Age Bands in Races

How do Runners World members feel about different age bands for males and females? Some races start at 35+ for senior women, but 40+ for senior men. At the other end of the scale, men have 65+ categories, whilst women only go as far as 60+ category. Wouldn't it be fairer to have the same categories?

 

Comments

  • Less women race i guess so wider bands might even the numbers in each band out?
  • Go CazGo Caz ✭✭✭

    I've always thought the categories should be the same. It seems like an antiquated system. Why should women become veterans at 35 but men at 40? That suggests women age faster, which is clearly not the case. And at the other end of the scale, too, it should be equal, otherwise more mature women are at a disadvantage. When I've mentioned this to race organisers however, they just say that how it's always been done. If you follow that reasoning to its logical conclusion, though, women still wouldn't be allowed to run marathons. 

  • Organisers can pick whichever bandings they like....I think nowadays vets should be 40 for both...And then have 50, 60 and 70 age groups....I like the league races as they are in 5 year bands

  • Stevie  GStevie G ✭✭✭✭

    If you want equality, how about taking out the male/female divide at all?

    No...didn't think so.

  • It is unfair that 69 YO women are competing against a 60 YO women, quite possibly. One solution is to use WAVA age grades. But if you are comparing male categories with female categories, fairness woudn't be the right word, since they are not competing. As someone said, foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.

  • Go CazGo Caz ✭✭✭

    And then there's always the question of good for age times being arguably easier to achieve for women. You win some you lose some.

  • Go Caz wrote (see)

    I've always thought the categories should be the same. It seems like an antiquated system. Why should women become veterans at 35 but men at 40? That suggests women age faster, which is clearly not the case. And at the other end of the scale, too, it should be equal, otherwise more mature women are at a disadvantage. When I've mentioned this to race organisers however, they just say that how it's always been done. If you follow that reasoning to its logical conclusion, though, women still wouldn't be allowed to run marathons. 


    But men, certainly on the track are classed as Vets at 35. Comes from the ridiculous decision to drop it to keep it the same as the women so they are both 35, rather than move women's Vet level up to 40 - especially as both sexes are improving at the vet level.

    I don't think I have discussed this with anyone who thinks it was the right decision. Yet image

  • There are now more women in the older vet categories. I competed with 11 women age 60 plus in my league race. But I think the main issue is .... how would you feel competing in much wider age bands than other competitors. E.g. Being 64 competing with women 55 plus? Park run has age bands equal for men and women. Age bands are a motivator for men and women. Often the prize is incsignificant compared to a reward for time spent continuing to try your best despite advancing years.
  • in our womens league races.it seems the women are faster as they get older.....

     

  • Go CazGo Caz ✭✭✭

    Simon, that doesn't sound like a good decision to me either. I think men and women should both become vets at 40.

    Seren, I was referring to the organisers of county events, who don't seem to like changing the established ways of doing things. Women over 55 is the top category in our league, so any female of 64 (or older) will be competing with 55 year olds, as Yvonne says. They could argue that not enough older women compete, but perhaps that's because they are put off by the age categories.

  • senidMsenidM ✭✭✭
    Its all a bit arbitrary, depends on the race, but by having band-widths of 10 years it means as you get to the wrong end your chances of picking up a GFA is fairly remote.



    I much prefer 5 year bands and some races do allocate prizes on that basis, otherwise its just tough luck.
  • Go Caz, if you look at races in general there just aren't that many over 60 women running, and I don't think there'd be a whole lot more if the county champ had a VW60 category, so the argument that there wouldn't be enough to make it competitive is a valid one.

    That's not to say that they couldn't give it a go though, introduce the category but make it clear that if there aren't at least X entries then it'll be merged with the younger group.  County officials tend to be people who've been in the sport a long time, they like things done the way they've always been and aren't (usually) the greatest innovators.

  • MrM2MrM2 ✭✭✭

    'Its all a bit arbitrary'.....I'd agree with that, and as an over 70 I can afford to be somewhat philosophical. Sure I check the local Parkruns for my age band, and I'm pleased that they are in 5 year stages. However, the Age Grading conveys more to me than my position within the age group.

    I have been pleased to see 70+ being added to more events, because I think that recognition should be given to older athletes, but perhaps the prizes should only go to those achieving a minimum age-grading; so that prizes are not given for just turning up. Then, would it matter how many competitors were in that age-group?

    Back in 2010, days before my 66th birthday, I was placed first in the 60+ men, in a 20km run in Bermuda. But as a non-resident I didn't get the prize. In 2011, running as a 67 year old, in a 6km event, I managed to win the 9th (and final) trophy for the (oldest) 45+ age group. Then, a couple of weeks later, in a 10k run, again won the final trophy in the senior Vet (50+) group. Yes, arbitrary. In a 21k run, in the Phillipines, I was presented with a certificate for being the 'Oldest Male Runner' at 68. (I would like to thank my parents.......)

    Certainly there is a huge drop in numbers of men competing when you move into 70+. In my three recent marathons there were only 6, 2 and 5 men in that age group. Should there be prizes? Placing 2nd, 1st and 2nd, with my age-gradings close to 70%, my conscience is clear about receiving small prizes. However, if they stipulated a minimum of,say, 75% I'd accept that. Have to say that my sense of satisfaction has nothing to do with prizes but with how well I managed my circumstances on the day.     Happy Christmas and Happy Running.

  • I hope you all had a Merry Christmas. Thanks so much for this informed discussion, which led to Mr M2's very useful contribution. I have to say that as well as feeling that older women are not being recognised, I have a lot of respect for MrM2 and other 70+ runners who do a very respectable pace, and still stay in the mix. I would like the opportunity to applaud those runners.

    I shall use this contribution to see if I can change our club's league's race (and others if I can).

    Thank you everyone.

  • ote (see)
    Less women race i guess so wider bands might even the numbers in each band out?
    Reminds me of a triathlon I once did, with trophies for the winner in every 5 year age bracket for each sex. On this occasion that was taking it a bit far, as it meant every woman over 45 got a trophy - including the 75-79 year old who was dead last by 20 minutes - as they each had no other competition in their band! image

     

  • parkrun has age bands equal for men and women.
    parkrun originally used the same categories as UKA, but changed a few years ago so that M and F became vets at the same age because they quite sensibly thought it was daft to have a 5yr gap. They could easily take the decision and get on with it whereas UKA/IAAF/whoever it is have a lot of history and people to persuade that just because it's always been like that it should stay like that!  
Sign In or Register to comment.