You used to be able to change the order of the challenge metrics so you could compare rankings by run count, distance, Aerobic Points etc. and although yes the run challenge is 100/100 people will have different priorities depending on their training plan and it can be interesting to compare different metrics. For instance I'm at the end of a marathon training plan so multiple runs of 30 mins each day to "up" my run count numbers does me no good.

The 100/100 challenge is about running 100 times in 100 days - we can agree on that. However, how you do that is going to differ for different people with different goals - can we agree on that? As you said "I only race short course stuff" - so your priorities/training plan is going to be different from someone racing longer races. Frequency can be and is separate from distance - I can be looking to increase my frequency of running at longer distances while someone else is looking for increased frequency of quick runs - are those not both goals of the challenge? I don't see the challenge as being specific to any one group of athletes - I see it as being an aid to increasing your running frequency at whatever level you were currently running at - whether that be a couch to 5k runner or MOP moving to long course.

The old challenge tables allowed you to look at the metrics in different ways - I didn't set that up but I found it interesting to look at based off my use of the challenge. As for treadmill running being mentally taxing believe me I get it - 5 days a week on my lunch break I run on a treadmill in an non air-conditioned room in Houston.

I agree. I was just offering that imo, a focus on frequency is quite different than distance per week or workout.

Should one be able to look at metrics in anyway they want. Would be great. But this would not, IMO, change how the standard display is for what the goal of the challenge is,
get folks to run more. I have run more in the last three weeks, but time, distance and quantity more than I have in my entire life. Is this smart? Time will tell.

Wow, you really have focus. After 30 minutes on the treadmill I am very glad this challenge allows me to take a break.

His hold on the top spot seems pretty secure. We used to be able to click on each participant and see what they were logging run wise to see how they were getting to their total. 42 runs in 29 days (I think) is a lot of 30 mins runs. Esp since I don't think he started doubling up until 3-4 days into the challenge.

blah. others told me to participate cause i can hit the volume, which is actually low compared to other years - so i should stop logging i guess

Why? The end goal is to boost your running volume and get you ready for the season....no need to stop participating just because you might be more focused on mileage vs run quantity. Still a fun challenge and motivating...all good!

so for example. on this training log.... today i logged 10.02 miles in 1:12:53

but what i really did was:

2.5mi warm up 18:14

10 min break

3.13 5k 19:52 (dont laugh)

10 min break

4.39 cool down 34

100 runs / 100 days is about doing it as much as you can in 100 days, not hitting 100 runs in 30 days - as h2o fun is trying to do?

Hey Dave, it is great that the challenge is getting you out with more frequency, but please realize that the main goal of all this is to prepare you all for a healthy year (racing or otherwise) while getting into the groove of enhanced frequency approach. The prize is not the leaderboard of this challenge (like we said at the start use it when you need to motivate yourself) though. Just don't get burn't out. You are an experiences athlete those so you'll know when little things are bothering you and when to back it down.

Hey, it really is about running as much training load as you can in 100 days and hopefully doing it safely. If someone is from a competitive running background in high school or college you ran a minimum of 6 days per week, but often more like 10 times in 6 days and many times 7 days per week. Like in any sport, if you want to get good, at some point you have to do it often. Swimmers will swim 10-14 times per week also logging huge volume.

At the end of the day, the challenge it there to help you safely jack up your training load....that really means jacking up overall mileage. If we made it a "mileage king" challenge, what we would end up seeing is the fastest runners always on top of the leaderboard. The reality is the fast runners here (at one point I would say I was one of them) are at the top of the leaderboard at every race they go to. When I was running fast and doing decent mileage, I did not want guys like "me" to hog this leaderboard too. I wanted to create a community where runners of all speeds could have success.

This is why spinning classes work. The entry level newbie cyclist can be in the same spin class with Chris Froome and they can ride "side by side" at 100% of their personal FTP and still be in the same group.

By rewarding "frequency" I was hoping that I can get runners of all speeds "glory and motivation". If you really want to see who is doing the biggest training load, just sort on mileage. But from a community building angle, by having the default sort on 'frequency' I have taken the speed part out of the equation. I always personally sorted on mileage after seeing the default frequency view. At the end of the day, I am still a mileage junkie....I had this stupid goal of swimming 100K per month all of last year when I could barely walk trying to hit 1200K for the year (I hit it on Dec 30th with a day to spare) and feel that mileage is the best gauge at a personal level when you compare with yourself. But bringing in mileage to compare with others is generally demotivating for everyone who are training at their own level.

Basically for the entire year last year, I was at the top of the monthly swim challenge distance because that was my focus. I asked Tigerchik and Halfspeed who are generally running those challenges, if they could change the gauge to frequency (I think I earned my request change by basically "winning" the swim mileage king status every month).

I feel that the biggest obstacle to age group athletes is just getting out the door for exercise. By rewarding frequency, we get people out. I've done several days when I have shuffled a 20 min treadmill jog before work and if not for the challenge, I'd call it a day right there, but have found myself going down the basement at 10 pm and doing a circuit of 4x<2.5 min treadmill jog + 3 weight training exercises> to put myself over the top. It's forced me out for a bit of jogging and also forced me to do some weights/core work that I'd otherwise likely blow off and I'd just sit on the couch watching football or hockey or surf ST. So it works as long as we do it with some respect for what our bodies can take.

so yesterday 20 miles in with 3 water stops... 30 sec each. should that be 3 workouts? today 7 miles then 1 mile of .10 strides with 30s rest between, thats 11 runs i guess :) on the system i am just logging total for the day even if i actually do doubles. pretty sure the day total is more stress indicator than frequency total in the day

I have a question that I haven't found answered in this thread. How, exactly, do we log our 15/45 (in 2 days) runs? If for example I run 1.5 miles in 15 mins on Day 1, then 4.5 miles in 45 mins on Day 2, do I log them as 30 mins/3 miles on both Day 1 and Day 2? Or can I just do 30 mins, 1.5 miles (day1), and 30 mins 4.5 miles (day2)? Or does it even matter? I have been splitting out time and distance based on my average pace, but it's more math than I want to do!

the first one doesn't count I don;t think. the runs have to be 30 minutes long

I have a question that I haven't found answered in this thread. How, exactly, do we log our 15/45 (in 2 days) runs? If for example I run 1.5 miles in 15 mins on Day 1, then 4.5 miles in 45 mins on Day 2, do I log them as 30 mins/3 miles on both Day 1 and Day 2? Or can I just do 30 mins, 1.5 miles (day1), and 30 mins 4.5 miles (day2)? Or does it even matter? I have been splitting out time and distance based on my average pace, but it's more math than I want to do!

Nope there is a wuss clause for up to two times a week, a 15 min followed the next day with a 45 or longer gets averaged for the two days.

Do you use the wuss clause during double run days....ie run 30 in the morning, 15 at night, 45 next day and combine the 15 and 45 for 2 runs, therefore 3 total ?

I do not see why not.