10 marathons in 10 days (Read 131 times)

I doubt very few people here have run 26 miles 7 days in a row.

 

I know i have not.

I know someone who has.

BTW, that's a 182 mile week. Pretty good week of running. Followed by another 78 miles over 3 days.

There are many different ways people can "impress" someone. 

Incidentally, I know a few very good road marathoners ("elite", sure maybe, or at least close... that's a fun description that people often throw around without defining it) who go on to run a trail 100 miler or two. Or in Wardian's case, Hardrock. Different thing, nothing close to road marathon pace. Maybe that wouldn't impress folks, maybe it would. But most folks can't do it.

And I'd be willing to bet that those tut tutting 10 marathons in 10 days (not at MP) probably would be pretty broken at the end of it.

Yall (not you, tom, sorry... I just borrowed your post) give it a try and let us know.

10 in 10 days, not a big deal. Averaging 2:55, that's a big deal. OK so for him that's a leisurely jog (though I'm sure travel logistics and some venues, like Antarctica, can't have made that any easier). That doesn't mean faster guys than him could do it. Wardian represents a pretty unique combination of speed and endurance, more specifically, recovery ability. I'm happy to see him having fun doing stuff like this. The "record" thing doesn't impress me either – the story doesn't say, but I'm assuming it's a Guinness record. They award "records" for all sorts of crazy stuff. Real records in running are determined by official governing bodies, i.e. IAAF, IAU, USATF. Which is not to say some Guinness records are not noteworthy (e.g. Pete Kostelnick's run across the US in 42 days), but the Guinness label is incidental to the accomplishment. I'll take my USATF age-group records over any number of Guinness world records.

15 min 5K, that doesn't mean anything to me, that's not a world I live in. Humans are pretty sucky runners, as mammals go, over such distances. We only really stand out at much longer distances. Yes that's a pretty self-serving attitude I admit, but to each his own. I prefer the longer stuff.

 

Fair question: would you rather have a quirky/weird endurance world record or the 5k PR of a middling D3 college runner?

 

For 40-something-year-old Mike Wardian, the answer appears to be "A".

can we compare world records and pick?

I'd certainly take the 5k World Record.

to me quirky world records were always dumb, sorry. Like fastest mile while juggling 3 balls... or most times one can kick themselves in the face... I forget the guys name...but he set out to own as many world records as possible...

Don't get me started on Swimming...lol. 100m back stroke vs. fly vs. freestyle... ever notice track doesn't have the 100m backwards race? sideways race... etc... always seemed odd to me that swimming created different events/styles to compete at instead of simply picking the distance and saying, fastest way you can swim it have at it!

 

Perhaps. I actually don't remember if he and I did it the same years. But probably so.

Year one, yes indeedy.

That was the year your island friend was in town (Johnny?) who ran each one faster than the last and finished Seattle on Sunday around 3:10 IIRC.

Then a month later I saw his picture on the cover of UltraRunning magazine doing the high step over some roots at the HURT 100

 

I too got progressively faster each day but can't claim no 3:10!

 

WOOHOO!

WOOHOO, indeed.

The last was my fastest as well

Thank goodness most of the record-keeping bodies restrict eligibility to humans, rather than including all mammals.

Yes, but they’re going to have to deal with GMOs and cyborgs in the not too distant future.