More about that crazy person's sport: road running

[Pequenita]

So, a few weeks ago, a friend emailed me a link to the NY Times article "See Jane Run. See Her Run Faster and Faster." A very quick summary is that women in their 50s were beating out women in their 20s and 30s in "local" road races ranging from 5K to 10K. A quote:

But the women were different — their times were all over the place with older women beating younger women in almost every age category. The fastest woman was 37 years old; the fastest woman in the 45 to 49 age group beat the fastest woman in the 20 to 24 and the 40 to 44 age groups.​

While this is may be the general trend, I didn't think 5Ks in metropolitan areas like DC counted as "local;" I'd rarely, if ever, seen the winner of the 50-54 women's age division be faster than the gals in the 20s and 30s division. The article discusses some other factors that may have kept women from racing their fastest. Thought it was interesting and may be similar to some of the discussions we've been having on the skiing side of the boards.



Then, as for the 5K I ran this AM, here are the stats I came across (sorry, I don't know how to do tables):

Total Finishers: Men – 222 Women – 236 Total – 458

Finishers by Age and Gender
Age Group Men Women Total
12 - 19 3 15 18
20 - 29 51 97 148
30 - 39 98 79 177
40 - 49 26 22 48
50 - 59 21 18 39
60 - 69 13 3 16
70 - 79 3 2 5


1) there were roughly the same number of men and women who raced and finished.

2) nearly 2x as many women in their 20s finished as compared to men in that age group; ages 40s through 50s, the finishers were about equal, men and women.

3) finally, the race was a chip-timed fundraiser for lung cancer education and research, held in Washington DC on a chilly Sunday morning. Does this make a difference?



LAST year, 2006's stats for the same race, same weekend:

Total Finishers: Men – 238 Women – 250 Total – 488

Finishers by Age and Gender
Age Group Men Women Total
12 - 19 4 11 15
20 - 29 68 117 185
30 - 39 89 70 159
40 - 49 36 30 66
50 - 59 24 15 39
60 - 69 8 2 10
70 - 79 1 2 3

There's the same phenomenon of significantly more women than men in the 20-29 group racing/finishing, with more men in the 30s, and then nearly equal number in the 40s.


Here are the stats from the 1st annual race. Difference here are: 1) the race was run in November (brr!) and 2) it was 4 miles, rather than a 5K.



Total Finishers: Men – 215 Women – 288 Total – 503

Finishers by Age and Gender
Age Group Men Women Total
12 - 19 4 8 12
20 - 29 66 124 190
30 - 39 70 94 164
40 - 49 30 35 65
50 - 59 29 20 49
60 - 69 11 4 15
70 - 79 2 2 4
80 - 89 0 1 1


Again, nearly twice as many women in their 20s finishing as compared to the men. Of course, now the 30s group is flipped a little, with more women running, but the numbers of 40s and 50s are about equal again.

So, what's causing the imbalance of registrants by sex among the 20s group? Are women more philanthropic? Are men more hungover after partying on Saturday?

I'm intrigued.

 

[Kimmyt]

Hmm, in all the road races I've done recently (mostly small-town events), I've noticed the opposite. Age 20-29 in women seems to be the most under-represented. I do not know if the same would be true for a larger race. For example, last weekend I ran a 5k and placed third in my age group (F20-29). And this was with a time of 27:34, which is by no means fast! So yes, I think our age group was under-represented. On the other hand, the top female runners were 30-39 and 40-49. I was 70th overall, and The Boy was 54th, yet he didn't place in his age group.

Maybe the statistics vary depending on the running culture of an area, and since I live in a more small-town rural part of the state, perhaps there are less younger women who are interested in taking running seriously.

K.

 

[Pequenita]

I'm also wondering if, in general, there are just more women than men between the ages of 20-29 in DC and NY (I found the same trend among race finishers in NYC) as compared to other geographic locations. Not that the following stat is accurate for this purpose, but National Geographic pubilshed a map in Feb. 2007 that revealed that DC had at least 40,000 more single women than single men (presumably, if you're not "single," then you're married to a member of the opposite sex; therefore, the outcome still is that there are more women than men). In the NY-NJ-CT urban area, there were over 180,000 more single women than single men. Of course, this cut across all age groups, not just people in their 20s.

I wonder, if I looked at races in the SF bay area, which the Nat Geo map shows as having 40,000 more "single" men than women, if I would find that the numbers are different in the 20-29 age group.


I have to do a road race where you live, kimmy. I could come home with bragging rights if I lied about my age!

 

[Kimmyt]

Hah, well I guess it only works if it's a small-town one. For instance, the Philly runs are usually such fast courses that all the Kenyans come over to set Personal and World Records at distance (the Philly Distance Run was last weekend, 1/2 mary, and the winners were around 1:00:00).

But you know, I do tend to think that the single factor really plays in. Honestly, I just know way too many young women who place such emphasis on marriage and family starting, perhaps to the detriment of their own personal lives. I think this happens alot more in a small-town, suburban setting, because one moves to a place like that to 'settle' their lives perhaps, and in a more urban environment there is more ability to compromise the desires of settling into a life while still living that life.