3 replies to this topic

[weary]

Further to my recent post re the dearth of competitive road races in Victoria, I've compiled a list of all competitive road races in Victoria, based on rather arbitrary criteria applied to results from the last 12 months.

Criteria is:
- 50 runners or more under 40minutes for 10k (or equivalent for other distances); AND
- 10 runners or more under 35 minutes for 10k (or equivalent for other distances)

I've cut some races some slack, when they've fallen just outside the criteria.

Here's the list:

January
Mountain to Surf

April
Runners World Run to the 'G
Geelong Half Marathon

May
The Great Train Race
Aths Vic Cross Country Relays
Aths Vic Geelong Cross Country
Aths Vic Sandown Park Road Race

June
Aths Vic Albert Park Road Race

July
Aths Vic Road Relays
Aths Vic Bundoora Park Cross Country

August
Aths Vic Coburg Cross Country

September
Aths Vic Half Marathon

October
Asics Melbourne Marathon (both marathon and half marathon)

November
Herald Sun Olympic Dream

I'm sure I've missed a couple. Feel free to point them out.

Either way, there's not that many.

adw

[Action]

Interesting criteria - that would eliminate all the Striders 10k races (if the same criteria was applied in NSW).  Striders stats so far this year are:
under35/under40/fronted
- Feb 8/36/200
- Mar 6/43/214
- Apr 4/35/160
- May 8/41/195
- Jun 7/64/227
- Jul 6/42/205

[weary]

Pretty tough criteria, I know. But for those up the pointy end of the race, competition of this order is necessary - otherwise you may as well be running on your own. Even 10 people under 35 minutes is not that many. If there's an even spread of runners between 30 and 35 minutes, runners are still 30seconds apart, which is almost 170 metres. If you're at that level of performance, where every second counts, close competition can make all the difference, and is worth travelling for.

I'd love to see a national list of all competitive road races.

Action, maybe you could help out with a list of NSW races? Feel free to adjust my arbitrary criteria if you want.

adw

[mickmcc]

Shouldn't the criteria for competitiveness depend (to at least some extent) on the proportion of runners achieving certain times, rather than the actual number?

For example, if a 10K race had fifty runners, all under 40 minutes, and 10 under 35 minutes, I'd personally find that competitive and finish near the back of the field if not stone cold last.

Now think of a 10 K race with 2000 competitors. With the same number of runners under 40 minutes, I'd finish in the top 3% and feel like a legend, but really it wasn't a very competitive race.

So, maybe competitiveness could be measured by the proportion of runners finishing within 50% (for example) of the world's fastest time (e.g., proportion of male runners under ~40 minutes for 10 K or under ~3:08 for marathon, etc).

I know this approach doesn't deal with adw's issue about the density of fast runners at the finish of a race, but it would better capture my feelings of what makes a competitive race.