Jess Brewer unveils Age-Graded calculator with 2014 WMA factors

Simple like Google but with tons of data behind it.

Simple like Google but with tons of data behind it.

As legend has it, Jess Brewer posted a note to an ancient track message board about crossing some desert to masters track. And then Ken Stone said aha, and started a website. (The legends are true, BTW.) But Saint Jess isn’t done inspiring. His latest miracle is taking the new WMA Age Factors and fashioning a new, improved Age-Graded Tables online. This is the first revision since 2010. I once called this the Holy Grail of masters track. Now it’s taken for granted. I’ve been using Professor Howard Grubb’s AGT calculator for years (often to comedic effect). But Age-Graded Tables, despite their entertainment value, are serious efforts to let people of different ages know how they compare. It’s also the only way to officially score multi-events. (The Age Factors help WMA meets calculate point scores. See the raw factors down this page.) Jess says his latest lookup form is a work-in-progress, a “pre-alpha” release. He wants athletes to try the and form out and let him know “specifics” of any bugs or glitches. Jess further writes: “Seems to work for the simple stuff, but it’s screwing up for (SOME) events where distances change with age, e.g. M65 [long hurdles].” So be aware of that.
Print Friendly

April 6, 2014

22 Responses

  1. Anthony Treacher - April 6, 2014

    Several track and field meets use Age Grading Tables to calculate results. So it is getting important that we sort this out.

    Any interest in Age Grading Tables is welcome but Jess Brewer’s calculator above only allows entry of age on the 0 and 5 age boundaries, say 70 and 75, not in between say 74, which is absolutely necessary (and not only because I am 74). Jess’ calculator does not give the Age performance % and maybe most important it does not give the Dec points. No good. Forget it completely.

    Why re-invent the wheel? Professor Howard Grubb’s AGT calculator is pretty good, even if the age factors may need updating.

    Why cannot WMA lend its name to Howard Grubb’s AGT and someone combine it with a technical innovation that brings in money to fund the whole thing, for instance an App to allow you to run a WMA Age Grading Calculator offline on your smartphone or tablet? I for one would pay $10 for such an App.

  2. Matt B. - April 6, 2014

    Good work. Just add in the single age factors.

    % seem a bit more realistic.
    Age 45 800m 1:53.0 = 97.23% 2006- 98.53%
    Age 80 800m 2:38 = 101.88% 2006- 103.17% old factgor-.6203 new factor .6281
    Age 50 800m in 1:58.0 is a 1:44.39 96.86% 2006% = 98.57%

    Age 70 800 in 2:18 98.93%, 2006 100.37%

  3. Weia Reinboud - April 6, 2014

    Anthony: today’s grading set as developed by Bernd Rehpenning does not have had one-year gradings, only five year.
    My spreadsheet also contains only five year subdivisions and is menat for the scoring of multi events and has untensively been used by Bernd: http://home.xmsnet.nl/weiatletiek/index3.html

    I have developed medal standards for use in our national championships. In fact I first had to make new gradings and of course they differ a bit from other gradings as inevitably so many decisions have to be made, more or less arbitrary. Mine are less forgiving for the oldest categories. More realistic I think.

  4. Myrle Mensey - April 6, 2014

    I tried to put my weight throw mark in this Age graded table and it didn’t work. Kept saying error. Can someone help me with it? female age 65 weight 5.45
    distance 16.91m. I’ve also used Professor Howard Grubb’s AGT for years,no problem.

  5. Anthony Treacher - April 6, 2014

    OK. Back to basics. Is the ‘WMA Age-grading calculator 2006 (updated 2010)’ by Howard Grubb/Alan Jones and © Howard Grubb 1999-2011.

    on http://www.howardgrubb.co.uk/athletics/wmalookup06.html

    the official WMA Age-grading calculator?

  6. Scott Hannay - April 7, 2014

    I get errors with this calculator. I always appreciate these tools, but this tool does not seem
    to be very intuitive and it does not work.

  7. tb - April 7, 2014

    Works fine for me. His biggest area for improvement is combining Gender, Decade, and Year into a single Age Group drop-down.

  8. Weia Reinboud - April 8, 2014

    It doesn’t work at all.

  9. Scott Hannay - April 8, 2014

    The shot put function does work, but the Jav 700g
    function does not work.

  10. Milan Jamrich - April 8, 2014

    When I use the two calculators, I get two VERY different results for M60 high jump (170cm).

    Grubb calculator: 2.33 cm
    Brewer calculator: 2.21 cm

  11. Ken Stone - April 8, 2014

    Milan, the different results are because Howard’s calculator is based on 2010 Age Factors and Jess’ is based on 2014 factors. Professor Grubb has been looped into offline conversation about updating his form. Several issues need to be ironed out.

  12. Anthony Treacher - April 8, 2014

    Of course the 2010 and 2014 factors are different. Can’t we move on from the banal and get something done for a change?

    Again, back to basics. As we say in Sweden: “Vem äger frågan?” “Who owns the question?” i.e. Who is in charge of the Age-Grading Calculator problem complex? Someone must be. I know who should be.

  13. Myrle Mensey - April 8, 2014

    weight throw calculations still not working for me

  14. Weia Reinboud - April 9, 2014

    To be precise: there are no 2010 and 2014 sets, we have the 2007 gradings (last version of the gradings by Rex Harvey) and the set of 2010 (by Bernd Rehpenning). Milan’s results show correct outcomes for 2007 (Grubb) and 2010 (Brewer). (In my personal set you would get 2.19.)

  15. Anthony Treacher - April 9, 2014

    Weia, while I appreciate your passion and involvement, nobody can rely on any AGT factors/gradings that are not in a system backed by the athletics authorities. We, as so often on this blog, are beating about the bush. So, again back to basics:

    1. WMA must acquire/purchase the rights to a viable AGT system. The only user-friendly AGT system today is that of Howard Grubb/Alan Stone.
    2. WMA must decide which set of factors that currently apply.
    3. WMA must decide the periodicity in which the AGT system is to be updated with new factors.
    4. WMA must cover its costs for acquiring and then updating an AGT system with new factors.

    How WMA covers those costs is up to WMA but cover its costs it must. I am humbly suggesting that overall funding may be helped or even covered by a new attractive WMA-sponsored, user-friendly, AGT package incorporating the technical upgrade of a snazzy offline AGT App for smartphones and tablets. I personally am willing to pay $10 for such an App. I thought that was a helpful, constructive proposal and I had expected some helpful, constructive criticism. So come on.

  16. Milan Jamrich - April 9, 2014

    Weia, I like your personal set the least ;-). I say we go with the Grubb calculator 2.33 cm :-)

  17. Matt McCubbins - April 9, 2014

    yes, I like my Grubb results better too, Milan. :)

  18. tb - April 9, 2014

    Anywho… Myrle, your 16.91 age-grades to a 22.42m open 20# throw using the 2014 factors.

  19. Weia Reinboud - April 9, 2014

    Anthony: that 2010 set of Bernd IS the current WMA-set. So Grubb is simply wrong.

  20. Anthony Treacher - April 9, 2014

    Updated age-grading factors. A viable user-friendly AGT calculator. And never the twain shall meet?

  21. SimonM - April 12, 2014

    Wot, no mile?

  22. Lollylegs - June 19, 2014

    To be correct, the current official grading tables are the WMA 2006 for single events. The 2010 grading tables are for Multi events only.

Leave a Reply