Altitude Adjustment for the CPFT

[Pingree1492]

I'm working on a proposal to send up the Chain (hopefully to be presented at the next NB meeting) on adding an altitude adjustment to the mile run for the CPFT.  I'm mainly looking for additional opinions and research on the topic, obviously the proposal itself will more fleshed out.

Background:
Anyone who has done any aerobic activity at altitude knows that it is much more difficult and strenuous than at sea-level.  Obviously, it gets a little easier once you get acclimated to the altitude, but even then, performance is reduced.  There is a LOT of conflicting science about how much performance is impacted, but the fact that there is an impact on aerobic activity is clear.

Most of the research that I conducted agrees that anaerobic activity (such as sprinting) is not affected by altitude and, according to some research, that it is even aided by being at higher altitude (less wind resistance).  So all of the CPFT activities that are anaerobic- sit-ups, push-ups, sit&reach, and the shuttle run would not need any altitude adjustment.

The NCAA uses a simple altitude adjustment for the qualifying times for their National Track and field meet.  I propose that we adopt the same adjustment for use on our mile run times.  There are two versions of the adjustment, one for indoor track and one for outdoor.  I'm operating on the assumption that most squadrons conduct their CPFT mile run outside, so I used the outdoor adjustment times (good assumption/bad assumption??).  The link to this is available here: http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/ncaa/ncaa/sports+and+championship/track+and+field/playing+rules/index.html

After doing some number crunching on the data that the NCAA provides, I found that the adjustment is simply a percentage of the actual qualifying time that is added on based on altitude.  So it's not dependent on whether you're a male/female, or running division I, II or III.  This makes things VERY simple for us. 

In the interest of simplicity (the CPFT scoring can be complicated enough), I decided to use the Spaatz-level mile run time requirements for males and females at the 17+ age category to come up with the altitude adjustment.  Coming up with the adjustment for each altitude, achievement level, gender and age group is certainly doable (just more tables in excel ), but again, that just adds to the complexity level of administering it at the squadron level.  I think something as simple as possible, such as choose your altitude, and gender, and you have your adjustment is the best solution.  Thoughts?


Results:
So, again, skipping the number crunching portion of the proposal for now, here is the chart that I came up with for the altitude adjustment.  This is based, again, on running a 6:23 mile time for males and an 8:52 mile time for females, here is the chart:

ALT   FEMALE   MALE
2500   4   3
2775   4   3
3000   5   4
3225   6   4
3500   7   5
3775   8   6
4000   8   6
4225   9   7
4500   10   7
4775   11   8
5000   12   9
5225   13   10
5500   14   10
5775   16   11
6000   17   12
6225   18   13
6500   19   14
6775   20   14
7000   21   15
7225   22   16
7500   24   17
7775   25   18
8000   26   19
8225   27   20
8500   29   21
8775   30   22
9000   32   23
9225   33   24
9500   34   25
9775   36   26
10000   37   27
10225   39   28

Basically, you just choose the closest adjustment to your altitude, and either subtract the number from the time the cadet ran, OR add the number to the time requirement for that particular cadet.  I don't think either option really matters, but it should probably be done uniformly.

I started at 2500 because that's about 500 feet lower than the NCAA started.  Extrapolating numbers much lower than that is going to get inaccurate, as the altitude effect is NOT linear.  Leadville, CO (10,125) is just a bit higher than our highest elevation squadron meets in Colorado (that I'm aware of anyway).  If any of the folks in Alaska have a higher meeting location, please let me know, and I'll include numbers up to there!

To the casual observer, these numbers may appear much higher than the NCAA adjustment times listed, but remember, they're calculated as a percentage of the qualification time.  NCAA male times are in the 4:15 range, and female times are in the 4:50 range.  Obviously, MUCH faster than our cadets are going to run, so the adjustment needs to take that into account.

Alright, debate away!!   *ducks for cover*

[RiverAux]

My first question would be whether we are actually seeing higher failure rates at squadrons at higher altitudes.  If we are, then this makes sense.  If pretty much the same percentages are passing everywhere, then this wouldn't really be necessary. 

Any data on this?

[davidsinn]

My thoughts are that the cadets at a higher altitude unit should already be acclimated as they are from there so why make it easier for them?

[AirAux]

If you are going to do this, why not take it all the way to sea level?  After all, you have a 3-4 second advantage at 2500 feet..  I would think that if a cadet was within the parameters that you are talking about now, a commander would take items like this into consideration..

[davidsinn]

If you are going to do this, why not take it all the way to sea level?  After all, you have a 3-4 second advantage at 2500 feet..  I would think that if a cadet was within the parameters that you are talking about now, a commander would take items like this into consideration..

The regs currently don't allow us any leeway. They either pass or they don't.

[raivo]

I don't know exactly how it works, but the AF gives you a slightly higher score if you test at certain high-altitude bases (though there's only about 6 of them.)

Run times/scores will be adjusted for those members who test at facilities with altitudes > 5,000
feet.. The adjustment is automatically calculated by the AF FMS when the applicable base is selected
on entry by the UFPM of member's score