I have an opinion on this, just want to see what others think..
I have an opinion on this, just want to see what others think..
4:15
I'd say a female running 5:00 is equivalent to a guy running low 4:20s, say 4:23.
Former Bomber wrote:
I'd say a female running 5:00 is equivalent to a guy running low 4:20s, say 4:23.
This is correct.
wert wrote:
4:15
I was going to say 4:20.
However, if you take the men's WR divided by the women's WR time: 223.13seconds divide by 252.56 =0.8835 and use that as a multiplier against 300 seconds (5:00 minute proposed time) = 265.04 or 4:25.04
SO, I guess the answer is really around 4:25
There is a formal calculator for comparing performances.
http://www.pinebeltpacers.org/AgeGrade/newwava.html
A 25 year-old female running 5 minutes a mile has an age group rating of 83%.
The equivalent performance for a 25 year-old male would be 4:30.
5:00 Mile =? 4:58 1600m
70 high school girls under 4:58 1600 in the US last year.
70 high school boys = 4:14.7 1600 = 4:17 mile?
47 high school girls under 4:58 1600 in US in 2007
47 boys under 4:14 1600 in 2007 = 4:16 mile
This isn't really scientific at all, but 4:16 - 4:17 seems about what I would have guessed for high school.
It's tough to do college age because so many are shooting for that qualifying standard in the 1500, but I would guess that 5:00 (4:39 1500) is still pretty good at most universities while 4:16 (3:58 1500) will no longer get a man anything.
But that really only measures the strengths of the men's and women's records, and it assumes that the WRs are equally strong and consistent. Given that no one's run close to either WR in some time, they're more outliers than anything else. Or is my math-free brain missing something?
~4:25
There just aren't as many good female runners - they don't care nearly as much. Not a bad thing, just a fact.
I don't think you can add in how much they "care" into the equation, but if I knew the sample size it would be good info to go along with # of runners under x:xx. There are of course far more boys running track than girls in high school.
I got those numbers off Milesplit.us
What's the equivalent of a male having to run sub-2:20 for the trials in the marathon? 2:35 for a female?
I'll go with 4:16
ewrewtewr wrote:
I'll go with 4:16
no. that is way too fast
Well.. it seems that an estimate in the range of 4:25 +/- 5-10 seconds is about right. That said, what is really being debated by people in this thread is the + or -. i am not going to do it but if you want an answer you could take a sample of the top 1,000-or-so male and female times in the mile and look at the distributions. You can assume that ability is normally distributed in both male and female populations. If it is true that girls are simply not as motivated then the distribution of female times will be skewed. You can then correct for the skew in the distributions and compare the corrected percentiles. This should give you a pretty good estimate of the equivalent times from an ability perspective. However, at the end of the day the rational behind this method is that you are not interested in factors such as how much someone wants to run. Many people would include this in the criteria... if you include this then just look at straight percentiles. In conclusion define your question better!
It would be somewhere between 4:25 and 4:30. Those estimates of 4:15 are way too fast.
I would have said 4:20ish.
Kind of sad that a sub-5:00 is still regarded as an "elite" time for HS girls. In fact, I've had the impression that there were more girls under 5:00 around 1980 (or so) than there've been in recent years!
I could be wrong on that, but I'm pretty sure that 5:00 was not thought to be as big a deal back then as it seems to be now.
The competitive equivalent would be around 4:16, the physiological equivalent would be around 4:25.
I think it is the same.
If a male and female each ran 5 minutes, they would tie.
Not really wrote:
The competitive equivalent would be around 4:16, the physiological equivalent would be around 4:25.
I can live with that. Dyestat lists 4:18 Mile and 5:02 Mile (4:16.5/5:00.30 1600) as the elite national cutoffs. And these cutoffs are formed from years of national rankings designed to be the top 100 in the nation.
Like you said, that's "competitive." Physiological could be different.
eight lanes wrote:
I have an opinion on this, just want to see what others think..
HEY!
What was your opinion? I'm curious to know what you were thinking beforehand.