All start dates are great. I don't give a sh_t. I wish each treadmill minute could be counted as 2 outdoor minutes. I hate those torture devices.

start with a 1 min run x 1 min walk 15 times thru for 30min

I don't care what the "official" rules are - the rules that I'm running by are these:

• 30min minimum


• must have one hour between the end of run 1 and the start of run 2 to make 'em count as 2 separate runs

Ian

I wish each treadmill minute could be counted as 2 outdoor minutes. I hate those torture devices.

I still think the 30 min minimal is the dumbest requirement if someone is running a second time that day. First run sure, second run dumb.

You know there are going to be folks who say that you shouldn't get credit for 30 minutes, if you're only running for 15 of them

The rules say if you only go 24 minutes on the first, you're allowed to go 36 on the second to make it up for two 30's

I haven't decided if I'm in or out.

Overall, the challenge was extremely good for my running, last year. I'm in a completely different zip code as a runner now. I used to be your typical injury prone runner. With the judicious application of BarryP's principles leading into last year's challenge, and then the challenge itself...I came out the other side as a leg-hardened runner. I was able to go straight into a challenging tri program that included a lot of hard running.

Its been over two years since I had any type of running related injury. Now I'm doing tons of run intensity (that I would have been terrified of last year) without a concern in the world for any of the usual maladays. So, the 100/100 did for me what it is designed to do---the connective tissues are tough.

However, the challenge coupled with my own competitive spirit was bad for my mental state going into the real training season. I went WAY Over The Top trying to climb the "leader board", and got burned out with training by around late May. As a result I didn't do any tris this year, and only will do a single 10k right before the holidays.

just stifle the urge to overdo

I'd bet you $10k the average ST triathlete runs <17 mile per week or 885 miles in a year.

I'm about to finish rehab for a hip injury, I will try this. Hopefully I can get back on track!

My grievance was going to be me not doing the challenge because of said injury.

Where are the "official rules"?

Where are the "official rules"?

it's like saying, "match.com was good for me; i found a perfectly suitable mate; somebody i could spend the rest of my life with happily; but i got caught up in it and found myself going out on a first date 4 nights a week; and crashed and burned a wrecked and lonely man. so, i don't know if internet dating works for me."

That's a hell of a metaphor, Dan, and maybe not entirely untrue

II consider myself first a runner and second a multisport athlete

My question regards strava syncing — I often log warmup/workout/cooldown as 3 separate activities, especially if the workout is on a track. These 3 activities are not a double or triple day - they are just part of an extended single run. (even though warmup and cooldown may be more than an hour apart). Will the strava import recognize they are all part of the same run?

I’ll bite...

I consider myself first a runner and second a multisport athlete, and this challenge just looks like smart run training. I’ll join if I’m feeling recovered from the NYC marathon by the start date.

30’ minimum of running and at least 1 hour between runs seem like good starting points to me.

My question regards strava syncing — I often log warmup/workout/cooldown as 3 separate activities, especially if the workout is on a track. These 3 activities are not a double or triple day - they are just part of an extended single run. (even though warmup and cooldown may be more than an hour apart). Will the strava import recognize they are all part of the same run?

your main set is 29 minutes

Who among us isn't so anal that they'll let a run go for such an odd number, regardless of what's on the schedule?

Most will keep going for another minute just to round up

YMMV - literally

You ask this on a forum dedicated to OCD training? I'm sure there is someone on this forum who will only do workouts of a prime-duration.

You ask this on a forum dedicated to OCD training? I'm sure there is someone on this forum who will only do workouts of a prime-duration.

A: I'd be happier doing 30
C: You're fired ... Send the Trucker Hat back

I'd either stop at 28 minutes or continue to 30 minutes. But never go for 29 minutes.

You know there are going to be folks who say that you shouldn't get credit for 30 minutes, if you're only running for 15 of them

I wouldn’t let what others do stop you from some fun. I always start aggressively and then fade fast, was top twenty one year for awhile. Looking at the logs of those who were killing it, not many were gaming the system, and if you recall Bluestacks was putting in some serious effort. Put in the effort that you want, and if you do 20 runs of 30 minutes at easy effort that you would not have done without this challenge then so much the better.

I wouldn’t let what others do stop you from some fun. I always start aggressively and then fade fast, was top twenty one year for awhile. Looking at the logs of those who were killing it, not many were gaming the system, and if you recall Bluestacks was putting in some serious effort. Put in the effort that you want, and if you do 20 runs of 30 minutes at easy effort that you would not have done without this challenge then so much the better.

