| |
Main
Date: 16 Dec 2006 11:22:39
From: Doug Freese
Subject: More on endurance running
|
As little Lance would like us to believe this long stuff over time
might be detrimental to one's health. I don't see any suggestions that
it has been historically harmful. This of course is just a snippet but I
would like to read the full article but alas it is not free online and I
don't subscribe.
-Doug
============================================================
Setting the pace: Endurance running may have played an important role in
evolution of the human form
Louis Leibenberg. "Persistence Hunting by Modern Hunter-Gatherers."
Current Anthropology 47:5.
A groundbreaking new study from a forthcoming issue of Current
Anthropology reveals that endurance running may have played an important
role in the evolution of the human form. Specifically, South African
anthropologist Louis Liebenberg suggests how contemporary
hunter-gatherers' ability to run down antelope over long distances using
persistence and intelligence can clarify a crucial aspect of the
emergence of modern human beings.
Persistence hunting, which involves tracking antelope on foot in the
midday heat, is a very efficient hunting method in the environments
where much of human evolution took place. A critical factor in the
success of persistence hunting is the fact that humans can keep their
bodies cool by sweating while running. If an antelope is forced to run
in the midday heat on an extremely hot day it will very likely overheat.
Liebenberg's data show that present-day antelope hunts are typically
done during the hottest time of the day, with maximum temperatures of
about 39 to 42 degrees Celsius, or, approximately 102 to 108 degrees
Fahrenheit. It may take two to five hours to run down an antelope over
25 km to 35 km (roughly 15.5 miles to 21.75 miles) - about
three-quarters of the standard marathon length.
"Before the domestication of dogs, persistence hunting may have been the
most efficient hunting method developed by early humans. Endurance
running, and in particular persistence hunting, may therefore have been
a crucial factor in the evolution of humans," explains Liebenberg.
Another challenging aspect of persistence hunting is keeping on the
right track, since the prey's distinct tracks must be distinguished from
those of other animals. "The art of tracking requires considerable skill
and intelligence," writes Liebenberg. "This level of intellectual
sophistication may well have been a very recent development in human
evolution."
|
|
| |
Date: 16 Dec 2006 14:25:43
From: Mark Hutchinson
Subject: Re: More on endurance running
|
"Doug Freese" <dfreese@hvc.rr.com > wrote
> As little Lance would like us to believe this long stuff over
> time might be detrimental to one's health. I don't see any
> suggestions that it has been historically harmful. This of
> course is just a snippet but I would like to read the full
> article but alas it is not free online and I don't subscribe.
> -Doug
> ============================================================
> ...Liebenberg's data show that present-day antelope hunts are
> typically done during the hottest time of the day, with maximum
> temperatures of about 39 to 42 degrees Celsius, or,
> approximately 102 to 108 degrees Fahrenheit. It may take two to
> five hours to run down an antelope over 25 km to 35 km (roughly
> 15.5 miles to 21.75 miles) - about three-quarters of the
> standard marathon length.
I have always liked that antelope hunting story because it
confirms some of my cherished beliefs about running. However, as
you will note, the distances described are in the sub-marathon
range. There is no mention of ultra-like distances. So Lance's
point may still be valid.
|
| | |
Date: 16 Dec 2006 14:00:24
From: D Stumpus
Subject: Re: More on endurance running
|
"Mark Hutchinson" <markh@goamil.com > wrote
>> It may take two to
>> five hours to run down an antelope over 25 km to 35 km (roughly
>> 15.5 miles to 21.75 miles) - about three-quarters of the
>> standard marathon length.
> However, as
> you will note, the distances described are in the sub-marathon
> range. There is no mention of ultra-like distances. So Lance's
> point may still be valid.
Coupla thoughts:
After jogging out several miles to select some juicy prey, running 30k to
get it, how do you suppose they get back?? :-)
Also, they do it in extreme conditions, with very little water (I've read
elsewhere), and it takes up to 5 hours (a bit more than it took me to run
50k recently). Sounds reasonably ultra-like to me. But between you and me,
that's a far cry from a 100 miler...
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | |
Date: 16 Dec 2006 22:16:42
From: Mark Hutchinson
Subject: Re: More on endurance running
|
"D Stumpus" <dstumpus_NOSP@mindspring.com > wrote
> "Mark Hutchinson" <markh@goamil.com> wrote
>
>>> It may take two to
>>> five hours to run down an antelope over 25 km to 35 km
>>> (roughly 15.5 miles to 21.75 miles) - about three-quarters of
>>> the standard marathon length.
