Elzio Dennick wrote:
I wouldn;t think he'd chance it at that age.
Chance what?
Elzio Dennick wrote:
I wouldn;t think he'd chance it at that age.
Chance what?
pAOIF[APSOI wrote:
This makes no sense. This is the fastest anyone in this age group has ever run - so by definition is it not 100 percent age graded? How else would the calculator determine what the fall off in the 95+ age group should be?
That's what you get if you enter his age and time, whether it makes sense or not. And his record is not the exception for M95.
100m: 20.41 (82.85%)
400m: 2:21.82 (64.31%)
800m: 4:41.92 (79.55%)
1500m: 10:10.88 (75.85%)
3000m: 22:46.4 (72.37%)
5000m: 39:42.52 (71.75%)
There is steep decline from M90 to M95, and the age grade calculator is apparently not capturing it.
usa weak wrote:
We have no chance in war vs these rugged Canadians.
Fee plans to quadruple at the 2029 World M100 meet.
How dare they quadruple the entry fee. These guys are living off their retirement funds which are probably almost gone considering how long they've lived.