Within each paradigm, there are many objective measures of style, according to convention. Anything according to convention, however, could be argued to be subjective in its inception. I am sure that someone could make an argument about mathematical relationships, having to do with geometry, and colours. Still others could bring sociological, psychological, and anthropological arguments, and explanations, in favour of subjectivity, objectivity, and a combination of the two.