WHO THE HECK runs 100,000 miles????

HRE wrote:

Well sure, most people won't run 100,000 miles in a lifetime let alone in 27 years. We are talking about people doing something unusual but attainable. It's only been since I turned sixty that my weekly miles have gone under 70 and even now I'll go above. Decades ago 70 was really at the low end of what serious runners did so you easily could average well over that amount even with injuries, which were a lot less common then than now I think, flu, travel and so on. And most everyone I knew back then was covering ten miles in much closer to 60 than 80 minutes so it wasn't all that time consuming. Yeah, running 100,000 miles is unusual but more because people drift away from serious running over time than because it's difficult.

I didn't say that it was not attainable. I said I don't believe most of the people that say they've done it. If you're still doing 70mpw in your 50s, then surely you realize you are 1 in a million, if not even more than that.

If you've truly done it, surely you can see the flip side that maybe it's colored your judgement of how "easy" it is. Just as I can't see doing it, maybe you overestimate the resolve of older runners.

Not that it really matters in the end. No one is harmed with another's claim.

Maybe we got away from what I'm wondering. We both agree that running 100,000 or more miles is unusual but attainable for a handful of people. Why do you have a hard time believing reports from people who say they've done it given that you believe that it's attainable? It's unusual for people to have cars with over 200,000 miles but some people do. Do you have a hard time believing them? Do you just generally have trouble believing unusual things?

All those hours spent joggin'. Just think if they had spent a fraction of that time on something potentially productive.

my age is 71 (72 in may). i started running when i was 30 (played baseball until i dislocated my shoulder). i have run ~35 marathons (best 2:32:12). during a period of 8 years i averaged ~90 miles per week year round (i was never fast , best 10K 32:15), so i had to do miles to get a decent marathon time. In my early 60s i still ran over 60 miles per week except for infrequent injuries i have never stopped. i think i am well over 100k miles. i still run but am slow and lack endurance (at 61 i was ranked 37th in the world at the marathon for 60+.) but at 71 , although my oxygen uptake is still good (vow2 max = 66 in a treadmill test last summer) my muscles are very limiting. i get very tired after 8 miles.

a key is to do something you like otherwise it will be too difficult to maintain over the years. for the past 25 years i have pretty much run trails except when doing long runs. the trail topology is diverse so i am continually stretching ( i have never consciously stretched beyond trying it a few times, i am too lazy). i continue to love running and the checks and balances a running lifestyle imposes.

HRE wrote:

Maybe we got away from what I'm wondering. We both agree that running 100,000 or more miles is unusual but attainable for a handful of people. Why do you have a hard time believing reports from people who say they've done it given that you believe that it's attainable? It's unusual for people to have cars with over 200,000 miles but some people do. Do you have a hard time believing them? Do you just generally have trouble believing unusual things?

The only reason I "doubt" is due to the fact that people lie about everything no matter how seemingly insignificant. Like people that cut courses to BQ. Like the salary threads that pop up here. Any one that has to "estimate" what they did decades ago is probably 100% overestimating. Time is funny that way.

It just takes a combination of diligence to run almost every day, and be not prone to injury. I started in 1973 and have it all logged. Have not turned in the journals to be in the club yet for a couple reasons. I am still a couple of years away from finishing my current journal, and also don't like the idea of sending them off. They are special as I journaled not just my miles, but how I felt, morning heart rate, weight, family milestones, etc. A couple of years ago, I actually tried to calculate how many hours of my life have been spent running to the total. I can't remember what I came up with, but it's cool to think about. I don't want to get sick/weak and die, I'd rather die while out on a run, and have told my wife that.

I've run over 41,000 miles in the past eleven years after many years of injury, with a slow start the first few years, so I don't think that 100k is actually that unmanageable over a career. Still a big number and how many have the will and health to run high mileage for 20-30 years?

sleeeper wrote:

sleeeper wrote:

Roger Urbancsik, 59, Marina Del Rey, California

Lifetime Miles: 173,840

“I've run in ASICS since the early ’80s, and I replace them every 200 miles. I credit that with preserving my joints. Moreover, I haven't raced since the 1991 Valley of the Flowers Marathon in Lompoc, California, in 2:35:43. Not racing enables me to avoid the train/taper/race/recover cycle. As a result, I have run at least 300 miles each month since 1991.”

So this guy has bought over 800 pairs of ASICS? Yikes

I did not read the article yet, and one of my friends is featured. But I find this sad. He is 59, has not raced since he was 34 years old and he was clearly a very good runner. For a person who cannot race anymore, this strikes me as wasting your gift in order to "keep on jogging".

I know this will sound bitter and I am, but I would not give up racing in order to maximize my ability to rack up 300 mile months. Especially since this particular guy would likely have been good/great in his late 30s, all through his 40s, and in his 50s and perhaps beyond.

But everything strikes you as sad when you can't run anymore.

