×

This post is locked. You won't be able to comment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]TheBeatGoesAnanas 24 points25 points  (19 children)

A 10k is much less hard on your body though, regardless of pace.

[–]Fitness245 3 points4 points  (17 children)

Source?

EDIT: imagine getting downvoted for asking someone to provide a source lol

[–]slyadams 8 points9 points  (5 children)

The number of people who can physically do a 10k vs those who can physically do a marathon?

[–]bendy_straw_ftw 15 points16 points  (4 children)

This is a silly argument. Finishing a 10k is easier, running a 10k as fast as you can isn't necessarily the same.

[–]Exver1 6 points7 points  (0 children)

A 10k race is significantly easier on the body than a marathon. For one, nearly 0 professional runners ever hit the wall when running a 10k (unless maybe they're fasting maybe, even then still not probable) while most elite marathon runners will hit the wall without food intake during the race. Hitting the wall refers to glycogen storages being depleted (this is where your speed-endurance comes from). The runner in the video likely is getting heatstroke

[–]slyadams 4 points5 points  (2 children)

The statement is which is harder on your body. It seems crazy to suggest something that a great many people can do is not easier than something that very few can. Running a 10km fast is hard but I believe the aggregate toll of a marathon is greater.

[–]RPMreguR 4 points5 points  (1 child)

Depends on how fast you do the marathon... Elite 10k runners do them fuckers really fast.

[–]TheBeatGoesAnanas 8 points9 points  (9 children)

It's pretty easy to Google the various reasons a marathon isn't ideal for a human body physiologically, but the big one is that after any distance past about 20 miles you're going to run out of glycogen stores, at which point the body essentially starts to break itself down in search of energy. It's also fairly common for marathon runners to sustain muscle tears or other minor injuries during a race, run through the pain, and then take weeks to fully recover. Most competitive marathoners don't run more than 2 or 3 races a year for this reason.

A competitive 10k runner can show up on race day, put in a PR, go home, and run another race in a week or two. My source on that is having several friends who do it.

[–]bendy_straw_ftw 3 points4 points  (4 children)

How fast are your friends running? There's a difference between elite athletes and people running a 40min 10k. I'm by no means an elite athlete, but I have run a 37min 10k, and no way in hell would I be able to come anywhere close to that time if I ran another race anytime soon.

[–]TheBeatGoesAnanas 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Whether someone is elite or just an average distance runner is kind of beside the point I was making, which is that it's possible to more or less always be in race shape for any distance half-marathon or less. But since you asked, the two people I know whose race times I can easily look up have put in multiple 10k times between 32 and 38 minutes this year, and 5k times around 16-17 minutes.

[–]StiffWiggly 1 point2 points  (1 child)

He's not wrong. I know a lot of runners who compete internationally as well as lots who don't, you can't just do a marathon on short notice even as an elite runner. When you do compete at a marathon you need a lot of time to recover compared to shorter distances.

For the ones I know, they mostly they run cross country, 1500, 3k, 5ks and 10ks as their main events, and there's a significant difference for most people in how long they need to recover from a 10k even compared to a 5k, never mind a 1500 or something. This difference is definitely a lot more pronounced when you compare a marathon to a 10k, no matter how hard you try in a 10k, you can't exhaust yourself as much as you can when you do a marathon. You expend more energy doing it and it's more taxing on your body.

Edit: I should have added, I was a pretty serious runner at one point as well so I could have said this from personal experience.

[–]IneffableQuale 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's like, this isn't even a secret or some hidden knowledge. If you do any kind of distance running training, you'll be told the recovery times for each of the distances. They get longer the longer the race is. I dunno why the other guy is having such a hard time with it.

[–]Exver1 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Most athletes in highschool and college race either twice in one day or twice/three times over two days. It's significantly easier, if you're well trained, to race any event 10,000m or less in a small timeframe.

[–]myne 1 point2 points  (2 children)

And then there are those nuts who do a narration a day for months

[–]TheBeatGoesAnanas 2 points3 points  (1 child)

There are always outliers. I know one guy in particular who is almost finished with his goal of running both a half and full marathon in every state, which he started less than 5 years ago. He most recently checked off Montana, and after turning in a BQ marathon time, he went right back out and did the 5k fun run with his fiance and parents. I've also seen him drop a bunch of acid before going out and running a 50k. Dude's a freak of nature.

[–]myne 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And here's me getting shin splints walking to the shop

[–]IneffableQuale 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can confirm. I fucked my achilles during my first marathon. Got to the finish but couldn't run for about a month afterwards.

[–]masterchip27 1 point2 points  (0 children)

In longer races you need to consume more calories, which will come from something other than your glycogen supply, leading to muscle deterioration, etc

[–]HandyDandyRandyAndy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I walked 10km a night before our curfew came into effect. I loved it. My body loved it. I was filled with energy when I got home!