Still pressed after all these years.
Still pressed after all these years.
speed ratings scale by distance wrote:
You have to remember that the Van Cortlandt race was a 4k race and speed ratings get scaled by distance. If you look at the actual speed ratings published, Bill Meylan has a note that "The Girls Speed Ratings Have Been Scaled to reflect the distance (4K)". Unfortunately, he doesn't give a scaling factor, and it's not just 5k/4k. So, Tuohy's 166.33 would be much higher if unscaled to compare equally to 5k times.
Bill, is that something you can calculate so that we can better put that legendary run in the context of 5k speed ratings?
Katelyn Tuohy’s speed rating of 166.33 at the 2.5-Mile Manhattan Invitational in 2017 is my 2nd most complained about speed rating (Amber Trotter’s 180 at Foot Locker 2001 is the most questioned). Most people think Tuohy’2 166 is too low … but for anybody really interested, it is good example of my speed rating process.
Speed ratings measure how fast runners race relative to each other and NOT how fast they run relative to the course.
When I first started speed rating, I did not scale 2.5 miles races to show equivalence to 3.1 mile race … I simply fit the ratings to approximate the group of runners of interest (the above average to average group) … I knew elite runners and slower runners might be under-rated and over-rated, respectively, but that didn’t bother me because I ignored 2.5 miles races when handicapping 5K races. But individual interest in the Manhattan Invite speed ratings caused me to start scaling 4K and 2.5-mile ratings.
Simply converting 2.5 mile times to 3.1 mile times and then speed rating the conversion might seem appropriate … BUT I found out it does not work very well in many races … Some races need to be scaled and some do not … and the magnitude of scaling needs to be varied depending on the race … So I used my Manhattan database and a statistical computer program to find an easy equation for scaling based on the individual runners and their respective speed ratings.
For Manhattan 2017, the scaling equations used were:
... Boys Scaled Rating = Unscaled Rating - (175 - Unscaled Rating)*0.12
... Girls Scaled Rating = Unscaled Rating - (135 - Unscaled Rating)*0.13
Where the 175 and 135 are focal points for scaling up and down (determined by fitting runners around that magnitude based on their seasonal ratings AS IF it was a 5K race) … the 0.12 and 0.13 coefficients vary from race to race and are fit by iteration.
Remember that Katelyn Tuohy’s speed rating is determined by how much she separated herself from other runners of known abilities … and NOT by the fact that she shattered the course record by running a 13:21.8 time.
One minute (60 seconds) is equivalent to 20 speed rating points unscaled. The top three Fayetteville-Manlius girls all finished less than 60 seconds behind Tuohy … Claire Walters (14:13.2), Sophie Ryan (14:18.5) and Phoebe White (14:20.1) with final ratings of 147, 145 and 144 … and Tuohy’s final rating (166.33) got scaled up even more than the FM values! The separation between Tuohy and hundreds of other girls (between Tuohy and between themselves) determined the speed ratings … and Tuohy’s 166.33 is accurate.
Now had the race gone the extra distance to 5K, Tuohy might well have separated herself from most other runners by additional time and THEN her speed rating would be higher. Tuohy’s speed rating was determined by how fast everybody else ran in relation to everybody else … It is different concept.
Tuohy’s 2.5 mile time (13:21.8) broke the existing 2.5 mile XC record time of 13:25 set by Erika Odlaug in 2001 at Detweiller Park in Illinois … Erika Odlaug finished 2nd to Amber Trotter by 40 seconds at Foot Locker 2001 … Amber Trotter passed the 2.5 mile mark at Foot Locker in 13:05 enroute to a 5K time of 16:24.
In case people forget, these speed ratings are a relative not absolute as Bill Meylan (the creator) has repeatedly stated on tullyrunners.com. I find it somewhat amusing that this scale as taken a life of its own, Track times and speed are a much better comparison because they are more universal. The reality is that Brynn, Hutchings, Thordvalson are almost never pushed as was the case of Touhy. Touhy runs well solo because she is a front runner type but is more likely to choke when pressed or someone is within striking distance of out-kicking together. We can speculate what would happen if they raced together, More likely it could come down to a tactical race where closing speed determines the victory. Dudeck is rarely mentioned but could well have won last year if she ran at Nike--perhaps Brynn as well but for that injury that ruined her season.
Kev2 wrote:
While doing well in Club champs was impressive it was hardly a representative national championship lacking the real big guns in the sport like Molly Huddle, Jenny Simpson, Shelby Houlighan, Shannon Rowbury, Emma Coburn etc.
