Age Group Records

Age Group Records

Post by rvfulltim » Thu, 29 Jan 2009 09:09:20


Does anyone know where I can look up some age group records for road
races?  I've been unsuccessful with google so far.  A friend of mine ,
female age 66, recently ran a 10K for the first time after running
marathons, and turned in a 54:40 time.  I thought that was incredibly
good considering her age.  Naturally she won her division and someone
told here it was a state record.
 
 
 

Age Group Records

Post by D Stumpu » Thu, 29 Jan 2009 09:47:17

"rvfulltime"  asked:

Quote:
> Does anyone know where I can look up some age group records for road
> races?  I've been unsuccessful with google so far.  A friend of mine ,
> female age 66, recently ran a 10K for the first time after running
> marathons, and turned in a 54:40 time.  I thought that was incredibly good
> considering her age.  Naturally she won her division and someone told here
> it was a state record.

The WMA age grading calculator:
http://www.howardgrubb.co.uk/athletics/wmalookup06.html

Rates her performance as strong, but not elite.  Her age graded performance
percentage (also known as AG%) is 79.23.

This means that she's about 80% as fast as the approximate world record.

For the F65-69 age group, the current world record for 10k on an outdoor
track is 42:07!  The marathon record is a bit softer at 3:28:10.  See:

http://www.world-masters-athletics.org/records_output/rec_list_outdoo...

So it's safe to say that she is good, but not super-elite..

I happen to be at the same AG% on a good day as she is, and here in Los
Angeles, I almost always come in from 1st to 3rd place in my age group, but
that's not national class, just strong-local-runner class.

 
 
 

Age Group Records

Post by Michell » Thu, 29 Jan 2009 11:36:24


Quote:

> A friend of mine , female age 66, recently ran a 10K for the first
> time after running marathons, and turned in a 54:40 time.  I thought
> that was incredibly good considering her age.

That is a damned good time for her age.  There's a 10K in Phoenix that
gives a special award for anyone who can run their age; in her case,
that would be in 66 minutes or less.

Her age-graded time is 40:30, and her age-graded percentile is 73.85%.  
That puts her in the regional class.
<http://www.heartbreakhill.org/age_graded.htm>

-- Michelle

--
26.2  Because I can

 
 
 

Age Group Records

Post by Sericinus hunte » Thu, 29 Jan 2009 11:59:13

Quote:

> Does anyone know where I can look up some age group records for road
> races?  I've been unsuccessful with google so far.  A friend of mine ,
> female age 66, recently ran a 10K for the first time after running
> marathons, and turned in a 54:40 time.  I thought that was incredibly
> good considering her age.  Naturally she won her division and someone
> told here it was a state record.

    Latest issue of Runner's World has it for marathon.
 
 
 

Age Group Records

Post by rvfulltim » Fri, 30 Jan 2009 04:59:09

Quote:



>> A friend of mine , female age 66, recently ran a 10K for the first
>> time after running marathons, and turned in a 54:40 time.  I thought
>> that was incredibly good considering her age.

> That is a damned good time for her age.  There's a 10K in Phoenix that
> gives a special award for anyone who can run their age; in her case,
> that would be in 66 minutes or less.

> Her age-graded time is 40:30, and her age-graded percentile is 73.85%.  
> That puts her in the regional class.
> <http://www.heartbreakhill.org/age_graded.htm>

> -- Michelle

I looked at the results of several large 10K footraces and it was hard
to find anyone faster in that age group.  The race was run at Reid Park
in Tucson.
 
 
 

Age Group Records

Post by tfacto » Fri, 30 Jan 2009 05:22:52

Quote:




>>> A friend of mine , female age 66, recently ran a 10K for the first
>>> time after running marathons, and turned in a 54:40 time.  I thought
>>> that was incredibly good considering her age.

>> That is a damned good time for her age.  There's a 10K in Phoenix that
>> gives a special award for anyone who can run their age; in her case,
>> that would be in 66 minutes or less.

>> Her age-graded time is 40:30, and her age-graded percentile is
>> 73.85%.  That puts her in the regional class.
>> <http://www.heartbreakhill.org/age_graded.htm>

>> -- Michelle

> I looked at the results of several large 10K footraces and it was hard
> to find anyone faster in that age group.  The race was run at Reid Park
> in Tucson.

79% WMA is a spectacularly good time for us regular people. With a
similar score Dan finishes at or near the top of his age group for a
metropolitan area with several million people (and I bet a larger
proportion of runners compared to the US as a whole). That's incredibly
fast. The difference between 79% and 89% WMA, say, is relatively tiny
compared to the difference between 69% (coincidentally my best
performance) and 79%, both in terms of actual times and in the
percentages of the population that can achieve those grades.

Good for her! (and for Dan too of course)

 
 
 

Age Group Records

Post by johnbhur.. » Fri, 30 Jan 2009 06:39:07



... A friend of mine , female age 66, recently ran a 10K for the first
... time after running marathons, and turned in a 54:40 time. ?I
thought
... that was incredibly good considering her age.

Certainly a good effort.  It is an entirely different thing racing
such different distances.