So because SOME people lie about anything, no matter how insignificant, you're not going to believe dozens of people who say they're run 100,000 plus miles in their lives, even when they've recorded the miles in their logs? OK. That's bizarre enough to be ever so mildly disturbing, but thanks for answering.

Psychedelic Rock wrote:

this and that wrote:

There are many people who have done this.

Including me.

Lots of people started LSD during the 1970's and have kept at it.

Tell us more

Sorry not talking about lysergic acid diethylamide, and I am skeptical that anyone who started taking that during the 1970's would have been able to keep at it and reach 100,000 hits or that many highs/altered psychological states.

There are other threads about LSD

Just saying long slow distance was popular at the time of the 70's running boom, and people who got into distance running then were likely to start accumulating lots of lifetime miles early in their running lives.

This site is obsessed with high easy mileage; not an accomplishment in and of itself, and sometimes an inefficient way to reach one's goals.

oh please wrote:

HRE wrote:

Maybe we got away from what I'm wondering. We both agree that running 100,000 or more miles is unusual but attainable for a handful of people. Why do you have a hard time believing reports from people who say they've done it given that you believe that it's attainable? It's unusual for people to have cars with over 200,000 miles but some people do. Do you have a hard time believing them? Do you just generally have trouble believing unusual things?

The only reason I "doubt" is due to the fact that people lie about everything no matter how seemingly insignificant. Like people that cut courses to BQ. Like the salary threads that pop up here. Any one that has to "estimate" what they did decades ago is probably 100% overestimating. Time is funny that way.

I have an easy time believe the claims in this thread. Most of the people with 100,000+ miles and still active in the US probably read LR.

I've trained an average of 1.5 to 2 hours a day since high school mostly running in singles, though also at times xc skiing or cycling. The running mileage is not as high as the time might imply because I'm on trails mostly, with a lot of climbing. Last year (age 46/47) my running mileage was fairly typical with 3,194 miles and 454,000 ft of climbing - maybe more than average because I didn't ski last year, but I also had some down months when I was a bit rundown. A typical run was 10 miles. My high year was when I was about 20, when I ran just short of 5,000 miles. I'm well short of 100,000 miles despite 31 years of running because I moved to AK in 1999 and have had many winters where I skied those 1.5-2 hours, not running at all until the snow melts. I think I'm probably somewhere around 80,000 miles lifetime.

My logs are incomplete - consistent online since 2011, sporadic from 2001 to 2011, consistent in paper logs from 1987 or 1988 to 2001, and nonexistent to sporadic from 1985 to 1987. I have thought about transferring what I have on paper to my online log, but that would be a lot of work. But it would be nice, so I could have would have a total for lifetime logged miles (which will eventually hit at least 100,000 miles unless I die youngish) and then a guess for the unlogged years.

I'm one of the people in the article. Started running track in high school in 1969, luck has a lot to do with it. Also staying inspired. Going in for surgery on Monday. Only have 17 miles this year. But had a string of years between 4-5000 miles in the 80's made it obtainable. Still Have logs for most for most of those years. Now I just jot it on a calendar. Managed 60 on my 60th birthday.

Didn't set 100,000 as a goal just totaled it up one day last year

broken arrow wrote:

100000 is not that big a deal, it is just a number. I ran for 34 years before knee surgery ended my running days. I am just an average runner, I ran 4:37 for the mile in HS. I eventually ran 2:24 for the Marathon after ten years of training. I was not a high mileage runner, usually running ~80-85 miles per week. But the consistency over the years adds up to over 100k after 30+ years of running. Nothing magical about it.

If you needed knee surgery you must have missed a lot of time up to that point out with injury. Unless runners keep accurate records like Ron Hill then the number is always going to be over exagerratted.

Another guy with his hour a day. We all slow up - how far is he really going.

I'll bet that fewer people in this group (100,000 milers) lie than do just about any other group you can define. I didn't say none, but I'll bet it is few.

As a 100,000+ mile runner, the question that I get asked the most is "How often do you change your oil?"

advocateofthedevil wrote:

I'll bet that fewer people in this group (100,000 milers) lie than do just about any other group you can define. I didn't say none, but I'll bet it is few.

Compared with the number of posters on this site who claim to be 14 min. 5k runners? Which according to the Strava group is really about 3.

Turning 60 this year, and have been a competitive runner since high-school, so training consistently since 15, and would have raced every year since.

At that, it doesn't take much more than 40 miles a week to get to 100,000.

Never kept track of mileage, and would have had some injury down time, but also did a couple of marathons (generally prefer 5k) so at times would have had a fair bit higher per week, so must be there or there abouts.

I am almost there, or already there. And I am not 40 yet. I had always underestimated my mileage and "official" records tell me I am in 90.000plus range. Still running 70-90m/w, racing occasionally. Have been running since 16, always considered by peers a high mileage guy. Peak years (late 20s) were over 5000miles per year. It helps that I stay below 120lbs, but I had my share of injuries.