How do you judge your "endurance level?"
2302
Member
2338 days
Tribro posted 45 weeks ago.
ya. that's good. it's waht i use as well. those numbers aren't meant to be scientific ;) just to help one another gage experience and fitness levels. hopefully i'll be updating mine post Florida.
53
Member
1162 days
kicker posted 45 weeks ago.
tribro;83320 wrote:
hopefully i'll be updating mine post Florida.
I was thinking the same thing. Last year I had a horrible bike segment at IMUK. It was pretty humbling to go almost 7 hours on the bike.
427
Member
351 days
Sully800 posted 45 weeks ago.
I did 3 races this year. In one, my run was best, swim was close to it and the bike was the worst.
In one, my swim and bike were the best and run was the worst.
In the last, my bike was the best, swim and run definitely worst.
Based on that I figured I am currently equal in all three events (a little worse in running but I had an achilles injury and did little run training so that was expected). Then I just had to choose between 7,7,7 or 8,8,8 and I somewhat arbitrarily picked the 8's.
4212
Member
1557 days
kylie posted 45 weeks ago.
Yeah, I also base my on my placings at a recent race -- often the A race for the year. They are based on IM Lou right now. Mike laughed at me cause I was excited to get to calculate what they had moved up to and to update them :) It was a bonus of PR'ing.
Miles of Life --- Powered by MarkyV
3337
Member
1325 days
RV posted 45 weeks ago.
Yup, same for me - base it on AG in my 'A' race for my primary distance for the season.
RV
It takes a long time to get good. - Scott Molina
Slow is smooth; smooth is fast. - Rich Strauss
1659
Member
1452 days
PrinceofClydes posted 45 weeks ago.
My IMC finish place in M55-59:
swim 73/109
bike 53/109 7:02:53
run: 76/109
Endurance levels 4,5,4
What is interesting is that you have rated your endurance level on the bike as 5 same as me and I did 7:02:53 8 weeks ago. (I too am humbled by doing a 7 hour bike split.)
This must mean (if your math is right) that the bike times spread is the same in the M55-59 and M25-29 age groups - which surprises me.
Intuitively we would expect riders in M25-29 to be faster than us older guys, so without checking the stats, I think we would see the mean time in M25 to be significantly lower than the mean in my age group. In other words the mass of scores would be grouped around a lower time than the mean time in the M55-59 - basically what we would expect intuitively.
I'm guessing there are guys in the 25-29 age group who think the race is easier than it is or that they are better than they really are, so that would account for some slow times. What I'm showing here is that while your time may be midway between the extremes in your age group you may be better than that.
Look at the stats again. Try knocking off the 5% of the scores at the extremes and consider only the scores within two standard deviations of the mean. Then see where you are.
PoC
"Pain doesn't last, chicks dig scars, glory is forever!"
- Shane Falco.
53
Member
1162 days
kicker posted 45 weeks ago.
My actual bike time was 6:43. Actually, I was in the bottom 40%, I just looked. :(
189
Member
388 days
Nutty posted 45 weeks ago.
I use the same method as well. Though since my A race of the season I'm sure much has changed. Got a new bike which i spdn a LOT of time on, and i finished a marathon. So im sure the bike and run have gone up.
However, due to all the cuts from my bike crash 3 weeks ago, i havent been able to hit the pool. So im sure my swim has dropped.
-Alan
My fancy new blogitty blog.
http://therunningfridge.blogspot.com/
1659
Member
1452 days
PrinceofClydes posted 45 weeks ago.
kicker;83347 wrote:
My actual bike time was 6:43. Actually, I was in the bottom 40%, I just looked. :(
Okay, now don't be disheartened. Yes, you still have to beat these guys if you want to be top dog, but as far as "endurance level" goes, it is meaningful to compare your times with everyone in the race. Conditions vary from one race to the next and from one year to the next within the same race.
The latter comparison should tell you if you were consistent with your training versus profiting from a year when race day conditions were ideal, or Hellish, whichever. If everybody's times were down yours should be too, and vice versa.
If you're using these stats to adjust your training there may be a number of other factors playing a part, so don't over-react. As Paul said above the numbers we post on trifuel are just to give a rough guide to measure advice given.
Gotta go now, back later.
PoC
"Pain doesn't last, chicks dig scars, glory is forever!"
- Shane Falco.
53
Member
1162 days
kicker posted 45 weeks ago.
PrinceofClydes;83355 wrote:
Good points. I trained in Charleston, SC (flat as a pancake) and the race in UK was anything but, with almost 7500 ft of climbing. I wasn't ready for the hills, and by the third loop, it took me a hour to go almost 9 miles.
Okay, now don't be disheartened. Yes, you still have to beat these guys if you want to be top dog, but as far as "endurance level" goes, it is meaningful to compare your times with everyone in the race. Conditions vary from one race to the next and from one year to the next within the same race.
The latter comparison should tell you if you were consistent with your training versus profiting from a year when race day conditions were ideal, or Hellish, whichever. If everybody's times were down yours should be too, and vice versa.If you're using these stats to adjust your training there may be a number of other factors playing a part, so don't over-react. As Paul said above the numbers we post on trifuel are just to give a rough guide to measure advice given.
Gotta go now, back later.
PoC
At any rate, I finished in the top 30% of my age group at the Accenture Triathlon this year (international dist) and averaged 22.5 mph on the bike. However, the skill level of athletes at an iron distance race is far higher than those doing shorter races, which is what enables most of us to finish higher in our age group as the race gets shorter.
Personally, I grade myself against my age group. The numbers I've used (6,5,7) were for IMUK last year,and the percentile rank I finished in my age group. What do y'all use?