3 ms·
It definitely needs to be accounted for. In the past decade, there has been a proliferation of smaller marathons. If you made a plot of "100th finisher times" b
by tqi 9y ago
It definitely needs to be accounted for. In the past decade, there has been a proliferation of smaller marathons. If you made a plot of "100th finisher times" by # of participants, it would be slower for smaller races. If the growth in marathons is primarily on the smaller end, then you'd expect the average to go down.
- timmaah 9y agoThe "Playing Devil's Advocate" section takes this into account and simply orders all finishes for the year. This still shows the time increase. > We analyzed the finish times of the 100th, 1,000th and 10,000th slowest participant (separately for men and women) for every year.
- wgjordan 9y agoThe article does not take into account race size - it plotted 100th finisher times by year, which is not the same as plotting 100th finisher times by # of participants.