Forums >Look What I Can Do!>Age graded milestone
Prince of Fatness
Here's one site. http://www.pinebeltpacers.org/AgeGrade/newwava.html There are a whole bunch of sites that just replicate the WAVA calculations. I'm sure someone else can post a better link that will explain age grading as well as do the calculations.
Here's one site. http://www.pinebeltpacers.org/AgeGrade/newwava.html
There are a whole bunch of sites that just replicate the WAVA calculations. I'm sure someone else can post a better link that will explain age grading as well as do the calculations.
Yeah that's one of the first ones when you Google it. I use this one, because it was the only one I found that does 5 milers.
Not at it at all.
At the risk of seeming too imodest I'll show how wierd I am about age grading. Here is an excel chart of my AG's at the races I've done this year plotted versus date, has distances from 5K up to 12K. The 70.5% in March was coming right off of my hip injury. Good progress since then. Just to give you an idea how far some of us take this AG thing!
Congrats MrPH!
I have just squeaked a 70% and have a bunch in the 68-69% range.'
I am comparing my times at age 58, with the 32 year old son of a friend, who has run a few half marathons- he is at best 2 minutes ahead of me in real time, age corrected he is toast!
Jim is a phenomenal runner, really something special.
Simon.
PBs since age 60: 5k- 24:36, 10k - 47:17. Half Marathon- 1:42:41.
10 miles (unofficial) 1:16:44.
Just to give you an idea how far some of us take this AG thing!
You're not alone. I don't have the updated version online but here's data up to the start of this year. The two short lines on the graph link the same race in different years - one is a 5k and one is a half marathon. It's interesting how similar the slopes (ie rate of improvement) are and how similar they are to the overall line of best fit.
John
Imminent Catastrophe
Having turned 50, I am in favor of this.
Now, get off my lawn!
"Able to function despite imminent catastrophe"
"To obtain the air that angels breathe you must come to Tahoe"--Mark Twain
"The most common question from potential entrants is 'I do not know if I can do this' to which I usually answer, 'that's the whole point'.--Paul Charteris, Tarawera Ultramarathon RD.
√ Javelina Jundred Jalloween 2015
Cruel Jewel 50 mile May 2016
Western States 100 June 2016
You're not alone. I don't have the updated version online but here's data up to the start of this year. The two short lines on the graph link the same race in different years - one is a 5k and one is a half marathon. It's interesting how similar the slopes (ie rate of improvement) are and how similar they are to the overall line of best fit. John
Suhweeeet! Hey, you should send this to Jim. I'm always sending him graphs of this or that data and he just ain't a graphical representation person! He'd rather just have the numbers.
That is a real nice progression. I'd put more data points on mine but I only really started racing this past year.
Giant Flaming Dork
http://xkcd.com/621/
Nice Idea and took it a step further and graphed both age Grade and Vo2Max (that is how I used to judge races against each other) and it looks like a 95% correlation between the two (yes I am also a stat geek) MTA -- Ran actual #'s and Correlation is 99.5%, the 95% was just a guess from eyeballing the numbers.. Now I imagine over time the correlation would break down as Age grades would go up faster than V02Max as you age, but over the course of a few years a pretty good predictor. Only had 1 race the same and reprsented by Black connector.
Looking back was doing pretty good first 3 - 6 months (started running 1/08) and then numbers dropped as increased distance too fast in Fall 08 marathon attempt ending in injury. Oct 08 - Jan 09 was little running due to recovery with lowpoint race 5 miler 12/28 in Fla on vacation with temps 50 degrees wamer than used to. Since then things have been looking good last 6 - 7 months.
"It's supposed to be hard. If it wasn't hard, everyone would do it. The hard... is what makes it Great!
But remember that this isn't actual VO2max - that would require running on a treadmill hooked up to machines. This is a proxy for VO2max, and the usual calculation is derived from Jack Daniel's tables which are, in turn, based on your time for a particular distance - just like the age grade tables. The correlation should be near perfect and I imagine the very slight discrepancy is due to either different tables or a slight age grading effect since your data covers more than one year. As you say the correlation will decrease as time increases and the age grading factor becomes more important.
Interesting to see other people's data. It looks, just by eyeballing it, that the line of best fit would be similar to the line joining the two points for the same race.
Interesting to see other people's data. It looks, just by eyeballing it, that the line of best fit would be similar to the line joining the two points for the same race. John
Here you go .... Close but my numbers from Oct to Jan were skewed low and almost have two lines of best fit:
2008 - Farly flat and 1/09 to Present has almost all the increase from approx AG % 48 to 60.
Its usually about now that La Brat comes on and calls us DORKS! Like someone working in a Lab has room to talk
Well, we are most definitely dorks! Problems I have with fitting a straight line to that data is that I'm pretty sure it isn't a straight line as well as AG performance shouldn't correlate to DATE. Maybe overall mileage or maybe better yet the point system that Daniels assigns to your training, I guess we're using DATE as a proxy for 'training'. I think we all have a theoretical best AG and our AG's will asymptotically approach that best. and we won't achieve higher AGs with time as those equations predict . But it's all fun to look at and play around with
Good point. Instead of trying to pick in advance what the best unit for the x-axis should be, it would be interesting, if you have several years worth of data (and it wouldn't be possible to do it without a good few years) to fit lots of different explanatory variables and see which gives the best fit.
The data fit well to time for me because over that same period I've had a corresponding increase in mileage from about 30mpw to 70mpw. There are some ups and downs, especially in the first year but the broad pattern is an increase. Since we are being nerds here's another graph. I never quite decided between a 4 and 8 week running average so it still has both.
Petco Run/Walk/Wag 5k
bob e v 2014 goals: keep on running! Is there anything more than that?
Complete the last 3 races in the Austin Distance Challenge, Rogue 30k, 3M Half, Austin Full
Break the 1000 mi barrier!
History: blessed heart attack 3/15/2008; c25k july 2008 first 5k 10/26/2008 on 62nd birthday.
bobev - can't help with that one but I can sure relate. I was on beta blockers for years and just last Dec started with ACE inhibitor class of meds. Don't know how it affected my running, if it did at all. I do seem to get a slightly higher max heart rate now, though.
Here's a link from SoCalPete's blog on Age grading:
http://petemagill.blogspot.com/2009/07/so-just-what-heck-is-age-grading.html
bobev - can't help with that one but I can sure relate. I was on beta blockers for years and just last Dec started with ACE inhibitor class of meds. Don't know how it affected my running, if it did at all. I do seem to get a slightly higher max heart rate now, though. Here's a link from SoCalPete's blog on Age grading: http://petemagill.blogspot.com/2009/07/so-just-what-heck-is-age-grading.html
"This blogger would add that age-grading varies considerably for different events - and for the two sexes. It's not unusual for older sprinters to record age grades in the high 90s or even over 100%. On the other hand, I'm not sure a male distance runner has ever recorded a road race age grade of 100%."
Interesting. But I guess his audience is aiming for 90%+ so it makes a much bigger difference. Fo those of us aiming to one day hit 70% maybe it doesn't make much difference.