Performance over the years

[Also Ran]

An interesting stat has come out of my looking back at my old Langdale results. It's 22 years since I did my first Langdale which I completed in 3hrs 1min - I came 357th out of a massive field of 506 (I think 1986 may have been a championship race).
I've been fairly consistent over the years - indeed managed just under 3 hours 3 mins on Saturday which gave me 158th position from 370 finishers.
Brings me to the issue - what has happened in the meantime - I'm 22 yrs older, yet finished further up the field on a % basis (ie 42% rather than 71%). I can only deduce that the runners in front of me in 1986 have deteriorated with age and not replaced by younger contenders!

What does anybody else think?

[IainR]

A championship year may well attract a higher calibre of runner and possibly put off the 'less able' runners, whereas in a normal year you may get less quality runners by number.

I'd only look at year on year changes over a group of races, rather than comparing sepcific races.

[Also Ran]

Accept your reasoning re championship race - but there is a pattern in my analysis of 18 completions of the race over that period. For example in a non championship year (I think) of 1989 i did 3.03 and finished 241st out of 320 (75%).
Again in 2003 I did 3.04.39. finished 147 out of 340 (42%).

Only conclusion that I can come to is that some of the better runners in my earlier years were a few years older and have either not returned or run slower times. I'm sure the age profile of races has increased during the intervening years (discussed many times in the past).

I'm amazed at how consistent I've been on this particular race

[Margarine]

You should have been getting faster.

[Graham Breeze]

An interesting stat has come out of my looking back at my old Langdale results. It's 22 years since I did my first Langdale which I completed in 3hrs 1min - I came 357th out of a massive field of 506 (I think 1986 may have been a championship race).
I've been fairly consistent over the years - indeed managed just under 3 hours 3 mins on Saturday which gave me 158th position from 370 finishers.
Brings me to the issue - what has happened in the meantime - I'm 22 yrs older, yet finished further up the field on a % basis (ie 42% rather than 71%). I can only deduce that the runners in front of me in 1986 have deteriorated with age and not replaced by younger contenders!

What does anybody else think?

Langdale was a Championship Race in 1986 (It should not have been but ToP was cancelled) and the record entry of 527 led to it becoming pre-entry (The Fellrunner Spring 1987 page 31 refers) ever since.

I have calculated my % of winner's time and % position for every race I have ever done for over 20 years (OK OK! but so does Angela Mudge and Sarah Rowell). It is apparent that Championship fields are faster and bigger and my results illustrate this. It is not unknown for a runner to win an event in one year and struggle to get in the first 20 in the same race when a Championship year.

In my view the % of winning time (or better the average of, say, the first 3) is a purer guide to performance than % of finishers.

I also think it not surprising that someone, say, in their 30s could produce similar times when in their, say, 50's. I would expect performance to improve with experience but be counter-balanced by a falling off with age.

So what would be illustrative is a curve or bar chart of % of winning time over the period with some indication of age and a note on when a race was a Champ race or the runner got lost etc.

Actually I am researching an article on a not dissimilar theme for a future Fellrunner so you have been warned!

[ghost]

hats off to such consistency over 22 years - very impressive!

[Graham Breeze]

Langdale was a Championship Race in 1986 (It should not have been but ToP was cancelled) and the record entry of 527 led to it becoming pre-entry (The Fellrunner Spring 1987 page 31 refers) ever since.

I have calculated my % of winner's time and % position for every race I have ever done for over 20 years (OK OK! but so does Angela Mudge and Sarah Rowell). It is apparent that Championship fields are faster and bigger and my results illustrate this. It is not unknown for a runner to win an event in one year and struggle to get in the first 20 in the same race when a Championship year.

In my view the % of winning time (or better the average of, say, the first 3) is a purer guide to performance than % of finishers.

I also think it not surprising that someone, say, in their 30s could produce similar times when in their, say, 50's. I would expect performance to improve with experience but be counter-balanced by a falling off with age.

So what would be illustrative is a curve or bar chart of % of winning time over the period with some indication of age and a note on when a race was a Champ race or the runner got lost etc.

Actually I note Mr Jebb managed to win last weekend in a dawdle with 2.05. In 1986 this time would not have got him a place in the first 12. But then, in 1986 Langdale was a Champ counter.

[Grouse]

Not nationalisation .

[Also Ran]

Graham, I look forward to reading your article with interest. I too tend to calculate % performance for most of my races - I'm only sorry I didnt think to keep the actual results - I only made a note of my time, finishing position and number of finishers.
From my simple interpretation I still believe it is as a result of the running population getting older and not being replaced by younger runners - the faces seem very similar year on year.
There is a seperate consideration re winners times - was Andy Styan really so much better than today's top runners (10 mins on this years winning time) or was it that Jebby wasnt pushed hard enough (4/5 mins before the Noor came in) - or did he know better lines!!!

[IainR]

There is a seperate consideration re winners times - was Andy Styan really so much better than today's top runners (10 mins on this years winning time) or was it that Jebby wasnt pushed hard enough (4/5 mins before the Noor came in) - or did he know better lines!!!

Be interesting to look at the dates of the records? Are many records that old? Apart from the famous Kenny Stuart Ben and Snowdon Records, are there any others that have stood for a considerable time and what % were set within the past 5-10 years?