Kind of how marathon world in USA is going people signing up for extreme downhill marathons with Nike bounce shoes to BQ

You have that backwards. He would prefer to exclude (and belittle) everyone else who can't or won't participate in accordance with his "ideals".

If this is all about regaining consistency, I'm counting those walking minutes - I'll still have done a third as many miles as the rest of you by the time we're through. I'll just log on my own so as not to skew all you alpha triathletes' numbers.

They make me faster and unreasonably annoy someone to boot- I need to buy an extra set.

I still think the 30 min minimal is the dumbest requirement if someone is running a second time that day. First run sure, second run dumb. I'd love to see it changed to:
Minimal 30 minutes for any first run of the day, minimal 15 minutes for any second run. For a lot of people doing 30/30 in one day is too much to being with. After all we're talking about triathletes not runners. I'd bet you $10k the average ST triathlete runs <17 mile per week or 885 miles in a year. Setting a lower bar allows one to start double runs more easily which can allow them to build their volume up more safely. By having to add the double to the next day it offers people all sorts of ways to become delusional about their actual run training.

The rest of your post though I can agree with though.

It would be better 100/100 to be in purist definition... 1 run per day, for 100 days straight

... this challenge is not for short course guys.

Is there a reason why you don’t leverage Strava for 100/100? Every year you get a clown or two who do 10 runs in a day for the first 30 days (and get collective ST panties in a bunch). You’d think having to upload these on Strava will cut a part of that BS.

So you're saying people who don't Strava can't participate?

I wasn't on this forum a year ago but saw that you stirred the pot a bit after the fact by insisting on this "purist" (or "original intent"?) definition of a 100-day run streak in singles.

Run streaks can be inspiring, but are fundamentally pedantic. What really matters to running better is getting in the miles and the runs consistently; a day off here or there really doesn't matter. Frequent doubles are better than singles. So from the standpoint of being good running training, the 100/100 as currently formulated is, simply put, better than your purist definition.

Yep. And if a 5k counted. It would make sense, but this challenge is not for short course guys.

If this challenge ever goes Strava-only, I'm out. Would be a shame, as I'm rather fond of it, and it seemed a few of you enjoyed my photos of wintry woods in past years. I finally made 100/100 (actually 120/100, though that still left me in 17th place...though perhaps the top Womens?) for the first time in 2018/19, and am hoping to accomplish a gold again.

If this challenge ever goes Strava-only, I'm out. Would be a shame, as I'm rather fond of it, and it seemed a few of you enjoyed my photos of wintry woods in past years. I finally made 100/100 (actually 120/100, though that still left me in 17th place...though perhaps the top Womens?) for the first time in 2018/19, and am hoping to accomplish a gold again.

Can there be some language added to clarify if multi-hour runs can or cannot be counted as 2 (or more) runs? I personally lean toward 1 session = 1 run, regardless of length - that's how I logged all of mine, including 3-hour and 6-hour races last year, but I know there was some "interpretation" of the "runs must be separated by 1 hour" that led to some logging a 2-hour run as 30mins + 30mins separated by 1hr.

I agree, seems like a single session should be 1 run, even if it's a long run > 2hrs.

If the intent of the 1-hour separation rule is to allow doubles to count (which would make sense to me), then I would be in favor of making the time gap bigger. Like 3 hours or even 6 hours. Doubles probably should be at least several hours apart to realize the runs as separate training stimuli and not just an extended single session.

And if a 5k counted.

...It's about getting/making time to get 1/2 an hour of running in, on a regular basis, whatever that may mean for you [30/100, 50/100, 75/100]. And to perhaps re-invigorate a joy of running "Hey! It's time to run! Let's go!"

It's a very special breed of STers who actively pursue 100/100

On Dec 1st the 2019/20 edition of the 100 runs in 100 days Challenge, commonly known as 100/100, commences. The thing has evolved somewhat over the past few years, due to and contrary to popular demand. This is the official boast, complain and relate thread, that will remain active until March 9th, the final day of the Challenge. The last few years we have had 500+ athletes from all over the world. Invite your friends. Thanks to Dev Paul for conceiving of and curating this Challenge over the years.

This first post is to explain the purpose, and the rules.

