Next Step For Me
Understanding Course Comparisions
okay, next step for me is to understand course comparisions ...
You are actually going runner by runner and comparing?
Doesn't it make sense to say take the average of the top 100 times at a larger invite and comparing those to come up with a differential? Or top x percent of a field? Obviously the smaller the field, the less reliable it might be, but for a carson, spartan, portage sized meet, it seems that it might be sufficiently reliable?
I wrote another program to average racers times.
For example if I do the top 100 finishers (any division) at MIS last year.
Course Differential: 59.98 based on 100 Runners with Average Time of: 959.98
Top 100 at Portage Any Division:
Course Differential: 95.95 based on 99 Runners with Average Time of: 995.95
This might suggest a 36 second correction between the two courses??? Of course, assuming no differential from morning to afternoon. You in fact used a differential of 48 for one and 25 for the other. That averaged would be 37.5 which is strikingly in the same range, is it not?
If I should better start a "how to thread for dummies like me" vs hi-jacking this thread, just say so :-)
|