I have a friend who recently finished the 3M half marathon in Austin at sub 9 minute pace. A lady. I'm wondering where her talent level ranks among other women.
I have a friend who recently finished the 3M half marathon in Austin at sub 9 minute pace. A lady. I'm wondering where her talent level ranks among other women.
no
unless it was run on a trail or something like that.
Depends if the sub 9 minute pace was also sub 6 minute pace. Else, no.
NotPC wrote:
no
unless it was run on a trail or something like that.
But it's 13 miles and 8:XX isn't necessarily a walking pace...
i don't think talented comes into play with running at all unless you're one of those guys or gals who hit the genetic lottery personally
If she did it on no training, she is in the upper 20% of women. If she is well trained, she is right around the middle of the bell shaped curve.
She is 5'10, fairly well trained. Has run NYC and Philly marathons. She did Philly in 3:52, NYC in 4:06. She broke 6:30 in the 5th avenue mile and has run 10K in 48:XX.
Running 13 miles under 9 minute pace shows that you're healthy, does not show that you're talented. There are a fair number of people who with minimal training (a few miles per day) can run under 7 minute pace.
That performance equates to just under a 2 hour half marathon, which no one would consider to be very good. However, when I plugged some numbers into an age grade calculator, I was surprised to see how good the performance seems.
If she's a 40 year old female, then she is in the 86th percentile for her age.
If she is a 30 year old female, then she is in the 83rd percentile for her age.
If she were a 30 year old male, then he would be in the 75th percentile for his age.
So, depending on your perspective, you could call this good or not. Better than most, but not in contention to be competitive. Maybe she could luck into an age group award at a small local race where there are less than 10 people in her age group. This is especially true is she can maintain a little speed endurance into the older age groups where the number of runners really drop off (like 50+).
I am turning 41 next month, female and run about 8 min per mile for a half. I am by no means delusional that I'm talented in any way. I just do 30 mpw, some strength training and have a lot of fun doing it.
Your friend is much healthier than the average American, but that's not saying much.
A couple of times I have run races in Europe, and I'm far slower comparatively (by place) there than here.
No
First off, good for her!!
But, to answer your question she is not talented. She shouldn't be upset about that as few people are.
Slightly above average
bartholomew_maxwell wrote:
I have a friend who recently finished the 3M half marathon in Austin at sub 9 minute pace. A lady. I'm wondering where her talent level ranks among other women.
I'm not sure why you're concerned.
I probably wouldn’t go “WOAH SHES FAST” until I saw a woman going sub 7 pace in a half marathon. I’m an 800 runner and have cranked out halves at 6:15 pace. I don’t consider myself talented over long distances and I’m pretty sure the conversion rate is about 30 seconds per mile across genders.
I wouldn’t consider a runner “talented” until they are in the “competing to win” bracket which is usually the top 0.5-1% of a competitive race field. I once won an 8K with a field of 400+ people in about 28:50. I was the only person under 30. If I went and ran that in a D1 race I would probably not even be in the middle of the pack. I use this example to show that sometimes talent is subjective. I can come and obliterate an entire field of a road race but the college I’m running with probably won’t race me in XC next season.
She’s by no means bad though! I bet most people in the world couldn’t get up and run a 13 mile race without walking a large portion of it
I would like some insight as to your ‘user name’ Betty?
Thank you. ?
Hi Betty wrote:
I would like some insight as to your ‘user name’ Betty?
Thank you. ?
+1
From the shadows wrote:
Depends if the sub 9 minute pace was also sub 6 minute pace. Else, no.
This is a good point. Galen Rupp runs half marathons at sub 9 pace. He's talented. I also run half marathons at sub 9 pace. I am not talented. "Sub 9" encompasses a pretty wide range of possible finishing times.
bartholomew_maxwell wrote:
She is 5'10, fairly well trained. Has run NYC and Philly marathons. She did Philly in 3:52, NYC in 4:06. She broke 6:30 in the 5th avenue mile and has run 10K in 48:XX.
What is your point? You know what world class times for these events are, people who have talent, what is it that you wanted accomplished here? You clearly have an agenda - this woman bothers you for some reason, why?
bartholomew_maxwell wrote:
I have a friend who recently finished the 3M half marathon in Austin at sub 9 minute pace. A lady. I'm wondering where her talent level ranks among other women.
I don't know. That's just under 4 hour marathon pace. That's pretty average as far as pace goes.
Maybe a bit above average. It shows you have the ability to put your mind to something and finish it.
So I would say it shows some talent.
Here's another thought: A relative of mine did a half marathon in the summer and fractured their hip. I didn't know about this until afterwards. I've not always had a good relationship with them, but they know I am a runner and could have asked me for advice. They didn't, which I am not bitter about whatsoever. I can't help but think they probably thought 'Yeah, I'm going to do that. I have 3 months and I'm going to do that.' And maybe in their training they ran over an hour a few times.
Then they run 13 miles with very little background and find out how much pounding that is on your joints. And how a fractured bone in your hip feels.