Distance Challenge - Runners vs Cyclists

[Teenage Dirtbag]

Your reaction here just goes to show how touchy you runners are.

You guys are just mad because when someone says "World's best cyclist", the first thing that comes to mind is this guy:

[creekster]

You guys are just mad because when someone says "World's best cyclist", the first thing that comes to mind is this guy:

Just let it go friend, just let it go. Running is ok. No need to be so, well, so touchy.

[Babs]

DOnt worrym if they think they are losing they will cheat. ANd they'll be very touchy about it.

No doubt. They'll either just make up the numbers altogether, or they'll rack up their miles on the subway like the winner of the Boston Marathon did.

[Babs]

2) 4:1 ratios either direction. 1/4 mile swimming = 1 mile running = 4 miles cycling. Exception: cowboy wisely pointed out a mile on a mountain bike (trail or road) is not the same as a road bicycle so I would propose 3 miles as the equivalent for anyone riding on a mountain bike tire.

(Again, I'm totally open to feedback--on this point, especially.)

What do you think about using cumulative time instead of distance? It's just awfully hard to find a multiplicative factor to use to equate distance between disciplines. I have to admit that distance seems more fun, though.

[Teenage Dirtbag]

What do you think about using cumulative time instead of distance? It's just awfully hard to find a multiplicative factor to use to equate distance between disciplines. I have to admit that distance seems more fun, though.

I think the problem with using time is that it can de-emphasize effort. I mean, if someone goes on a leisurely walk for an hour, should they really be ahead of someone who cycled hard for 45 minutes? I don't think so. I think distance is the only way to go.

[Babs]

I think the problem with using time is that it can de-emphasize effort. I mean, if someone goes on a leisurely walk for an hour, should they really be ahead of someone who cycled hard for 45 minutes? I don't think so. I think distance is the only way to go.

Then what do you think of the ratio proposed?

I mean, my numbers may be off, but something to consider:
a good-average swimmer is going to swim a mile in a little over 30 minutes. In the same amount of time a runner will make it 4, and a cyclist will go 10. Of course this varies based on distance and terrain and age and so on.

But that would be more like 1/4 mile swimming = 1 mile running = 2.5 miles cycling. Somebody might want to correct me on my numbers, though.

[creekster]

I think the problem with using time is that it can de-emphasize effort. I mean, if someone goes on a leisurely walk for an hour, should they really be ahead of someone who cycled hard for 45 minutes? I don't think so. I think distance is the only way to go.

Thats a good point but there is really bno way to make this equivalent acros disciplines bno matter what you do, It is all just a fun thing. I tend to agree with you, hwoeverm that distance ios probably the onyl way to go fior this sort of challenge.

[ERCougar]

Then what do you think of the ratio proposed?

I mean, my numbers may be off, but something to consider:
a good-average swimmer is going to swim a mile in a little over 30 minutes. In the same amount of time a runner will make it 4, and a cyclist will go 10. Of course this varies based on distance and terrain and age and so on.

But that would be more like 1/4 mile swimming = 1 mile running = 2.5 miles cycling. Somebody might want to correct me on my numbers, though.

I like the 4:1 ratios. It's much easier on your body to ride for two hours than run for two hours. The increased ratio sort of corrects for that.

[Teenage Dirtbag]

Thats a good point but there is really bno way to make this equivalent acros disciplines bno matter what you do, It is all just a fun thing. I tend to agree with you, hwoeverm that distance ios probably the onyl way to go fior this sort of challenge.

Yeah, I agree, it's all for fun.

We need some input from people who cycle and run frequently. Maybe they could tell us from a perceived effort standpoint, what an equivalent would be.

[Babs]

I like the 4:1 ratios. It's much easier on your body to ride for two hours than run for two hours. The increased ratio sort of corrects for that.

spoken like a runner.

[Teenage Dirtbag]

Then what do you think of the ratio proposed?

I mean, my numbers may be off, but something to consider:
a good-average swimmer is going to swim a mile in a little over 30 minutes. In the same amount of time a runner will make it 4, and a cyclist will go 10. Of course this varies based on distance and terrain and age and so on.

But that would be more like 1/4 mile swimming = 1 mile running = 2.5 miles cycling. Somebody might want to correct me on my numbers, though.

I'm comfortable with whatever puts the cyclists at a disadvantage.

But seriously, I've heard a 3:1 ratio before, and I'd be fine with that. It would make the math easier than 2.5:1.

[ERCougar]

spoken like a runner.

any cyclists care to dispute that?

[Babs]

I'm comfortable with whatever puts the cyclists at a disadvantage.

exactly. It's clear this is rigged from the outset. Rigged!!!

To address your suggestion that we find a dual subject matter expert to ask, I'm trying to think if there's anyone we know that both cycles and runs all the time and loves nothing more than to talk about it.

thinking...thinking...

[creekster]

any cyclists care to dispute that?

Not me. It WAS spoken like a runner.

[RC Vikings]

Count me in on this little contest. I need a new little kick in the butt to get going again.