In a message dated 5/4/1 5:13:30 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
<<That's a 10.1 on the Age-Graded Tables (for sake of theoretical
comparison, and not to make David Honea go ballistic).>>
Ken,
David Honea is not the only one that goes "ballistic" when you publish
these "age-graded" comparisons. In my opinion, you do a disservice to masters
athletes when you do this, since most "serious" track fans laugh at the
numbers.
Let the performances speak for themselves. I would guess that many of the
people on this list can appreciate that a 10.96 for a 45-year old man is
pretty darned good.
I have no doubt that age-graded performances serve as a valuable tool in
masters competition...they just don't belong here.
Walt Murphy
(Wannabe Masters sprinter--but too lazy to do anything about it)