Just for the record, Aisling Cuffe beat Tuohy at CC club Nats, and Starliper beat Cuffe in Boston two months later in the 3K in Boston. As was said on a Let’s Run podcast a year ago....Starliper will be the better college runner! Everyone acts like Tuohy was NC State top recruit, but Starliper was the one they wanted. Tuohy contacted NC State, NC State went after Starliper. Starliper will be their #1 not Tuohy! T
Don't let FastTuohy read that. He hasn't responded so he probably had a heart attack. This year's big 3 will all be better in college than Tuohy.
Kev2 wrote:
In case people forget, these speed ratings are a relative not absolute as Bill Meylan (the creator) has repeatedly stated on tullyrunners.com. I find it somewhat amusing that this scale as taken a life of its own, Track times and speed are a much better comparison because they are more universal. The reality is that Brynn, Hutchings, Thordvalson are almost never pushed as was the case of Touhy. Touhy runs well solo because she is a front runner type but is more likely to choke when pressed or someone is within striking distance of out-kicking together. We can speculate what would happen if they raced together, More likely it could come down to a tactical race where closing speed determines the victory. Dudeck is rarely mentioned but could well have won last year if she ran at Nike--perhaps Brynn as well but for that injury that ruined her season.
It seems to me you just don't like Katelyn Tuohy for some reason. but at least you spell her name correctly.
I am not sure where you came up with the "more likely to choke" statement. She had that very opportunity at the 2019 NXN and she did not. She had the same opportunity as an 8th grader when Destiny Collins tried to pass her 3-4 times in the last 500 m of a DMR, and she held her off too. When exactly did she "choke" in this manner? Perhaps the Millrose mile as a sophomore is what you think of?
Her shortcoming seems to be occasionally getting overly nervous before a big race and running sub optimally. On a couple of occasions. But I would not question her heart.
And "more likely it could come down to a tactical race"? That was certainly never her style. If anything I would think she might go out too fast.
I don't know who would win such as race, with each at their best. All the runners you mentioned are very good. Tuohy's 9:01 3,000 m is very nearly the same as Brown's (8:38 3,200 m. And this was in a race involving lane changes, passing competitors, and at one point leading, as opposed to a perfectly paced effort behind someone. Not much difference there if you ask me.
So what exactly do you have against Tuohy, other than she is not the next coming of Zola Budd?
Or she could hsve come in 50th like Hart. Woulda, shoulda, coulda, didn't.
He has been betting against her for 6 years. No reason to change now.
Interesting. In the horse racing speed ratings they establish a course par. They then develop the speed rating off of that. Seems more accurate.
7empest wrote:
Kev2 wrote:
While doing well in Club champs was impressive it was hardly a representative national championship lacking the real big guns in the sport like Molly Huddle, Jenny Simpson, Shelby Houlighan, Shannon Rowbury, Emma Coburn etc.
Just for the record, Aisling Cuffe beat Tuohy at CC club Nats, and Starliper beat Cuffe in Boston two months later in the 3K in Boston. As was said on a Let’s Run podcast a year ago....Starliper will be the better college runner! Everyone acts like Tuohy was NC State top recruit, but Starliper was the one they wanted. Tuohy contacted NC State, NC State went after Starliper. Starliper will be their #1 not Tuohy! T
I have on good authority the last two sentences aren't exactly accurate. Not saying the premise from the beginning is wrong.
Oh the whole premise is wrong. Laughably so.
Wait. You are comparing a 6k cross country race to a 3000m track race? LOL. Silly. Anyway Starliper ran a 9:07 for the 10th place and Cuffe 9:08.
Feel free to look at the 6k XC finishes in the NCAA and compare it to the top performance lists for the 3k and you will see that it compares very well.
Good interview with Thorvaldson
https://c.tenor.com/chyia8h40Z4AAAAC/national-lampoons-christmas-vacation.gif7empest wrote:
Kev2 wrote:
While doing well in Club champs was impressive it was hardly a representative national championship lacking the real big guns in the sport like Molly Huddle, Jenny Simpson, Shelby Houlighan, Shannon Rowbury, Emma Coburn etc.
Just for the record, Aisling Cuffe beat Tuohy at CC club Nats, and Starliper beat Cuffe in Boston two months later in the 3K in Boston. As was said on a Let’s Run podcast a year ago....Starliper will be the better college runner! Everyone acts like Tuohy was NC State top recruit, but Starliper was the one they wanted. Tuohy contacted NC State, NC State went after Starliper. Starliper will be their #1 not Tuohy! T
HATERS GONNA HATE!
