doubter wrote:
I used mapmyrun to log it and it came to 9.61 miles (1 way). I then did it backwards to make sure, started at the turnaround and mapped it to my house and it came to 10.22 miles.
That is because the second half is always harder than the 1st half - you have been running for nearly 10 miles during the 1st half of your 20 mile run. Obviously the 2nd half will be harder.
Back in my day, we used to run to school 5 miles in the morning and then 8 miles home. Uphill both ways, dagnabbit!
ickybana5 wrote:
gumby wrote:Your wrong too.
Yeah... defiantly wrong. Definately!!
I'm so dissapointed in the spelling on this bored! You guys could of at least used a spellcheker!!
Ken Osha wrote:
That is because the second half is always harder than the 1st half - you have been running for nearly 10 miles during the 1st half of your 20 mile run. Obviously the 2nd half will be harder.[/quote]
How does harder effort mean longer on a map? That ridiculous.
Asterix wrote:
doubter wrote:The run I was mapping was also hilly the whole way, not mountainous, but always going up or down. Do these maps adjust for this as 20 miles using an arial view of this would add up to more distance right?
Try some trigonometry (a^2 + b^2 = c^2 - sound familiar?) Any vertical variation in your run amounts to a truly trivial difference versus a completely flat course.
If you were to run 10.000 miles on a constantly sloping 5% grade (either up or down or combination of the two), this would end up being measured as 9.987 miles or about 66 feet short of 10 miles. At 6 minute mile pace (slow, easy pace for everyone on letsrun), that's barely 3 seconds difference.
There is no way you could plot the actual course you followed to that level of precision.
If you truly need to know your distance run to a precision greater than 0.25 miles, shouldn't you be running either on a track or a course that has been properly certified with a Jones counter?
Its been a while since 9th grade geometry byt that sounds right, so unless you are running up everest elevation doesnt have an relevant effect on mapping a running distance.
In terms of accuracy, no, i should not be running a 20 mile run on the track, and, no, i shouldnt be running my long runs on a certified course. Running 20 miles on a certified marathon course every sunday isnt going to work with because of the needed road closures to make the route work. It doesnt have to be down to the inch, but when I mapped it there was a potential 2k difference. That is too much. If it was 9.9 or 10.1 I would be fine with it.
doubter wrote:
It doesnt have to be down to the inch, but when I mapped it there was a potential 2k difference. That is too much. If it was 9.9 or 10.1 I would be fine with it.
Any error of any relevance in measuring such a course using GoogleMaps is likely to derive purely from your ability to draw on the map the route you actually ran. Following a somewhat twisty trail through the trees or even many turns through real streets are going to require a lot of effort to mark all the correct waypoints.
Class of 73 wrote:
He ended up at the exact same spot he finished.
I don't want to show off or anything, but I manage to do this just about every time I go for a run.
dukerdog wrote:
Class of 73 wrote:
He ended up at the exact same spot he finished.
I don't want to show off or anything, but I manage to do this just about every time I go for a run.
Dukerdog, your logic always ceases to amaze me.
"I'm so dissapointed in the spelling on this bored! You guys could of at least used a spellcheker!!"
Good point. I've noticed alot of mispelling on here lately.
Sarcasm overload!
To the OP: If you're unwilling to admit that you somehow messed up when using the mapping program, go out and buy a Garmin so you can be absolutely sure you ran 6:17 pace vs. 6:19 pace. In the end, it's really going to matter!
dukerdog wrote:
Class of 73 wrote:
He ended up at the exact same spot he finished.
I don't want to show off or anything, but I manage to do this just about every time I go for a run.
Damn, I went a whole day without anyone pointing out my obvious error. I recognized it immediately, realized I should have typed "same spot he started", but was too lazy to correct the post. Thought I was in the clear after a couple of hours.
Good catch, Dukerdog, albeit a little slow on the uptake.
This thread is relevant to my interests.