. I looked at the results of several large 10K footraces and it was
hard
. to find anyone faster in that age group. ?The race was run at Reid
Park
. in Tucson.

Once you get up in age ( like that ... and it won't be too long before
I get up there ) the age group competition gets weaker.  Many of the
ones that were fast when young just don't race much at all after a
certain point.

The competition in the mens category in the higher age groups is
generally stronger than the competition women face once you get 50 and
above ... it is just the way it is.

There are a couple of ladies in the Northeast Ohio area in the 60's
( not sure if they have hit 65 yet ) that are still turning out times
in the mid/high 40's for a 10k.  Not trying to say the time your
friend ran wasn't good obviously it was pretty darn good!

As Dan pointed out there are some people that like to crank out
comparisons at age and distance to give a number.  That's all well and
good but when you look at the absolute fastest times at a distance and
age there tends to be big differences between the record holder and
almost everyone else unless you are rated in the 90 percent range and
above.

 
 
 

Age Group Records

Post by Michell » Fri, 30 Jan 2009 09:48:21


Quote:

> > Her age-graded time is 40:30, and her age-graded percentile is
> > 73.85%.  That puts her in the regional class.
> > <http://www.heartbreakhill.org/age_graded.htm>

> > -- Michelle

> I looked at the results of several large 10K footraces and it was
> hard to find anyone faster in that age group.  The race was run at
> Reid Park in Tucson.

It is not surprising that there wouldn't be anyone faster in a local
race, considering that she's rated in the regional class.

By the way, I'm in Chandler.  I'll be running in the Lost Dutchman 10K
on Feb 15th.  I'm in the same age group as your friend, but nowhere
nearly as fast as she is.

-- Michelle

--
26.2  Because I can

 
 
 

Age Group Records

Post by Elflor » Fri, 30 Jan 2009 23:41:14


Quote:


>> A friend of mine , female age 66, recently ran a 10K for the first
>> time after running marathons, and turned in a 54:40 time.  I thought
>> that was incredibly good considering her age.

> That is a damned good time for her age.  There's a 10K in Phoenix that
> gives a special award for anyone who can run their age; in her case,
> that would be in 66 minutes or less.

> Her age-graded time is 40:30, and her age-graded percentile is 73.85%.  
> That puts her in the regional class.
><http://www.heartbreakhill.org/age_graded.htm>

The percentage is NOT a percentile. It's your pace as a percentage of
a smoothed age vs world record pace curve.

In terms of *percentiles*, she's probably in the top 1% or so in her age group.

Cheers,
--
Elflord
"RRings best troll" -- Mr Billie on rec.running

 
 
 

Age Group Records

Post by Elflor » Fri, 30 Jan 2009 23:44:05


Quote:
> 79% WMA is a spectacularly good time for us regular people. With a
> similar score Dan finishes at or near the top of his age group for a
> metropolitan area with several million people (and I bet a larger
> proportion of runners compared to the US as a whole). That's incredibly
> fast. The difference between 79% and 89% WMA, say, is relatively tiny
> compared to the difference between 69% (coincidentally my best
> performance) and 79%, both in terms of actual times and in the
> percentages of the population that can achieve those grades.

Not quite ... there are plenty of 80%+ runners in New York, but 89% in the
US more or less puts you on the national stage (that's a 2:19 marathon for men)

Cheers,
--
Elflord
"RRings best troll" -- Mr Billie on rec.running

 
 
 

Age Group Records

Post by tfacto » Sat, 31 Jan 2009 00:23:18

Quote:


>> 79% WMA is a spectacularly good time for us regular people. With a
>> similar score Dan finishes at or near the top of his age group for a
>> metropolitan area with several million people (and I bet a larger
>> proportion of runners compared to the US as a whole). That's incredibly
>> fast. The difference between 79% and 89% WMA, say, is relatively tiny
>> compared to the difference between 69% (coincidentally my best
>> performance) and 79%, both in terms of actual times and in the
>> percentages of the population that can achieve those grades.

> Not quite ... there are plenty of 80%+ runners in New York, but 89% in the
> US more or less puts you on the national stage (that's a 2:19 marathon for men)

Right, that was my point. The difference between 79 and 89 is the
difference between being one of a few in a huge metropolitan area (NY or
LA, i.e.) or in the country. That's an order of magnitude difference,
maybe two at most (1 in millions or 10s of millions vs 1 in 100s of
millions). My 69 doesn't get me age group placement in a local 5k drawn
from a population of a few thousand. That's three or four orders of
magnitude difference compared to 79.
 
 
 

Age Group Records

Post by Michell » Sat, 31 Jan 2009 04:09:08


Quote:

> > Her age-graded time is 40:30, and her age-graded percentile is
> > 73.85%.  That puts her in the regional class.
> ><http://www.heartbreakhill.org/age_graded.htm>

> The percentage is NOT a percentile. It's your pace as a percentage of
> a smoothed age vs world record pace curve.

I had meant to write percentage, but had been doing work with
percentiles on my computer, and the word stuck in my head; I didn't even
notice that I had written the wrong word.

Thanks for pointing it out.

--
26.2  Because I can