Ok... help me out here. What is the easiest way to find the average mile time of some athletes. Convert this into seconds first?
5:15
5:30
5:36
6:05
6:18
6:22
6:45
7:35
Ok... help me out here. What is the easiest way to find the average mile time of some athletes. Convert this into seconds first?
5:15
5:30
5:36
6:05
6:18
6:22
6:45
7:35
6:07
ok... lend me a hand in how you do the calculations
I came up with 6:10. I just copied the times you listed into Excel, added them all up and divided by 8.
The easiest way to do this is to go to class and learn how to master basic math problems
6:10.75
assistance needed wrote:
Ok... help me out here. What is the easiest way to find the average mile time of some athletes. Convert this into seconds first?
5:15
5:30
5:36
6:05
6:18
6:22
6:45
7:35
subtract 5 minutes from all and you get
15
30
36
65
78
82
105
155+
-------
566/8=70.75
add 5 minutes back on and you get 6:10.75
I found 6.18 minutes.
I did it manually.
Add the times by the various athletes which amounts to 2966 seconds.
Divide by 8 which gives 370.75 secs.
Convert into minutes (by dividing by 60).
This gives you 6.179 minutes.
I believe you are correct. Is there a less time consuming process?
Now the people that are getting 6:10. Why doesn't the adding and dividing process come out right?
The easiest way to calculate the average time is to post the list of times to the letsrun.com forum and have the dorks do the calculations for you.
I'm not lazy, but I'll have to do these calculations for quite a few differnet athletes so over time it will take some time unless there is a faster route
If you're serious then I feel bad for you.
370.75 seconds is a lot like 6:10.75 which is a lot like 6.170 minutes.
All in all another great day for math in American high schools, eh?
Yes. Very great day.
It's also great when people can hide behind a computer screen and bash yet not provide an answer. (but of course, it's letrun.com.... they are too prideful to share their 'knowledge'
assistance needed wrote:
I believe you are correct. Is there a less time consuming process?
Now the people that are getting 6:10. Why doesn't the adding and dividing process come out right?
Fun fact, .179(60)=10.74
right. nativeson didn't account for the fact that the decimal .18 or whatever it is represents a fraction out of one hundred. you need to turn this into a fraction out of 60. could do this to get 6:10 the correct answer. 18 multiplied by 60 and divide all of that by 100. you get 10 seconds then. for the correct answer 6:10
You cannot just add up the times and divide, because in the seconds part of the numbers, 60s = 1 minute, not 100 seconds.
The quickest way to add the time up is to find a program online to do it for you. Here's one that I found in 10 seconds of searching:
http://www.uscaa.org/goodies/timeCalc.html
The other way is to just do it manually by converting into seconds, adding, dividing by the total number of times, and converting back into minutes.
assistance needed wrote:
Yes. Very great day.
It's also great when people can hide behind a computer screen and bash yet not provide an answer. (but of course, it's letrun.com.... they are too prideful to share their 'knowledge'
Uh..."too prideful?"
There was no bashing--finding the arithmetic average is basic math, not advanced stuff---I played with the number three ways.
Average = (sum of samples)/(number of samples)
or is it the use of sixties that is befuddling you?
everyone has been so busy with math that they hadn't realized how slow this team is.
Maybe a girls team?