Don't worry, it's just water weight.

+1

Seems we are going with those minimums. So it would make sense, to me, if you could do either. Basically you'd of done either 2x5km over 2 days or 2x30mins over 2 days.

ETA my understanding is you manually did the makeup adjustment, so it was down to your honesty, so now you'd make the manual adjustment that fits for the situation either time or distance.

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.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

keep it simple i dont think the guy writing the code to distinguish 5k vs time is going to have fun. 30 min it should be. a 5k should be done with warm up and cool down anyways

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.

That's the kind of "can do" attitude we need more of around here.

Hey this variation totally sucks. This is my grievance.

Way back when we set the minimum at 30 minutes so it did not matter how studly you are....you gotta stay out for 30 minutes. Mo Farah gets his 5K done in sub 13 minutes but he's not done....he has to go out and run more. He then crossed the 10K point at sub 26.xx....hang on Sir Mo....your run still does not qualify....get your ass out there and do some victory laps....the rest of us are running, and you just lucked out with better parents than the rest of us for running. So sorry Mo, quit whining and do some victory laps to do the full 30 minutes....no mercy on ST:

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

I’m a first-timer to 100in100, and I’m fast, and I agree with you. Not only does a distance minimum make it easier for the fast people, but it also sets poor training incentives - “get your daily 5k done fast” rather than “get your daily half hour in and keep it relaxed” is much more likely to lead to injuries.

(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.)

Or you could be in Ultraman Hawaii this weekend and do 5km and start your stop watch and 60 minutes after that start your next 5km and keep doing that. A 8 hour double marathoner would roughly get credit for 6 runs, but hey whether it is 30 minutes or 5 km this person is roughly doing 30 min per 5km anyway.

For me at my current state of run fitness 30 min or 5 km is a wash...its almost identical anyway as I generally jog around at 6 minutes per km vs a time in the distant past when 4 min per km was barely a fast jog. So for me, the 5km minimum has zero impact.

So just do that then

If you want to maintain the 30-minute minimum as your own personal standard ... who is gonna say 'you're doing it wrong?'

As a wise person once told me "It's YOUR run ... do what you want with it"

---

"What's your claim?" - Ben Gravy
"Your best work is the work you're excited about" - Rick Rubin

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?? (-;

Treadmills. Hell. These are synonyms.

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).

Not quite. You could do 30 minutes plus an hour in between 16 times in 24 hours. With the current rule, assuming you could run the 3 mile blocks in 20 minutes each, you could fit 18 in 24 hours.

-Eric

Not quite... On both counts.

Old rule... 30min run, 60 min rest = 90 min cycle time. 1440 min per day. 1440 / 90 = 16 runs.

New rule... 20min run, 60 min rest = 80 min cycle time. 1440 / 80 = 18 runs.

Assuming you don't sleep.

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).

You know what I love about this, is you wrote it all out, showed your work, and had such a convincing argument, yet it is still wrong!!! Like I tell my 8 year old, an A for effort, but an F for content!!! (-;

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.

:o)

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

It's ok, I got a bit of a laugh that somehow you thought that you could get in 36 total runs in 24 hours, forget about the running time, that's 36 total hours of just rest time!!. You got so wrapped up in your math equation, you just didnt see how silly that number was. Now for me, I know for sure I could do 24 hours of the rest interval in a one day period, and will likely do so, several times over..(-;


Good luck everyone, tomorrow is blast off!!!

Good morning,

No complaining, just an easy questions for anyone with the knowledge - is it possible to see my data from previous 100/100 challenges? I have participated in several, but really don't know what my finals numbers have been - I have hit 100 a few times, but interested to see the total runs/miles.

I clicked on the tab for older challenges in the current challenge section but was not able to get anything to load.

Thanks and good luck to everyone.

Best,
Jeff

See post #101 in this thread..

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

Hey Jeff!

Ya got me! I am wiring in the functionality for this button to list older challenges a year at a time. It's not quite there yet even though the button appears already on the page.

-Eric