women's standard's waaay softer than men's

Then how would you go about actually comparing times. Obviously the Iaaf tables are off because they are just off of best lists and if the 11 to 13 percent rule is wrong how do you compare men and women's times. Like a 2:17 800 for women would be what for a man and what would a 14:30 5k from a man be for a woman ?

I'm not talking about her record, Which is stronger than the men's world record. I'm talking about american high school and college standards being way way weaker.

I've done some scientific work on this topic. It's summarized in a paper that can be downloaded here:

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1842663

I only browsed a bit of your paper but did not find where the process for explicitly comparing men and women's performances was.

Start reading carefully on page 25 under the header "Relative Performance."

ethiopian pride wrote:

Why do American's always reward mediocrity and celebrate the fact that people are getting up out of their lazy boy chairs ? So what if college girls are runnnig 11 in the two mile or 3k or running 18:30's in the 5k they don't deserve more scholarship money than a guy runnnig 16:20s in the 5k. Anything more than a 11-13 percent difference in gender is ridiculous.

18:30 (F) is a lot more impressive than 16:20 (M). Mercier puts it at 15:25.

Just because mercier is a calculator doesn't mean it's correct. The mercier calculator only can use the the data it has at it's disposle. While paula's 2003 marathon record may be included the majority of women's records are either weaker or hardly on par with the men's which scews the data in favor of the women. Also the calculator takes into account top lists from each year and what the majority of women are running. This all scews the data in the women's favor due to the fact that the women's competition is much much less deep. This isn't to take away from the women who are running or running well it's just a fact. Women have been running competitivley less time than men so it makes sense.