tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-124160833070692205.post2657600770893148582..comments2016-12-11T11:34:25.538-05:00Comments on The Aging Pseudo-Athlete: WS Pace ChartDamonnoreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-124160833070692205.post-75482343145485207152008-06-16T10:06:00.000-04:002008-06-16T10:06:00.000-04:00Andrew,I used all finishers, and calculated the me...Andrew,<BR/><BR/>I used all finishers, and calculated the median percentage of time used for each split. I ignored time spent in aid stations to keep it simple, and I only bothered with one time at the river crossing, on the near side.<BR/><BR/>In the past, I've used a different technique, where I would break finishers down by time ranges around a number. For example, if I wanted 24 hour estimates, I might take all finishers from 23-25 hours and examine them. I'd plot data points and ask Excel to generate a 5th order polynomial for me. That can give you more accurate data for a narrow time range, but the reduced number of data points risks being less statistically valid. I would often have data sets with fewer than 30 records, and those are particularly suspect.<BR/><BR/>Because 16 hour runners and 30 hour runners might run the course very differently, in terms of time spent on particular segments, my method this time is probably best for runners near the mid-point of the finishers. I simply used all finishers and then took the median percentage time used for each segment. I decided that using averages could be thrown off a bit by bizarre splits if a runner took a nap at an aid station somewhere.<BR/><BR/>Then, when I summed the median times, I got 99.14%. So, I divided each percentage by .9914, to normalize those percentages to 100%. From that, I took the percentage for each segment, and multiplied it by a projected finishing time.<BR/><BR/>I started with the spreadsheet that firepotter mentioned in his comment.<BR/><BR/>I have now modified the spreadsheet somewhat for my crew, but I can e-mail you what I have, if you like. You could then use that as the starting point for what you need.<BR/><BR/>I went with a simple technique this time that had lots of data points, rather than smaller samples around a single finishing time range.<BR/><BR/><BR/>DamonDamonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16393751713576765589noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-124160833070692205.post-53015543776461684152008-06-16T09:21:00.000-04:002008-06-16T09:21:00.000-04:00This is really nice. I have a question about meth...This is really nice. I have a question about method. I don't quite understand how you calculated the median values. (I'm sure this is my fault since I'm a math dummy.) Are the median values for 24 hour runners taken from those who finished in over 22 but under 24 hours, over 22 but under 26 hours, all under 24 hour finishers? I ask because one of my projects this week is to sit down and calculate median times for the last ten 24 hour finishers (since I will be at the back of the 24 hour pack if I'm in it at all).Andrewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15435959192189421397noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-124160833070692205.post-53717987859141887902008-06-13T12:38:00.000-04:002008-06-13T12:38:00.000-04:00Excellent work!Here is a version of last year's sp...Excellent work!<BR/><BR/>Here is a version of last year's splits on Google Doc.<BR/><BR/>http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=pOU9pftk-3V6N70BeOXfCSA&hl=en<BR/><BR/>Garyfirepotterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02243524102959224074noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-124160833070692205.post-57526422844531731182008-06-12T16:48:00.000-04:002008-06-12T16:48:00.000-04:00You just saved me a lot of work... thanks!!!You just saved me a lot of work... thanks!!!Jamiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09819417283043630893noreply@blogger.com