Home Chat General Chat

I was just wondering..

whilst reading about Scott Neydli's DNF at Kona, losing his nutrition & deciding to stop & fetch within the first Km or so would end his race, so didn't etc.
I wondered if the difference between 1st & say 50th is the same relative to the winners time across the distances (obviously flat or hilly courses would skew the maths, but in general). Does the question make sense? I mean if an ironman winner crosses the line in 9hours, will 50th cross say, in a time that is 5% longer & an olympic winner crossing at 1.50 would 50th still be my 'made up' 5% slower?
I lack the mathematical ability to get beyond wondering & I have no idea why I was wondering..except that how much would you lose going back for your nutrition versus your ability to make up that time & the proportion of your total time it would take, obviously the longer the race the smaller significance of delays.

Comments

  • BritspinBritspin Posts: 1,655
    note to self..must stop reading tri mags on the loo.
  • risris Posts: 1,002
    i thought triumphant used (still does?) to calculate his position as a relative % of the winning times, maybe there is some handy data from there...
  • You have a good memory. I still analyse all my results, and break down each of my splits as a percentage of the top 10, just to even out any spikes. As a rule of thumb, and because I am useless, my times are generally about 50% of the winners. So in ParkRun, if the winner takes circa 17 minutes, I'm in around the 23 minute mark. At OD, a 1:55 winning time means I get in just under the 3 hour mark. For some reason, which I don't know why, but when I stepped up to HIM the winner was just under 5 hours, and you guessed it, my time was 7:28

    so when my half marathon time was 1:53, what time did the winner post

    As to Britspins question, I'll have a look, but probably can't compare 1st with 50th as it would be slewed by the number competing. But maybe have a look at 10/25/50% down the leader board and see if there %'age times on the winner corelate.

    Something for the office tomorrow I think
  • shadowone1shadowone1 Posts: 1,408
    surely as proper anaylsis of the times, you have use the median of the times. So therefore to avoid "spikes" you have to rule out the quickest time and the slowest time. I know this in a strict statistic sense is not accurate but neither surely is taking an pure average???

    Oh perhaps this is taking it too far......
  • OK, I've crunched some numbers, and analysed seven races I had results for from last year. They included 5 pool based sprints, 1 OW sprint, and 1 OW OD. Participants vary between 45 to 1477.

    On a very rough averaging basis:
    to come 5% down the board, you need to add 11% to the winners time
    for 10% down, add 15%
    for 25% down, add 23%
    for 50% down, add 34%
    to come last, add 116%

    Don't know if it's of any use, but I said I'd do it, so it's done.
  • BritspinBritspin Posts: 1,655
    Interesting...I guess you have taken a mean or average, I was wondering what difference distance makes, so, do or would your figures /per centages hold the same for sprint, oly, HIM & IM?
    Fab work by the way..mathematical ability always humbles me....more of a word man, can you tell?
  • It's only based on averages, and only covers seven events, so not a great sample. But it does cover different distances, and size of event.

    I'll get a few more results, and crunch some more
  • BritspinBritspin Posts: 1,655
    You're a star..you do see what I mean tho'? As in 10% down in a sprint will be the product of a 15% add on to the winners time, but is it true to say adding 15% on to an IM winners time would mean a similar 10% down?
  • BritspinBritspin Posts: 1,655
    BTW...how sad are we?
  • How sad are we. You're only asking the questions. I'm going away downloading the reuslts and crunching the numbers.
  • BlinkybazBlinkybaz Posts: 1,144
    your triathletes, Stats and anyalisis come written on the tin!!!
    Britspin wrote:
    BTW...how sad are we?
  • OK, IM UK 2009, male age groupers only. Pro's are too fast.
    5% = 1st + 17%
    10% = 1st + 22%
    25% = 1st + 30%
    50% = 1st + 40%
    Last = 1st + 83%
  • BritspinBritspin Posts: 1,655
    Thats what prompted my wondering...how much harder would it have been to make up the lost time/distance, compared to a DNF, how high would Scott have climbed had he been able to follow his nutrition plan after picking up his food? Enough to please sponsors etc? In no way am I second guessing his enforced strategy, I am & will most likely remain an armchair ironman...
  • JulesJules Posts: 987
    Working out these percentages for your own performance is useful as it will show you if you didn't already know, where your strengths and weakness are.

    For example I found last season that on the bike I got about a third of the way down the field, but on the swim and run I was halfway down. You should look at T1 and T2 too.

    You can then adjust your training accordingly.
  • jonEjonE Posts: 1,113
    Britspin wrote:
    Thats what prompted my wondering...how much harder would it have been to make up the lost time/distance, compared to a DNF, how high would Scott have climbed had he been able to follow his nutrition plan after picking up his food? Enough to please sponsors etc? In no way am I second guessing his enforced strategy, I am & will most likely remain an armchair ironman...
    Suppose it depends how far down the course.Working on a mile every 2.45 mins and depending how far to their special needs bag.
    History tells us that when pro's lose their nutrition things start to go bad to worse.In 2002, the then holder of the HIMUK,Richard Allan lost his nutrition whilst out on the bike when it fell off after hitting a pothole,watching the video as he exitted T2,he was screaming for gels at the feed station on exit,looking around,despite the fact that all the feed stations are laid out identically,he should have been able to go straight to them not flounder around.Time lost,energy depleted,game over.Pro's I expect plan races in detail,but still seem to be human at times and forget items(socks)or generally believe that to forge ahead is the best plan.
  • diddsdidds Posts: 655
    britspin: note to self..must stop reading tri mags on the loo.

    doesn;t everyone?

    or is it actually just Britspin and me? (not in the same loo. at the same time. to avoid any doubt).

    didds
Sign In or Register to comment.