Re: [*FSFFU*] Average speeds of men and women

From: Michael L Forton (fortonmi@PILOT.MSU.EDU)
Date: Sun Sep 14 1997 - 20:32:02 PDT


>
> On Fri, 12 Sep 1997, Tanya Wood wrote:
> > deformation (although I have noticed the same trend in other women). When
> > I was at school, I asked my (female) gym teacher what the cross-over
> > between less hearty males and fit women was in terms of running: and she
> > answered 3%: i.e. only the top 3% of women are faster than the the bottom
> > 3% of men: is this not a major under-estimation? I was quite depressed
> > about this. It seemed wrong (not to mention unjust) to me, looking over my
>
> Granted swimming isn't the best example because it relys heavily on upper
> body strength, but here's what I came up with when I compared national
> time standards. Time standards are based on 500,000 reported times in all
> age groups and events. A C time implies you're in the 10th percentile, B
> time 40th percentile, A time=70th percentile, NN (implies one of the
> national level time standards) is the 96.5th percentile.
>
> 17-18 year old age group times for short course yards:
>
> 1650 free women NN-17:00.69 A-18:04.89 B-19:04.39 C 21:04.59
> 1650 free men NN 16:08.49 A- 17:02.09 B-17:54.79 C-19:52.19
> 500 free women NN 5:03.69 A-5:22.29 B-5:41.89 C 6:14.69
> 500 free men NN-4:40.69 A-4:58.19 B-5:14.19 C-5:54.09
> 100 free women NN-53.79 A-57.49 B-1:00.89 C-1:07.89
> 100 free men NN-47.89 A-50.99 B-53.59 C-59.19
> 200 breaststroke women NN 2:22.79 A 2:34.99 B-2:41.99 C 2:56.89
> 200 breaststroke men NN-2:08.89 A 2:19.69 B-2:27.99 C 2:44.09
>
> Okay, in the long distance 1650, women's NN times (upper 3.5%) are roughly
> comprable to Men's A standards. In the 500 free, the women are behind A
> standards (roughly BBB on the chart) In the sprint 100 free the NN women
> are about equal to men's B standards (40th percentile)
>
> There is a gap, but nothing to suggest the 3% and 3% suggested to the
> fitness coach. The times also grow more equal as the distances grow
> longer, which is something that's consistent with popular theory that
> women compratively improve as distances go longer.
>
> Jill Gillham jilkey@grfn.org http://members.aol.com/~ferndock2
> \|/ \|/ D=|[[] "All-arm'd I ride, whate'er betide,
> =0: + =0: = \O/ Until I find the Holy Grail."
> /|\ /|\ |*| -- Alfred, Lord Tennyson [Go WINGS!]
>

I realize personal expierence has no bearing on national standards, but I can
only compare your information to what I have seen in my life. My senior year of
high school I tried track for the first time. I was so bad that I was allowed
to do whatever event I wanted simply because it was impossible for me to score
in any of them. I beat one boy all year in the high hurdles because he fell and
hurt his knee halfway through. Now that I have given you some I idea how slow I
was let me say that I beat our girl's school record every single time I ran. I
mean If I was the worst boy in one given year in a school and I was better than
any girl to ever come through the school that lends some creedence to your gym
teacher. --



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 25 2000 - 19:06:42 PDT