for 10k it predicts 50 minutes, which is 3 minutes slower than my last time.
I used this to predict my 10k time based off my 5k. At first I was skeptical, thinking it was predicting faster than what I would do, but I actually ended up running faster than the prediction. Based off my 20:39 5k, I was to run just over a 43:00. I ended up running a 42:50 (this could have been a fluke, beginners-luck thing. It was only my second 10k of my life). In terms of per mile pace it was only like a second or so off, which I think is pretty darn good!
Might the predictor require some tuning ?
If I enter 21.0975 (half a marathon) and 1:20:10, the reply for 42.195 is 02:47:08.
According to the explanative text, I would have expected (1:20:10)*2*1.06 = 2:49:57?
The answer 2:47:08 looks like the coefficient would have been 1.0455 instead of 1.06?
(cancel and replace) oops, I missed the point! The formula is (^power)1,06 and not (*multiplied by)1,06.
What FrdricLN said, the formula is good, but it is stated incorrectly, it is to the power of 1.06, not multiplied by it as stated.
congratulations for clearing up a 8 month mystery!
Visit the official Runner's World page
Follow Runner's World on Twitter
Other Natmag-Rodale Sites
Run For Charity
About Runner's World
Runner's World is a publication of Hearst Magazines UK which is the trading name of The National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.
Website powered by: Immediate Media Company Ltd. | © Runner's World 2002-2014 |