Tough call since 100k isn't life-changing money and a lot of my motivation comes from racing (whether against others or myself.)
That said, I could take it and switch to cycling full-time! I'd definitely consider this if the amount was higher. Who's offering?
If age 36+: Take the $100K
If age 35 or under: Keep racing
hypothetical wrote:
Suppose that you were offered $100,000 on the condition that you could never do another timed run or race again. That includes timed interval sessions, solo FKT attempts on trails, and sports where running is a major component (i.e., triathlons). However, you would be able to go on solo untimed runs and do easy runs with friends.
Would you take it?
I would take it and then run in a race that weekend. Good luck to the moron who gave the bucks to me in getting it back.
I still have a shot at setting PRs, so I'll say no wrote:
If age 36+: Take the $100K
If age 35 or under: Keep racing
Somebody better tell Kipchoge.
I tried an experiment tonight on my run, I learned a ton.
Started out thinking about this thread. At about a quarter mile, I thought, try to run this recovery run with no GPS splits ( i usually get quarter-mile readings),
First time the Garmin lit up, i instinctively read it, and then groaned really loud as i realized my mistake. Pretty dumb, huh? Well I did it three more times, and I kid you not. Instincts are that strong, and that is one thing going against taking the $100K.
But once i remembered not to check at each 1/4 mile, I was good, but it was really tempting to glance down at my thin windbreaker sleeve with the watch glowing underneath it, because I know I could probably read it through the sleeve. But I didn't.
In the course of my run, I realized my answer is simply this: I would do it if it meant no more timed workouts, but I would not do it if it meant foregoing the few races I still do, and more importantly, the weekly running group workout (timed) that i do,
And most absolutely, I realized running is really great, and we find a way. Dicking around with things like splits and times and racing may keep us engaged, but big picture, finding a way to run and keep running is where it's at. That's what matters.
No way. The more interesting question is how much would it take? I'm in my 60s and would not do it for a million bucks. 2 million would tempt me and I might go for that. 3 I would reluctantly take out of consideration for my kids.
Interesting question. I'd say yes but 100k is barely enough. If I were just slightly richer, I might decline.
It will make racing an even whiter, snootier, poser-leaden situation.
No. Some of us easily make more than that amount in less than a year's salary while doing what we enjoy in life.
This thread is kind of weird. I'm not an attorney but I'm pretty sure that since the contract would be unenforceable, the $100K would be considered a gift. The answer to the OP's question is that any amount would be fine.
Being old and injured, hells to the yes.
Sure. I'm old and I'm not racing anymore. And I'd donate half the money.
No, that isn’t much money. I’ve had bonuses worth that much. As another poster commented, I’d consider paying that much to be able to run as much and as hard as I wanted without ever being injured.
Sure. I could still race and do workouts. I just couldn't time them. I've never been one to chase times, anyway. I just like to compete.
If I felt like racing, I could pay people to run or offer a cash prize under the stipulation that the race would be untimed. I'm sure there are a dozen 800m guys in Philly who would be willing to show up at a local track and run for less than two minutes for the chance to win $1K, even if the race would be untimed.
That’s a pretty interesting scenario. When traveling or trying out a new running route, I’ll often time it. Would I have to pay back the money if I glance at the clock before and after a jog? I think my treadmill doesn’t actually start the timer unless I start a “workout” which I can live with just fine. Not so much interested in racing, but theoretically not being allowed to do a timed fun run with the kids would be a bit weird.
I’d probably take the cash.
No, $100k doesn't drastically change my life and running/racing is my biggest hobby and important to me.
I think my number would be $400k. I could move about anywhere that I care to live if I had an EXTRA $400k in my bank account and live pretty comfortably. $500k and I'm definitely taking it.
Solo untimed run = no watch, right? So if I know I have to be back from my run in 1 hour because other things in today's schedule, I can't bring a watch to make sure I'm not going to be late? I have to just go by gut feeling and my internal clock, and trust I'll be back in 55 min rather than 1:08 or something? What a dumb proposition.
gladly wrote:
Sure. I could still race and do workouts. I just couldn't time them. I've never been one to chase times, anyway. I just like to compete.
If I felt like racing, I could pay people to run or offer a cash prize under the stipulation that the race would be untimed. I'm sure there are a dozen 800m guys in Philly who would be willing to show up at a local track and run for less than two minutes for the chance to win $1K, even if the race would be untimed.
The thread's title and post says no racing, so that won't work. You could do untimed workouts and untimed all-out runs, though.
bitcoin? wrote:
The thread's title and post says no racing, so that won't work. You could do untimed workouts and untimed all-out runs, though.
OP should clarify because "timed run or race" can be interpreted as timed run or timed race.
I'd say, hand me the money! I enjoy running just to run. I GPS my runs to see where I've gone on a map, and record distance, but I pay no attention to time, so it would be easy enough to just not record.
Even when I was last winning a lot of local races, the times were meaningless, because I pretty much only raced in a weekly trail/cross country type races without accurate distances and never once reliable timing (popsicle stick style with 1000+ finishers in 3 different courses finishing together means times were always off).
On topic wrote:
Solo untimed run = no watch, right? So if I know I have to be back from my run in 1 hour because other things in today's schedule, I can't bring a watch to make sure I'm not going to be late? I have to just go by gut feeling and my internal clock, and trust I'll be back in 55 min rather than 1:08 or something? What a dumb proposition.
you could set a timer to signal at a given time, and thereby keep you on some sort of schedule.
As long as you weren't doing some covert calculations, that would satisfy the intent of the rule and keep you from "timing" your workout.
Yes, there are ways to cheat, if that is what you are wondering, or just go the route of the lawyer who posted earlier and go the 'well, that's unenforceable anyways' strategy.
* pardon me, he said 'I am not a lawyer", so I misspoke in that regard. My apologies. But he did suggest breaking the rule and good luck to anyone trying to enforce it, with the provision that he would take the $100K.