Runner1 = 5k, Runner2 = 50k. Fair distance to race?

My first thought, before I finished reading the whole post, was 10 miles. Then I read that was your opinion, too.

Have you ever raced him before? What was the distance/results? What are some of your/his PRs?

775 wrote:

I personally lean towards #3, but my opinion may be biased. I'd like get other runner's input at there may be a significant about of money wagered over the predetermind race distance. Thanks!

Good call 10 miles is close to 3 times the length of a 5km and roughly a third of 50km

6 mi on trails and then 6 mi on the road.

I'm putting in my vote for the half marathon.

I've always thought that the best way of quickly finding the fair middle ground between two distances (without resorting to considering actual physiological variables) is to use a geometric mean.

sqrt(31*3.1) = 9.8

So I'd say 10 miles is fair.

SEG wrote:

I've always thought that the best way of quickly finding the fair middle ground between two distances (without resorting to considering actual physiological variables) is to use a geometric mean.

sqrt(31*3.1) = 9.8

So I'd say 10 miles is fair.

Correct answer.

Alan GS - Race we have raced before. I've beat him and he's beat me a pretty even amount. His pr's are better than mine, but I've been improving lately.

I'm not 100% on his PRs, but here is my guess:

5k me - 15:37 (most recent road 5k)

5k him - 15:18 (a couple years back)

15k both - 52 flat (don't race very often)

HM me - 1:14:23

HM him - 1:13:30 ??

FM me - 2:47 (only raced twice)

FM him - 2:31:XX

The way I'd think about this, is what systems are critical for each of your races. For you, LT is key, and some anaerobic. For him, it's more aerobic/endurance and much less LT, zero anaerobic.

10k is way too close to 5k. 15k/10mile still has some anaerobic, and are basically LT-runs. Too much of an advantage for you.

I think the true fair race is between #4 and #5. I think you may have an advantage in a HM. He would definitely have an advantage at 17.05 miles. LT is still important for a HM, and much less so for 17.05. What about a 25k?

Somewhere between HM & 25k seems most fair to me.

This McMillan graph (the orange line) shows where the LT is relative to each race distance.

http://www.mcmillanrunning.com/training1.htm

How about you both decide to be happy with the size of your penises and therefore don't need to set up a race?

'Me the 5k, him the 50k'

BS

Who trains for 50km?

My thought before looking at the other answers was 1/2 mar. With some more thought, I think knowing each of your avg weekly miles would help give a better answer. If you are around 60 and he's at 90, the fairest distance might be different than if the mileages are 45 and 110.

ukathleticscoach wrote:

'Me the 5k, him the 50k'

BS

Who trains for 50km?

Ummm, someone training for their first ultra??

Flagpole wrote:

How about you both decide to be happy with the size of your penises and therefore don't need to set up a race?

So you're encouraging runners not to race? Oh my God, you're right! What we're doing is pointless! I'm gonna go to LetsHug.com. Much more rewarding to just be happy with ourselves and each other.

trust but verify wrote:

ukathleticscoach wrote:

'Me the 5k, him the 50k'

BS

Who trains for 50km?

Ummm, someone training for their first ultra??

He's making it up and you are gullible.

50km is just a marathon with a warm down

ukathleticscoach wrote:

50km is just a marathon with a warm down

Regardless of your opinions on the matter, people do in fact run 50k races.

` wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

How about you both decide to be happy with the size of your penises and therefore don't need to set up a race?

So you're encouraging runners not to race? Oh my God, you're right! What we're doing is pointless! I'm gonna go to LetsHug.com. Much more rewarding to just be happy with ourselves and each other.

Training and racing is fine. Train for a marathon or a 5k and then show up and race and race whomever also showed up. But two guys training for vastly different races trying to find a medium distance in there somewhere to race so they know who is better? Meh.

Dude, they're friends. It's friendly competition/rivalry. No harm if they both want to do it, and it'll be a change of pace from the distance they are training towards.

He wasn't asking if you approve, douchebag.

If you can't contribute to his question, perhaps you should stick to the threads about how great the economy is doing.

Before I even clicked on the thread I thought 10 miles.

Flagpole, you moron, he's not saying they are actually going to race. Just asking what the fair distance to race would be. It's an interesting question. 10 miles as people have pointed out sounds reasonable, I was also thinking 20k.