This goals of this Challenge are to establish a solid run base; to embed a habit of using the run to establish your fitness foundation; and - for some of us - to break out of the my-legs-are-shot paradigm, by which we've convinced ourselves that we can only run once per week. This Challenge honors frequency. Not distance. Not speed. Not effort. It honors regularity. Routine. To prevail in this Challenge you don't see how much you can do; rather how little. Not how hard you can run, but how easy. You might think running that easy detrains you. Try this Challenge. Let's revisit this once you're 60 days into it.

What Counts?

1. Any run that's at least 30 minutes long (see below for exceptions).
2. The runs can be outdoors or on a treadmill.
3. Walking does not count.
4. Aquajogging and elliptical training do not count.
5. You can (and probably should) take days off.
6. You can do days with more than 1 run session; each sessions counts.
7. You get no credit for going longer than 30min; a 30min run is identical to a 60min run for this Challenge.
8. Extra effort gains you nothing.
9. You can go as slow as you want provided both feet leave the ground on every stride.
10. Runs must separated by at least 1 hour to count as multiple sessions.

Runs shorter than 30 minutes

11. If you do 2 runs shorter than 30 minutes in one day you can count the total as 1 run.
12. Twice per week you can run a session that is shorter than 30min if on the very next day you run a session that makes up the difference, i.e., a 23min run doesn't count, but, if you run a 37min run the following day, then you've officially run 2 sessions.
13. That same paradigm does NOT count for a double run on a given day.
14. These "make up" runs can't be the rule; they're the exceptions; you get to do this twice in a week, and not more.

Joining the Challenge; Entering Runs on the Slowtwitch Training Log

15. Go to training.slowtwitch.com. You can always navigate there via the blue navbar above (below the ad banner at the top), hover over "Training" (third heading from right) and click on Training Log.
16. Sign up for a Training Log account if you don't already have one (your Reader Forum account is also your Training Log account, i.e., there's one unified login for both).
17. Then look for 100/100 for 2019/20. It's hard to miss.
18. Click "enroll". (It says "leave" in the screenshot because I'm already enrolled.)

[inline enroll.jpg]

19. Now start entering your runs in the log. Make sure you only enter runs that combine as 30 minutes as one session. If you have a 20min + 15min day, enter it as one workout of 35 minute or it will not get rolled into the results sheet.
20. Please ensure that you log a distance along with the time. If you don't know the distance, please try to estimate.
21. Your runs will automatically get entered into the Challenge results sheet.

Strava Sync

22. You'll see a button on our Training Log allowing you to sync with Strava (in fact, you can see it in the screenshot above). Click that button if you enter your results some other way, in another training log or program. The only requirement for this to work is that your other training log must also sync with Strava. Basically, if your session is on Strava, our log will find it, download it, and your sessions will automatically append to the Challenge. "EricTheBiking" (on the Forum) is our Training Logmeister. He'll answer questions you have about this on this thread.

Viewing Challenge Standings

23. From the Challenges home page, click on the link to go to the 100/100 for 2019/20, you'll see where you and everyone stands.
24. Click on any of the column headers, and it will sort the sheet based on that category (frequency, time, distance, aerobic points). Just, frequency is how we judge this.
25. Please note that you must be logged in to actually enter your data. You can't enter data without logging into your account (seems obvious...).

Accumulated Wisdom: This is year-12 of this Challenge. Much has been learned, good and bad.

26. This is an exercise in who can whisper the loudest.
27. Don't try to bank run sessions early. Just trust the process. You'll probably be more successful "banking" runs, as in, performing double runs, later in the Challenge rather than earlier.
28. Take days off when you need to. As your fitness increases, you may find later in the Challenge you can run doubles. Most who hit their 100/100 do take rest days.

Levels

While some might go for 100 runs, the reality is that unless you are already running 4-6 hours per week, this might be unrealistic. For most a realistic goal is to start at Bronze club pace (or less) and then see how things go.

Platinum Club = 100 runs in 100 days
Gold Club = 90 runs in 100 runs in days
Silver Club = 80 runs in 100 runs in days
Bronze = 70 runs in 100 runs in days

Please put any questions on this thread. Better to put them here than send PMs or emails.

Please post stories about your workouts, pictures from running days and chime in to motivate each other on this thread. Don't just log workouts and disappear. The community is what it's all about.

