Ah what the hell. Count me in - this winter is bound to break me.
Bopo
Joddy
kfjatek
kfjatek wrote:Ah what the hell. Count me in - this winter is bound to break me.
Bopo
Joddy
kfjatek
Bopomofo wrote:Any appetite for a winterrun challenge this year, to go alongside the AndyB pain-fest?
*EDIT*
The format will be: a series of runs starting and finishing with a 1 mile test run. Previously we've done this as 1 per month but we're starting late as the test runs are normally done in September.
So, this time it will be a measured run every four weeks : 1mi test, 5km, 10km, HM, 10km, 5km, 1mi test.
Your times will be graded against the age grading tables here, unless anybody can give me something more authoritative.
You get graded against your age-based target time for each run. Points are awarded based on your improvement from your last run: bottom place gets 1*, every place above gets one more point with bonus points going to the top three, actual values to be decided depending on numbers of entrants.
*Complicated bit: there have been discussions in the past about having points based on the overall number of participants or those in that month. Bear with me. When it gets to HM month and only five people do it, the bottom person gets 1 point despite trying a shit-load harder than everybody who didn't take part.
So, we do this: All the points get awarded as though everybody did the run. BUT all the people who didn't do the run get to share all their points out evenly. For example, if 5 people don't do a run they get to share the points of 1+2+3+4+5=15 so they get 3 points each, while the slowest person who actually got off the sofa gets at least 6 points. Seems fair to me.
JoddyBear wrote:Bopomofo wrote:Any appetite for a winterrun challenge this year, to go alongside the AndyB pain-fest?
*EDIT*
The format will be: a series of runs starting and finishing with a 1 mile test run. Previously we've done this as 1 per month but we're starting late as the test runs are normally done in September.
So, this time it will be a measured run every four weeks : 1mi test, 5km, 10km, HM, 10km, 5km, 1mi test.
Your times will be graded against the age grading tables here, unless anybody can give me something more authoritative.
You get graded against your age-based target time for each run. Points are awarded based on your improvement from your last run: bottom place gets 1*, every place above gets one more point with bonus points going to the top three, actual values to be decided depending on numbers of entrants.
*Complicated bit: there have been discussions in the past about having points based on the overall number of participants or those in that month. Bear with me. When it gets to HM month and only five people do it, the bottom person gets 1 point despite trying a shit-load harder than everybody who didn't take part.
So, we do this: All the points get awarded as though everybody did the run. BUT all the people who didn't do the run get to share all their points out evenly. For example, if 5 people don't do a run they get to share the points of 1+2+3+4+5=15 so they get 3 points each, while the slowest person who actually got off the sofa gets at least 6 points. Seems fair to me.
Why not have the lowest number of points available being equal to the distance? Does that work?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests