1. ken c wrote...

will be interesting to compare the end results to the fran times. would be cool to compare it to a few other benchmarks as well (helen, grace, elizabeth). and dutch, what's with the sandbagging? i know for a fact you've done something around a 2:30.

2. Mike wrote...

These stats mean nothing as I'm sure most people do not maintain games standards while performing this WOD. No offense to Steve Smith but after watching the ROM on his last chance qualifier videos I would have to toss his time out.

Fran is overrated! Long live Helen....

3. Paul E wrote...

Would someone be willing to post this info as a txt or xls file so we can play around with the data at home?

4. Shane S wrote...

Interesting ranking, but it's merely a piece of the puzzle. The fastest Fran recorded wasn't good enough to qualify for the Games.

5. RhabdoGFCM replied to comment from Shane S...

Hey baby, don't bring me into this.

6. David Quintana wrote...

How about a list of athlete height, weight, and times for more benchmark workouts. :) Then we can extrapolate something useful for our predictions. :)

7. Tony Budding replied to comment from ken c...

Ken and David,
We're a step ahead. Expect a different one of these every morning for the next week or so.

8. Mark Lee wrote...

The big picture and averages with rankings on all the Benchmarks will be very interesting! But the legitness factor is a variable...either way I love to geek out about this stuff like a kid with baseball cards!

9. Ryan Brown wrote...

Big LOL @ Rhabdo's reply to Shane S.

10. Mark Lee wrote...

Is Tosh still competing? 2:37 Fran

11. David B. replied to comment from Tony Budding...

This is cool although the majority of times are entirely subjective.

12. Tony Budding replied to comment from David B....

David,
The times are data points. They are not subjective, though they are completely self-reported and unverified. I think Mark and Jeff have good points. It will be interesting to see how the stats all play out, and we all know there's a whole bunch more to the story than packing good stats.

For those of you that are geeks, all this data was compiled only from the profiles that are on the site. Nothing is hidden.

I would love to see some speculation about how folks will do given different Games formats.

Also, don't forget about the women. In 2007, only one woman broke 500lbs in the Total. This year, many if not most of the women would easily clear that. The game is elevated for sure.

13. Ralph Hicks wrote...

Graham Holmberg did a 2:23 the other day, once you mentally get this workout the seconds/minutes shed fast.

It's hard to see anything much faster than 1:50 with quality form.

14. Carter wrote...

I have a completed grid of all competitor provided stats. Whats interesting in comparing workout times, is how it clearly illustrates strengths and weaknesses in different elements by competitors. Its safe to say analysis is only as good as the information provided. But with so many new faces this year the competition really cant be hcp'd. Im looking forward to seeing the workouts for 2009 and I hope they keep the "Hill"in the mix.

15. Harold wrote...

Hey all:

I've done some preliminary analysis of these Fran data for men and women. Later today I'll post up some more formal results on my blog page. But, here is something interesting.

First off, the mean fran times reported on these pages are incorrect. The mean fran time for men is actually 2.54 (not 2.56) and the mean fran time for women is 4.33 (not 4.36).

All other descriptive statistics are correct EXCEPT that the mean the mean weight for women is 137 and not 138.

OK, so first off I also compute the BMI because we have weight and height and I look quickly to see if weight, height, or BMI have any relationship with fran times.

The answer is a clear NO. For the men, the correlations are:

BMI and Fran = -.13
Height and Fran = .21
Weight and Fran = .08
Age and Fran = -.02

For the women, the correlations are:

BMI and Fran = .008
Height and Fran = -.07
Weight and Fran = -.04
Age and Fran = -.25

For those who don't know, a "correlation" is a statistic that ranges between -1 and 1. The closer a value is to 1 (in absolute value), the stronger the relationship.

Here we can see that Fran correlates strongly with nothing. There is a marginal (and negative) correlation between Age and Fran for women, which means the older a women is, the slower her Fran time is. But, this correlation is so weak that you really cannot support that conclusion with these data.

This is only preliminary stuff, but I have a preliminary conclusion---Fran is about HEART. Get some.

16. Justin wrote...

So the average male competing is 28 years old, 5'10 and 185lbs. I'm 29, 5'10 and weight 185.

Now I really have no excuses.

17. Harold wrote...

Whoops, one correction. The negative correlation between Age and Fran for women means that older women have slightly faster fran times, not slightly slower fran times. Again, that relationship is weak, so don't read anything meaningful into that.

18. JB wrote...

exactly what i hoped for. now i know where i stand, kind of. the rest of the week will show how far behind i really am, er, how much opportunity there is for me to improve

19. Olafur wrote...

I just noticed that Sveinbjorn Sveinbjornsson from Iceland just posted a 3:27 Fran time from the 13th of June. Big improvement in what I think was his second Fran.