Any Runners here?

I took up running about five years ago to battle a weight problem that had caused severe sleep apnea as well as more minor problems like indigestion, shortness of breath, and other typical weight problems.I'm not a talented runner. I'm slow, but I enjoy it, so I have gotten better. I've run a half marathon (Dec '03 in 2:04:52, 3 seconds ahead of the world record for a whole marathon) and managed to finish a 50K (31 miles) a couple weeks ago, though it took 7 1/2 hours.My ultimate running dream would be to tackle the Badwater ultramarathon, run from 252 feet below sea level in Badwater, CA to the gates of some state park on Mt. McKinley, the highest peak in the continental U.S., though the gates are only at 8,000 feet up. It's a 135-mile run through Death Valley run in mid-July. That may well never happen, but it is something I've hoped to make happen by the time I'm 50 (more than 4 years left).It's probably a nutso dream. I watch the documentary on Badwater, called "Running on the Sun" every two or three months, so I've seen it over 10 times. My wife thinks I'm brain-damaged, but I have three friends who want to do it with me. Maybe in a couple years we can submit an application together.Any other runners here who like to talk about running as well as evolution?Suggested forum is Coffee House, of course.

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

wow. I'm extremely impressed that you can run for 7 1/2 hours, no matter what speed. I can probably run for about 7 1/2 minutes.How long did it take you to get that fit?MickPS. well okay I can run for about 25 mins, and end up with heartburn and achy legs.Edited by mick, : No reason given.

I used to run, swim and do calisthenics all the time all the time, but it was mostly for training purposes. Often, I simply didn't have a choice in the matter.Now, I just workout for fun, though I certainly enjoy the physical and mental benefits. And now that my wife just got me an iPOD it will be that much more fun for me. I'm not a serious runner any longer, as in, running over 6 miles in a day, but I'm still pretty good at it. My father, on the other hand, turned 64 this year and still runs at least 4 times a week-- and that's in muggy, South Florida.He used to be pretty husky, but now he's trim and fit. Both by parents are in very good shape for their age which can be attributed to good genes and a good work ethic. I can only hope that I will be as motivated as they are at the same age.

---

Faith is not a pathetic sentiment, but robust, vigorous confidence built on the fact that God is holy love. You cannot see Him just now, you cannot fully understand what He's doing, but you know that you know Him." -Oswald Chambers

I started running about 4 years ago for mental health benefits, and have kept it up off and on since then. Sometimes seriously, sometimes not.I always run with an mp3 player, music can make a big difference to my performance, the right motivatory track at the right time can make the difference between taking a walk break and keeping going.I've only done a couple of races, a 10k in Amsterdam (44.42) and a 10mile in the UK(1:26.16), I'm not particularly quick but the satisfaction is brilliant.I started running more seriously again a month or so ago, I find it difficult to find complementary exercise. I normally just do press-ups and sit-ups after running. I don't like gyms.I also just started doing walks with a weighted(17kg) rucksack for an event I may be doing next year, but I'm concerned about how bright an idea that is.

Yeah I did a fair amount! I have no speed whatsoever but my stamina has always been pretty good. I also seem to do well on hills! I ran a marathon four years ago in 4.04. Had aimed for sub four hours but a slight strain injury meant I just missed it on the day.Since then I've been switching jobs/moving around so I have only recently started working my fitness back up. I'm currently hitting the treadmill three times a week. Should start going on long runs soon.Unfortunately now I'm in London I've lost my favourite training ground - Arthur's Seat in Edinburgh. Edited by RickJB, : No reason given.Edited by RickJB, : No reason given.

I used to do 100x10^-9 gigametres in about 3166.67 x 10^-6 hours.As such, I'm probably the anti-thesis of the kind of person you're looking to chat with. I did once do 10,800 metres in an hour for a charity gig - which given my speciality I was quite impressed with.