Zwift Running

And, finally, I'm getting a treadmill (supposedly) today. The plan is to start putting some weekly Zwift run sessions on our Slowtwitch Event Calendar. To those who just got your footpods, or who will get them (working on that!), if you're a treadmill runner (the 2 things you need for Zwift running is a treadmill and a footpod), you've got the necessary equipment for Zwift Running. I'll be asking you for help on when to hold these sessions (time of day, day of week), and the length, format, and so forth. I'll probably begin a separate thread asking for your feedback.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

This. Minimum should be 30 minutes OR 3 miles. Alright, see you next year to comment this again.

I'd like to give this a go, and I'm a run/walker at the best of times. Never mind when I've been a lazy bum and sat on my ass following my last wicked undertrained half mary of the season about two months ago.

If this is all about regaining consistency, I'm counting those walking minutes - I'll still have done a third as many miles as the rest of you by the time we're through. I'll just log on my own so as not to skew all you alpha triathletes' numbers.

I'm not supposed to run (knee replacement), but walking with some "slow jogging" interspersed should work. Just saw the surgeon today and he said come back in 3 years. Regaining consistency is what I need so this is a good goal.

I've a serious grievance: I'm going to run for at least 30 minutes per day over the course of 100 days. My reward for doing so will be something stupid like 350 miles covered.

The hyper-competitive, hyper-fast jerks among us will cover over 550 miles while running the exact same amount of time as me.

Be honest: That's not fair.

Easy solution - be slow like me!! Then you can have 3 miles AND 30min

Thanks for doing the work. I like the change because then a) a 5k race counts and b) you can run a known route and not being in the odd position of running too fast and having to notice that and run around a bit to make it up. So I'd vote to add it.

No problem. I just bash on it behind the scenes. This would represent a fairly big update to the way the contest is structured, so I'd want to get some heavy hitters to buy in on it -- slowman, dev, and others -- but it would be a trivial change to make.

-Eric

I just tested out a version of the leaderboard that selects runs that are either 30 minutes in length OR 3 miles in length. It worked, and gave the lot of you between 1 and 5 extra runs on the leaderboard last year. What say ye, assembled masses, should we consider using this measurement?

Thanks,

-Eric

Alright, I've been a part of this forum community for the best part of the last 20 years or so, including the last 10 challenge years, and I've finally decided that I'd be a part of it this time around for the first time. Former runner who now can hardly run faster than 6min/ks at aerobic pace. Looking to go sub-40 min for a 10km at the end of the challenge. Just kidding, just hope I end up slightly less far from my former self when it's all said and done :-)

Meh. To me, it's wrong headed. The point is time, not distance.

A 3mile training run is 20-35 minutes (fast to slow). So we're talking about a few minutes if the training pace is faster than 10mpm. Run an extra 1/2 - 1 mile.

If you do a fast 5k, do a warmup and cooldown...as you should anyway.

If you're out there putting in honest work for 30+mins, you log that as a run. If you know you half-arsed it, maybe try to make up for that the next day (per the rules) and log that instead. If you need to work your way up to 30+mins of honest effort, take that time and care for your body, and aim to get some number of eligible efforts that is tailored to your needs by the end of the challenge. If that's making it up to one single 30min run by March 9th, then go for it! I'll be over here rooting for you!

Fine by me

Everyone knows what a legitimate run effort is for them, whatever that may look like to someone else. I guarantee there will be some walking mileage in my logged runs (...)

If you're out there putting in honest work for 30+mins, you log that as a run. If you know you half-arsed it, maybe try to make up for that the next day (per the rules) and log that instead. If you need to work your way up to 30+mins of honest effort, take that time and care for your body, and aim to get some number of eligible efforts that is tailored to your needs by the end of the challenge. If that's making it up to one single 30min run by March 9th, then go for it! I'll be over here rooting for you!

I may have missed this, but is there any way of seeing what we've achieved in past 100/100 challenges?

Last year I was at 41 runs so maybe I'll make it to 50 this year. (The year before I was at 26.)

Now I just have to figure out the Strava integration.

Stay in YOUR lane, Tom

Aaaaaand I'm out before I start. Plantar fasciitis came outta nowhere last week. 35+ years of running, this is a first.

, but dammit we'll do our own heroics once the 100 days expires and we won't have Tesla Pace cars, fancy Nike cheater shoes and rotating groups of East African pacers to help us shave off our PBs AND we'll be hauling around our several 10's of pounds of embedded Bioprene (TM) that slows us down at least more so than Kipchoge or that fat Chris Froome.



Dev

I'm counting on the 100 swims in 100 days after the 100 Runs/100 days to get to acceptable weight. am I wrong?

