In a LACCTIC simulation, Parker Valby has a 97% chance of winning. Doris Lemngole has a 1% chance, Katelyn Tuohy a 1% chance, and Hilda Olemomoi a 1% chance. 😆
In a LACCTIC simulation, Parker Valby has a 97% chance of winning. Doris Lemngole has a 1% chance, Katelyn Tuohy a 1% chance, and Hilda Olemomoi a 1% chance. 😆
Remind me of the projection from last year.
Lacctic is a representation of what we’ve seen so far. I’d say 97% sounds about right in terms of the performances this season. Of course, Tuohy could her best race this weekend, but that’s just speculation and not really a job for a computer.
Lacctic is a representation of what we’ve seen so far. I’d say 97% sounds about right in terms of the performances this season. Of course, Tuohy could her best race this weekend, but that’s just speculation and not really a job for a computer.
Unless a computer algorithm could be tracking sleep patterns, recovery (resting HR) and body weight (vs race weight), etc. 🙃
In a LACCTIC simulation, Parker Valby has a 97% chance of winning. Doris Lemngole has a 1% chance, Katelyn Tuohy a 1% chance, and Hilda Olemomoi a 1% chance. 😆
Remind me of the projection from last year.
I don't have the %, but here is what the pre championship ratings were
In a LACCTIC simulation, Parker Valby has a 97% chance of winning. Doris Lemngole has a 1% chance, Katelyn Tuohy a 1% chance, and Hilda Olemomoi a 1% chance. 😆
Remind me of the projection from last year.
I don't have the %, but here is what the pre championship ratings were
What's tuohy going to do next fall? Why not run cross country again? 2027 is her chance for USA... Stay in school....
Maybe she runs world cross country?
Would love it if she ran USA cross country this winter. It looks like it's right up the road in Richmond in January. I guess the women run 10k, a bit on the long side for her, but would still be a good experience.
In a LACCTIC simulation, Parker Valby has a 97% chance of winning. Doris Lemngole has a 1% chance, Katelyn Tuohy a 1% chance, and Hilda Olemomoi a 1% chance. 😆
Remind me of the projection from last year.
Lacctic is a representation of what we’ve seen so far. I’d say 97% sounds about right in terms of the performances this season. Of course, Tuohy could her best race this weekend, but that’s just speculation and not really a job for a computer.
I like referring to Lacctic and using it as one source of information for prognostication or whatever but I always keep the limitations of it in context. It’s just one tool.
For instance, how does it allow for and make adjustments for a South Regional course that more than likely was a few hundred meters short?
Lacctic is a representation of what we’ve seen so far. I’d say 97% sounds about right in terms of the performances this season. Of course, Tuohy could her best race this weekend, but that’s just speculation and not really a job for a computer.
I like referring to Lacctic and using it as one source of information for prognostication or whatever but I always keep the limitations of it in context. It’s just one tool.
For instance, how does it allow for and make adjustments for a South Regional course that more than likely was a few hundred meters short?
this has been asked and answered - it does not matter. it was short for everyone who ran.
this has been asked and answered - it does not matter. it was short for everyone who ran.
I’m not disputing that it wasn’t short for everyone that ran.
That said, if you are comparing performances from one course to another, that would be a limitation. It’s why XC times shouldn’t matter and why people shouldn’t pay so much attention to them.
I’m going to miss things that are “asked and answered.” Some of us can’t monitor these forums 24/7, like you do.
Would love it if she ran USA cross country this winter. It looks like it's right up the road in Richmond in January. I guess the women run 10k, a bit on the long side for her, but would still be a good experience.
More US T&F runners need to take advantage of running cross country for olympics /world qualification. I believe that there are a certain number of Olympic 10,000m spots that go to runners with high cross country rankings.
this has been asked and answered - it does not matter. it was short for everyone who ran.
I’m not disputing that it wasn’t short for everyone that ran.
That said, if you are comparing performances from one course to another, that would be a limitation. It’s why XC times shouldn’t matter and why people shouldn’t pay so much attention to them.
I’m going to miss things that are “asked and answered.” Some of us can’t monitor these forums 24/7, like you do.
well there is this thread - see post 17 from one day ago.
Jaygrainger9 wrote: It has some good data and a good idea to be an objective ranking. But the formula does have some flaws, like it does not account for racing at altitude, and if a course is long or short but TFRRS says it isn't (like Roy Griak is actually 8,150m but is labeled as an 8k). So the idea is great but like anything in life it is far from perfect.
Nope. It accounts for ALL factors. Course length, altitude, weather, etc. It accounts for them by normalizing all races to the same scale. Those factors affect all the runners in the race so they get washed out in the normalization process which processes individual results across all races. A simplified example of this would be for a race at altitude where the average runner is 30 seconds slower than average then their rating for the race is adjusted by those 30 seconds. It does not matter whether that 30 seconds was due to altitude, course length, weather, etc.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.