Not answering for Flagpole.
But this is a pretty reasonable way to do it...
Mon-Sat AM 10-14, PM 6-10
Sun 20
Not answering for Flagpole.
But this is a pretty reasonable way to do it...
Mon-Sat AM 10-14, PM 6-10
Sun 20
Been there. Done that wrote:
Unless they have trained for endurance by running at least 50 mile days a few times most runners aren’t going to be capable of running 100 miles in 24 hours. Most wouldn’t get further than 80 miles.
Not really.
I did 100 off of 12 weeks at 100 mpw. No single run longer than 20. Previous longest run was 36 miles.
I am not arguing this was the right way. But an opportunity to get a FKT presented itself so I said screw it and went for it.
Fitness is fitness.
Milesmatter wrote:
Both present unique challenges. But for the every day average Joe/Jane is it harder to get out the door 1-2x a day for 20 miles on average or just suffer through a one day journey. Obviously both are very achievable in their own right but both come with them very unique challenges. Thoughts? Which one would you choose if you had to and why
Important questions that may change my answer: Is this a 1x thing or ongoing forever? Is there a speed required to be considered "running" for this effort, or is finishing the mileage each day the only issue? Is the 100 miler fully supported or do you have to carry your own gear the whole time? Are you trying to enjoy the journey or just get from A to B? Is there a person with me or is it a solo effort?
I have experience with several-day, high mileage hikes with a full pack. It's tough because of things like weather and small issues early (like blisters or chafing or ankles rolling, etc.) can turn into really big problems after a few days.
So, to minimize those effects and the probability of failure they introduce, if it were a one-time event, I'd go for the 100 miler in a day. You might be trashed for a few days after, but things like swollen feet, chafing, etc. typically catch up to you when you stop. Also a contributing factor: for me, it's easier to keep moving through pain if I know I'm done when it's over. If I know I have to wake up the next day and do it again and again and again, that would start to mess with me mentally if I started to physically break down.
I would choose 140 miles a week and do 10 miles in the morning, 10 miles in the evening schedule. It would definitely be tough, but I think I would have a shot of doing it. 100 miles in day, I don’t think I could do it.
why not do both?
do 40 miles in week then do the remainder as a 100 mile race?
Milesmatter wrote:
Obviously both are very achievable
Friendly reminder that 99.99% of people couldn’t complete either of these tasks even if given a lifetime.
Yeah, I'm actually thinking about doing a 24 hour run and seeing if I can finish 100 miles in that time. I think it would be very tough (I'll be 59 when/if I try doing it); when I'm training for something I normally run 45-50 miles per week.
My plan would be to run 50 of the miles and walk 50 of them - more running in the beginning and more walking at the end.
HRE wrote:
I found 140 or more a challenge rather than a grind and found a lot of satisfaction in getting myself to do it. I suppose you could look at a 100 mile day the same way but it's not something you're going to do for 6-8 consecutive weeks.
I have done both, and 140MPW is MUCH easier than 100 miles in a day.
broken arrow wrote:
HRE wrote:
I found 140 or more a challenge rather than a grind and found a lot of satisfaction in getting myself to do it. I suppose you could look at a 100 mile day the same way but it's not something you're going to do for 6-8 consecutive weeks.
I have done both, and 140MPW is MUCH easier than 100 miles in a day.
As I suspected all along. Nice accomplishments.