tyvm wrote:
The Donger wrote:You're talking participation numbers. I'm talking quality of field.
You're likely talking to a troll.
No, he's trying to debate with someone smarter than him. If anything, he's the troll.
There's 10% more women marathoners in the 25-34 age bracket, and you somehow think women's quality is less, The Donger? The stats speak for themself. The IAAF set their standards accordingly.
No Mann wrote:
sisterdyde wrote:So you don't think a stay at home father could ever run under 2:18!?
No. It isn't possible.
what if he has a treadmill?
asdfasfds wrote:
You won't see it now, but convert up the 16 yr old US record and I bet it converts to better than 2:18.
16 yr US record for 3200m that is.
I'd like to see your evidence too though...
World Record in Women's marathon: 2:15:25
Women's Qualifying time for OT: 2:43:00
WR in Men's marathon: 2:02:57
Men's Qualifying time for OT: 2:18:00
Women's Spread of possible qualifying times: 27:35
Men's Spread of Possible qualifying times: 15:03
An Equal QT for women would be about 2:32 based off of the percent slower that the fastest women has run compared to the fastest man. Women also don't run the same distance in XC races in college, but that's a whole other topic on why women have it easier in this sport.
2:18 = 2:35
Separate but not Equal wrote:
When stay at home moms who have no running background can start training and knock out the OTQ, then it's too easy. Here's for 2:20/2:40!
Well, I know of a Kenyan who was a hobby jogger until 2008 when he started training and recently broke the world record. So... there's that.
What if he did it on a track? A Marathon on a Track.
troof be told wrote:
They'd have to break 14 in the 5000 m first like they do in other countries.
Do other countries really require their younger runners to break 14 before moving up to the marathon? Not a bad idea.
MTRaceTimer wrote:
World Record in Women's marathon: 2:15:25
Women's Qualifying time for OT: 2:43:00
WR in Men's marathon: 2:02:57
Men's Qualifying time for OT: 2:18:00
Women's Spread of possible qualifying times: 27:35
Men's Spread of Possible qualifying times: 15:03
An Equal QT for women would be about 2:32 based off of the percent slower that the fastest women has run compared to the fastest man. Women also don't run the same distance in XC races in college, but that's a whole other topic on why women have it easier in this sport.
Nope, first rule of statistics: does each population represent a normal distribution? The answer is no (women's is skewed to the right), so you can't make a linear comparison as you did. You set the standards as 2:18/2:32, and you get 9 women and 61 men as of right now. You set it as 2:18/2:35 (as another poster "suggested"), and you get 24 women and 61 men- nope, not equal. You look at the time differential between the 1st man and woman vs 50th and then 100th man and woman-- it's not the same different. You have to use a rank order method to determine times, which is what the IAAF did based on their performance lists.
Women have it easier? Who do you think is setting the distances for women? MEN. Mind you, it was men who postulated that a woman's uterus would fall out if she ran over 800m. You can blame the men, not the women.
