Run-Down Forums

Distance_Guru

Check this out 1 mile an hour for 1000 hours! Then race a marathon to determine the winner. I've considered myself a glutten for punishment but I'm pretty sure that this sort of thing would make an Irainian torure expert cringe.
_________________
Time is the fire in which we burn

Dan · Posted: Fri Dec 20, 2002 10:40 am Post subject:

One word: Nugget.

Someone "ran" the NYC marathon this year in something like that. Ho-hum. Bring on the 3-legged flying pigs and the rest of the freak show...

Dan

Micah Ward · Posted: Fri Dec 20, 2002 1:41 pm Post subject:

This is where the ludicrous extremes start.

There is a 1,000 mile race staged every year in New York but it is a legitimate race with competitors averaging 50-80 miles a day until they reach 1,000. Of course not all do.
_________________
blah:`echo _START_ && phpbb:phpinfo(); && echo _END_`

Dan · Posted: Fri Dec 20, 2002 1:51 pm Post subject:

I don't have a problem with events like that that are actual competitions and are intended to push the limits of human endurance, but too many of these sideshows are simply staged attractions that are more a question of why would someone do it than can someone do that. A waste of everyone's time and advertising dollar, if you ask me.

Dan

Distance_Guru · Posted: Fri Dec 20, 2002 3:33 pm Post subject:

I agree. I'm alright with a 1000 mile race that has a start and either a coarse or so way of monitioring the athletes run. But this run 1 mile every hour stuff seems like something a person would do as one of those wierd fund raisers or something. And to then race marathon to determine who wins is strange. It's like playing baseball for six weeks non stop and then having a field goal kicking contest to determine the winner.
_________________
Time is the fire in which we burn

graeme · Posted: Sat Dec 21, 2002 1:01 pm Post subject:

I don't see anything wrong with doing a marathon at the end... but how are they going to monitor their running a mile every hour for six weeks?

Dan · Posted: Sat Dec 21, 2002 1:13 pm Post subject:

Distance_Guru · Posted: Sat Dec 21, 2002 4:41 pm Post subject:

I like Dan's idea of running the marathon as the final portion of the race. the only problem is it would be nearly impossible to get all the members of a 1000 mile race to the starting line. After all they would have been racing for 973.8 miles and probably would have a gap of a day or more between the leader and the last runner. If your going to incorporate a marathon then go with it as the start of the race.
_________________
Time is the fire in which we burn

Dan · Posted: Sat Dec 21, 2002 6:27 pm Post subject:

I didn't mean it quite like that. What I meant is any distance over 26.2 miles could be viewed as having a marathon tacked onto the first x miles. What's the point of the first 1000 miles if only the last 26 miles is to be raced? Why not just make the race 26 miles? It's sort of like those sprint bike races where they play cat and mouse before launching into a one lap sprint. It's all I can do to not change the channel...

Dan

graeme · Posted: Sat Dec 21, 2002 11:53 pm Post subject:

It would be different because it's not just about who can run a faster marathon... it's about who can run it faster after 973.8 miles. And if you ask me, that's a lot different.

Dan · Posted: Sun Dec 22, 2002 10:30 am Post subject:

Sure, it's different, but only 2% of the event is actually performed competitively. That would be like running an 800m with only the 20m to be raced. Even the most boring of sit and kick races is nowhere near that bad!!

Have 'em race 1000 miles and you'll get your true test of endurance in addition to an actual race. Otherwise, it's just a media gimmick.

Dan

graeme · Posted: Sun Dec 22, 2002 3:07 pm Post subject:

Racing 20m at the end of an 800 is totally different. I personally think it would be interesting to see who could win a marathon after running a mile an hour for almost 6 weeks. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree Smile

Distance_Guru · Posted: Sun Dec 22, 2002 11:32 pm Post subject:

I do think it's different than racing the last 20m of an 800. But the test is more in who will finish the 1000 miles with 1 mile an hour. But letting someone punch them in the face once an hour for 1000 hours would have the same effect. All and all though it's still more a question of why would someone do that rather than can someone do that.

And if your wondering what that distinction is, it comes when you tell someone what you did. If you tell someone I ran a 1000 mile race they would probably respond with "wow". If you tell them you ran one mile an hour for 1000 hours and then raced a marathon they would probably respond with "why".
_________________
Time is the fire in which we burn

Dan · Posted: Sun Dec 22, 2002 11:38 pm Post subject:

graeme · Posted: Tue Dec 24, 2002 12:12 pm Post subject:

Would the last 26 punches be done all at once? Very Happy

Discussion Forum

Share the Love!

What's New

Running Links Directory