masterstrack.com

Apologize if this is a stupid question (and yes, I do believe there are stupid questions). Looking at the U.S. standards of excellence charts, the 60m times don't seem to correllate well with the 55m or 100m. Just to pick on 40 year old males, the 55m is 7.1, the 60m is 7.7 and the 100 is 11.5--I guess the way I look at it is that I can run that 5m is .6 seconds (difference between 55m and 60m) but need to run the final 40m in 3.8 sec (difference between 60m and 100m)? I hope I'm making sense and would appreciate any enlightenment someone wants to give me.

Thanks!

I don't know if there is any sense to it. Last winter I hit the 55m A-A time, the winter before I hit the 60m A-A time. This summer I ran the best 200 and 400 I've run in years and still am a good 0.5 secs off the 100 m A-A time. The only thing I have heard is that the times are based off the best 5% of performances for that age-group, so possibly the 100 is a lot more competitive than the 55 or 60. It doesn't seem to jive to me either, since I typically get my lunch handed to me in the 55 or 60 but I can hold my own in a 100 or 200.