I've just recently started jogging about 3 months ago.In the past, I have always done some kind of team sport and/or ridden horses/did barn chores, so fitness or weight was never an issue.Now that I am close to 40 and I no longer have a physically demanding job (although thankfully is is not a desk job) the pounds have been slowly creeping up on me.Before moving to my current location, I had been doing the stairmaster for about 45 minutes, 3-5 times a week for around a year, and I had lost 15 pounds.After moving, the pounds starting coming back on alarmingly quickly, and a gym membership was too expensive. I started doing hikes in the mountains and walkining, and one day I decided to see how joging abit felt. I was shocked and delighted that it felt good, since every time I had jogged in the past it was a miserable experience.Since then I have bought some proper shoes and go about 3 times a week for around 30 minutes. I could barely manage 15 minutes when I first started so I know my cardio vascular endurance has improved a great deal.I have lost some fat but gained quite a bit of muscle, mostly in my legs.I must admit that a big motivator is vanity; I had always been slim and athletic and it bothers me quite a bit to have excess fat in my midsection. I also feel better and have more energy, sleep better, etc when I'm running regularly....which is my cue to get up out of this chair and go jog before I have to leave for work at noon.

About 3 years. I had gotten in pretty bad shape. I really haven't gotten in any better shape over the last three years. I did practice some 12 to 20 mile runs in advance, with the 12 to 15 milers followed by about 2 hours of soccer with the kids (playing halfback very actively).The 20 mile runs are terribly boring, because the last five miles feel longer than the 1st 15. I much prefer 12 milers followed by soccer, which unbeatable for exercise and still a lot of fun. I am always very sore the next day.I have the amazing ability to run 30 miles per week and still eat enough to gain a pound a week. I have to watch my eating even while I'm running. It seems like I'm always hungry.After that 50K, I'm going to cut the mileage, up the speed, and run more with the kids. Several of the young people around here run 5K's with me (and they all beat me, even the ones that don't train).I saw Sour's 44 min. 10k. Breaking 45 min. for the 10K would be a goal of mine, but I need to break 50 min. first :-). My last 5K was 24:45, so there's a lot of work in front of me, but I don't think it's beyond me.

I'm not a runner, but a climber/hiker. As such, I have to correct one tiny, technical detail.Mt. mckinely is not the highest mountain in the continental US. It is the highest peak in Alaska. over 20,000 feet high.I don't think you plan on running something comparable to the AT, so my guess is you mean Mt. Whitney, which is, as far as I know, the tallest peak in the lower 48.However, if you do actually plan on running from California to Alaska, good luck.

---

Want to help give back to the world community? Did you know that your computer can help? Join the newest TeamEvC Climate Modelling to help improve climate predictions for a better tomorrow.

Thanks. I lived in Alaska for a year. I doubt this is the first time I've made that slip of the tongue. I probably do it repeatedly.California to Alaska would be a very beautiful trek, assuming I didn't get eaten by a bear or cougar or starve to death along the way. I doubt there will be any time in my life for such a trek, but it would be awesome if I didn't have to do it alone.

Mt. McKinley, at 20,320 feet, is the highest peak in North America. (Whether or not Truthlover was correct in his statement depends on whether or not you consider Alaska part of the continental US. I guess I do but sometimes people only mean the contiguous 48 states when they say that.) Mt. Whitney stands at a considerably shorter 14,505 feet.

The military called the lower 48 (the term we used in Alaska) CONUS, short for Continental U.S. I adopted their usage, I guess, and I didn't realize that wasn't universal.Alaska is on the same continent as the lower 48, so I guess technically CONUS ought to include Alaska.I googled to make sure CONUS was really "continental" US to the military and not contiguous, and it is continental.Hmm. My dad's from Hawaii, anyway, so it really doesn't matter what all you haoles call your states ;>.

Not quite. Mauna Kea, in Hawaii, actually has the tallest peak in the world, technically. The only difference is that you can't climb Mauna Kea for very long because most of it underwater.

Well, while we're all being overly technical, Crash said that Mt. McKinley is the "highest" peak. Mauna Kea may be the tallest, but if highest means above sea level, as it normally does, Mt. McKinley wins.