spot wrote:
devashish_paul wrote:
If I look at November, I ran 28 days out of 30. It just worked out that way. However, if I look more closely, there were around 5 days where the run was 15-25 min range. That was the right amount of running on those days. If the challenge was on, I would get credit for 23/30 days and that is fine. If it was during the challenge, the days that were closer to 25 would turn into 30. The days that were closer to 15 would remain 15...so maybe I end up with 25/30. There is a lot of value in 10-15 min runs for sure, and nothing wrong with doing those for the sake of training even though they may not be additive to challenge totals (at least based on feedback, most past participants are saying NO to the 15+45 option proposed in my first post).So, this begs the question...what is the purpose of the 30 minute minimum, then? If the overall goal is consistency, then establishing an arbitrary minimum time that may discourage runners from the challenge that need to work on consistent running would seem to be contradictory, no?
And I'm not a fan of the 15+45 option. I just think that the min should be less than 30, for the exact reason you state in bold above.
Spot
One problem Dev has discussed in the past is the system that "tracks" this challenge. I believe it is hardwired to only recognize runs 30 min or more. This is why Dev for example is saying to log a 15+45 as 30+30.
One solution may be to allow some walking in that 30min. Say something like minimum 30min, with a max of 10 minutes walking. People wanting to build up slowly could do 5x4min with 2 minute walking in between, slowly decreasing the walk until they are at 30minutes of running.