The 100 swims in 100 days or therabouts is roughly the program I am on. In the last four years (including this year), I have swam 2016 382 hrs, 2017 398 hrs, 2018 410 hrs, and 2019 362 hrs (to date should hit 400 hrs for the year). All that is happening is I am getting fatter and fatter. I need go on the Kipchoge approved 800 hrs per year running program, but sadly my body would not withstand that. So I am on the 800 hrs per year target of doing stuff that seemingly makes me heavier....oh well.

Just to clarify, are we going with the 30 min run or 5 km as minimums?
If yes, which I’m fine with, does the same basic rule apply that indicates that runs under 30 minutes can be made up the next session? For instance, I run 4.4 km in the morning (in 21 minutes), would I have to run 39 mins in the following session or just 5.6 km?
Sorry for complicating matters.
Ciao,

+1

Just to clarify, are we going with the 30 min run or 5 km as minimums?
If yes, which I’m fine with, does the same basic rule apply that indicates that runs under 30 minutes can be made up the next session? For instance, I run 4.4 km in the morning (in 21 minutes), would I have to run 39 mins in the following session or just 5.6 km?
Sorry for complicating matters.
Ciao,

i believe it's now 30min minimum, or 3mi minimum, either qualifies. and, if you want to do next day makeups, that's only on timed-based. so, if you run 24min and you don't make 3 mi, then you don't have a qualifying run that day. but if you run 36min the next day, then you have 2 qualifying runs in 2 days.

There are 100 days....my greivance is that you can take 50 days off and do 100 runs in 50 days and catch up.
Dev

With the new 3 mile option, if you do your 3 miles in 20 minutes or under, and given the required 1 hour between runs, one could theoretically do 32 or more qualifying runs per 24 hours. So you could then take around 96 days off and catch up in the last four days.

i believe it's now 30min minimum, or 3mi minimum, either qualifies. and, if you want to do next day makeups, that's only on timed-based. so, if you run 24min and you don't make 3 mi, then you don't have a qualifying run that day. but if you run 36min the next day, then you have 2 qualifying runs in 2 days.

In all seriousness, back when I started the challenge, I could do a 20-22min 5km on most days if I wanted to push myself a bit. I felt this would be unfair to less fleet footed runners to have a distance minimum as it unduly penalized "less fast runners". So I don't personally like the 5km minimum because it gives an ability based leg up instead of democratizing it and removing the pure speed out of it.

But hey, we're talking grievances, and I have no say in this so I will take whatever you give. I have a 70.3 in 10 weeks so I am going to use this to get into shape of some sort.

Dev

With the new 3 mile option, if you do your 3 miles in 20 minutes or under, and given the required 1 hour between runs, one could theoretically do 32 or more qualifying runs per 24 hours. So you could then take around 96 days off and catch up in the last four days.

I’ll probably end up with a lot of 29’ 4-mile loops that I would have made into slightly easier 30’ runs if the time-minimum criterion had persisted.

With the new 3 mile option, if you do your 3 miles in 20 minutes or under, and given the required 1 hour between runs, one could theoretically do 32 or more qualifying runs per 24 hours.\\

I guess you skipped math class in school, or maybe were just high?? (-;

Could be. With the old rules one could do 24 qualifying runs in 24 hours. With the new 3 mile qualifying distance if you do it in 20 minutes, you reduce the clock to the next run by 10 minutes. This provides the opportunity to complete at least 8 more cycles in a 24 hours, so the possibility of 32 total qualifying runs. (Calculated the 8 additional runs on 30 minutes runs, 1 hour between runs, if continuing with 20 minutes runs, then then you could do 3 run cycles every 2 hours, giving 36 qualifying runs).

Old rules:
Start at 12:00
Run 30 min: now 12:30
Rest 60 min: now 1:30
Run 30 min: now 2:00
Rest 60 min: now 3:00

Ok, this is were I see the error, was skipping the the hour rest on the repeat cycle at the top of the hour.

Thanks, that is great. Hopefully some older data may become available too, but this is a good start.

My grievance is that THIS is the first day of the 100 in 100:

Hey, as a user I appreciate all the work behind the scenes and can't wait to see any new features as well. Thanks!

Huh, I was thinking the same thing -- where's the airing of grievance thread. Dan said it's the sticky thread, so I guess that thread is doing double duty. I have a list... it's like 7 items deep so far, but I feel silly posting it I the regular 100/100 sticky thread... what to do?

Its too bad you can't like...you know....create a post on your own, without... you know...permission.


:o)