I like the ideas around this. The idea is not to penalize someone for going above and beyond what they usually do (in fact IMHO, that is one of the GOALS
of VRAA) but to limit the impact of that on the fairness factor. I like a % limit, or maybe a sliding scale to make it easier on the BAIT who is better/stronger than they thought and harder on the more experienced folks who should have a better idea of their current abilities. I know a year ago, even planning on 100 miles a month seemed like a faraway goal, but I went from 60's at the beginning of the year to over 140 a month by the end of the year. Anyway, the higher level folks should have a better handle on their abilities and thus have less leeway to exceed their self-described limit. And imposing this penalty on a per week or per game basis would allow for reduced running to heal or get well (or vacation) followed by extra effort to make up for it.
Well, on long rides, I average around 16 mph or 24 points per hour.
On long runs, I am usually about 6 mph or 24 points per hour.
Swimming, I usually do about 2000 yards in a 1 hour workout for 20 points.
For me, this seems to be about fair.
I used my training plan to see how many points I had scheduled (including a recovery week) and averaged my 4 week totals to choose my level. I am right at the top of the category I choose (my training plan had me at the high-end or low end of the next level and I am usually at about 85-90% of my plan due to life getting in the way).
While that would be fun, I like the fact that I got to know some new names and even met one of them at a race.
Smart man. I don't care what anyone says about you.