Many of you will be aware that we recently made a major change to how our results system works. That’s progressing well, and whilst we’re still working on one or two things - not least ensuring we have suitable resources on a Saturday morning - we’re over the hump and really happy with the new system.
The new system has, however, highlighted a couple of anomalies. The main one is that the historic summary data we maintain and use for results emails and points tables had a few historical mistakes.
We’ve spent time over the last week investigating and reconciling the data, and have today applied corrections so that our rolled up summaries are now correct (ie. properly match our event results). The total number of affected runners is less than 1% of our system, and typically this has been a correction to run points as a result of an historical edit to the results (eg. add/remove a named runner due to a barcode miss-scan), so a few folk might notice their points and relative position adjusted a very small amount.
We’ve also today corrected an age grading anomaly that a few people had got in touch with us about. When parkrun introduced age grades, we pretty much followed the established guidelines (specifically IAAF rule 141), which classified women as masters/veterans at 35, but men as such from 40.
This changed a few years ago to treat genders identically, ie. both considered masters/veterans from 35. Until now we’ve not been in a position to update our system, but have now done so. So we’ve corrected the classifications (for current and historical results) such that anybody 35-39 years old on the day of their run is classified as VW35-39 or VM35-39.