Obviously, as a not-very-dedicated middling plodder, I'm not going to win, so it's more appropriate to see where I am with respect to the distribution. Rather than chart the whole field, I've chosen to compare my time and position with the leader and median (i.e. half way down the field) for the overall result and my category Veteran Man. Finding the median is easier than computing the mean (average), as I can just look up the half way point in the listing. These are my times for each of the three races (not an identical course, but similar).
Data laid out as follows.
- Number of runners in each of the four categories, then the total
- My time hh:mm:ss
- Overall: leader's time, median time, my position overall
- Vet Man: leader's time, median time, my position in this category
- Overall: my time ratio vs leading time; vs median. Lower is better (Note 1)
- Vet Man: my time ratio vs leading time; vs median in this category
- My position as a percentage of the Overall field (Note 2)
- My position as a percentage of Category
Encouraging to see an improvement in each of the metrics. Goes with my general trajectory of improving (restoring fitness?) since I switched the running back on in December. Sort of confirms what I thought about progress and how you feel competing.
Note 1: The winner would score 1.000 here, and someone running at half the speed would be 2.000. So I take 50% longer than the leader, but in terms of time I'm within a few percent of the middle.
Note 2: The winner would be about 0.3% (1 divided by the number of runners) on position, whereas the last runner would score 100%. The median runner scores 50% by definition. The results show that the distribution isn't symmetric (there are more people towards the front; the average is quicker than the median). It's taken me 3 goes to work towards the better half of the field, and I'm not quite there yet, whereas on time I'm not doing so bad.
No comments:
Post a Comment