>
>> However, as
>> you will note, the distances described are in the sub-marathon
>> range. There is no mention of ultra-like distances. So
>> Lance's point may still be valid.
>
> Coupla thoughts:
>
> After jogging out several miles to select some juicy prey,
> running 30k to get it, how do you suppose they get back?? :-)
If there is no shuttle available back to the start, they'd probably
walk (no reason to run back, unless they wanted to catch the latest
episode of Survivor).
> Also, they do it in extreme conditions, with very little water
> (I've read elsewhere),
Yup... hence our ability to go relatively long distances without a
need to continuously "hydrate". ;-)
> and it takes up to 5 hours (a bit more
> than it took me to run 50k recently). Sounds reasonably
> ultra-like to me.
Yes, but do you get to stop and rest if you feel tired when racing an
ultra?
> But between you and me, that's a far cry from
> a 100 miler...
I've recently done a four hour training run -- wasn't as bad as I
thought it would be. Could have easily gone another hour, but got
bored. Of course, that was not at race pace. But then neither is the
21.75 miles in 5 hours for Ogg and his merry men.
|
| | | | |
Date: 16 Dec 2006 14:35:40
From: D Stumpus
Subject: Re: More on endurance running
|
"Mark Hutchinson" <markh@goamil.com > wrote
>> Also, they do it in extreme conditions, with very little water
>> (I've read elsewhere),
>
> Yup... hence our ability to go relatively long distances without a
> need to continuously "hydrate". ;-)
I am also amazed at our ability to go a week or more without the need to
continuously "eat" ;-)
> Yes, but do you get to stop and rest if you feel tired when racing an
> ultra?
I don't know if I should be saying this, but...people do walk in ultras,
stop 10 minutes or more at aid stations, change shoes and socks, etc...In my
best 50 miler, I had to walk for 20 minutes due to cramps, still came in 5th
out of 140 starters. Interestingly, I passed 5th place when we were both
walking...
-- Dan
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | | | |
Date: 17 Dec 2006 01:05:27
From: Mark Hutchinson
Subject: Re: More on endurance running
|
"D Stumpus" <dstumpus_NOSP@mindspring.com > wrote
> "Mark Hutchinson" <markh@goamil.com> wrote
>
>>> Also, they do it in extreme conditions, with very little water
>>> (I've read elsewhere),
>>
>> Yup... hence our ability to go relatively long distances
>> without a need to continuously "hydrate". ;-)
>
> I am also amazed at our ability to go a week or more without the
> need to continuously "eat" ;-)
Dayum! You can do a week or more without eating? You are much
man, Dan. I did some calorie depletion before last week's
marathon and all I could handle was about 24 hours without food.
And I was into the taper by then, so not much running at all.
>> Yes, but do you get to stop and rest if you feel tired when
>> racing an ultra?
>
> I don't know if I should be saying this, but...people do walk in
> ultras, stop 10 minutes or more at aid stations, change shoes
> and socks, etc...In my best 50 miler, I had to walk for 20
> minutes due to cramps, still came in 5th out of 140 starters.
> Interestingly, I passed 5th place when we were both walking...
Carefull, you are making Lance's points for him. :-)
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 16 Dec 2006 21:42:11
From: D Stumpus
Subject: Re: More on endurance running
|
"Mark Hutchinson" <markh@goamil.com > wrote
>> I don't know if I should be saying this, but...people do walk in
>> ultras, stop 10 minutes or more at aid stations, change shoes
>> and socks, etc...In my best 50 miler, I had to walk for 20
>> minutes due to cramps, still came in 5th out of 140 starters.
>> Interestingly, I passed 5th place when we were both walking [95 degrees F
>> and uphill]...
>
> Carefull, you are making Lance's points for him. :-)
At the time, my last marathon was 2:37, and the guy I passed had a 2:36 at
Honolulu. It was one of those pathetically weak ultra fields Lance goes on
about.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| |
Date: 16 Dec 2006 15:18:32
From: Twittering One
Subject: Re: More on endurance running
|
Dan, can you post a pic of your Ultra legs?
I am very interested in what 50-mile runs do to one's legs, seriously.
|
|
