Waltons ThreadLord
Interesting results, given that 7 weeks in the base score is 70 (i.e. running at your average weekly distance). I know some have been affected by injuries and the winter has slowed others. Still, the numbers speak of a high level of consistency among the runners vs. previous years. Or am I reading too much into this too soon?
5k 23:48.45 (3/22); 4M 31:26 (2/22); 5M 38:55 (11/23); 10k 49:24 (10/22); 10M 1:29:33 (2/24); Half 1:48:32 (10/22); Marathon 4:29:58 (11/23)Upcoming races: Clinton Country Run 15k, 4/27; Spring Distance Classic 5k, 4/28
Could it be that without races, we are most consistent weekly than when training (when we might run a lot more than our weekly average before taper?
Damaris
As part of the 2024 London Marathon, I am fundraising for VICTA, a charity that helps blind and visually impaired children. My mentor while in law school, Jim K (a blind attorney), has been a huge inspiration and an example of courage and perseverance. Please consider donating.
Fundraising Page
The way I built the points system, it favors getting 10 points vs getting any other score. The "bracket" worth 10 points is twice as big as any other bracket (Goal + or - 10%)
I know why I did that : because to me it's never about hitting a specific number (69, 70, 72, it's all good) and I didn't want people to lose a point because they're 0.2 miles under, or wanting to go an extra 0.1 mile to get an extra point.
Of course one could argue that I just put the threshold elsewhere, and the 0.1 miles I'm talking about still occur. I know, but that was the rationale behind it.
I thought that would put he lot of us with a similar score, week after week, (roughly 70 points by week 7) but as you pointed out, many are running more now that what the average of the past three years would lead to think.
Why, you ask? I dunno
As someone who wasn't injured in the last 3 years, I'm at a severe disadvantage
The way I see it, "winning" by a lot probably means you've had bad previous years, and "losing" by a lot is the opposite. My goal is to keep to the 10 points per week as much as possible, with the occasional 9 or 11 points.
Sounds good to me. Not unlike professional sports where teams rise and fall over the years (generally speaking). It would be hard for any one person to win this game year after year.
With the way my training cycles go, I'm going to be up and down during the year.
My miles bounced back up. Not doing my STD any good, I'm sure.
Weekly stats
I would not expect running to help that, your best bet is antibiotics.
Dave
Indeed.
Lol
Week 8:
STD leaders: Ginny, HCK, Dave, and Bluerun.
Bluerun is at a disadvantage the way my calculation is right now for STD%. I calculate the percentage relative to what you were supposed to run based on your previous 3 years, instead of what your actual mileage is this year. It should be the latter. I'll change that before I actually award the points for STD%.
Here's my mileage.
Weekly Run stats
Ginny, Bluerun, Dave and HCK2 are the leaders for the STD%
Finally changed the calculation this past weekend. Now The STD percentage is calculated relative to the average miles run this year, and not based on the average miles run in the previous 3 years.
Ramping up my mileage as training for my April half is not doing my consistency score any good.
StD% leaders: 1-Ginny, 2-BlueRun, 3-DavePNW, 4-Cyberic, 5-WCRunner