Middle-aged people are not worse than young people at long distance running. The current male world record for the 24-hour run was set by Yannis Kouros at age 41, and the current female world record was set by Mami Kudo at age 45 (Wikipedia).
I really want to revert the endurance requirement to what it said before you changed it, because I’d like the tasks to come with a sense of challenge and accomplishment if at all possible. Making some pancakes for the first time will certainly feel to me like “wow, I made some pancakes!” Running a mile for the first time feels like “wow, I ran a mile!” (That should’ve been in all caps, the feeling is so intense!) Walking 30 minutes for the first time… feels nothing like that...
YMMV, definitely, but I think walking for a distance rather than a time preserves some of that ‘wow’. I know I was fairly impressed with myself the first time I walked a mile and a half to a convenience store, walked around to shop, and walked a mile and a half home without stopping. It might be less of a ‘wow’ than running some distance, but for level one I think attainability outweighs that.
Here is an calculator enabling equalizing for fitness among distances and times. For example. the fitness level required to do two miles in 30 minutes is approximately the same as that required to do one mile in 14 minutes and a few seconds.
Ok so we need a better understanding of what level 1 means then.
I was comparing it to the “strength” level-1 which is given as “untrained”… ie what you could possibly reasonably do without needed any time training—even though it might feel like an achievement to do it for the first time… and the particularly unskilled in an area may have to do some training to get there.
Walking 30 minutes for the first time… feels nothing like that...
Not to you it might not… but I’m guessing you’re probably fitter than average, though you might not realise it—average is lower than you think...
As to age and running… it’s not to do with the actual age.. but the fact that most people over 30 have slacked off for a while and are unfit—especially those of us that have been working a sedentary job now for ten years (ie most of us) . It’s not related to age… but to what constitutes the “standard” level 0.
I know a hella lot of people that could not walk for thirty minutes without getting winded… and universally these would be over thirty. Those under twenty can still coast on the endurance equivalent of “natural talent”. Those over 30… have to actually work.
Still, I like the other commenter’s example of using distance. How about “walking 5k in under 40 minutes”?
I certainly felt “wow” the first time I did that.
For me.. running a mile feels more than level 1… I would get a “WOW” instead of just a “wow”…
We can have lots of levels, you know.
Running 5k can be level 3, running 10 can be 4 etc etc… all wow’s of varying amounts of awesome… :)
Actually the ExRx tables that SarahC linked to are pretty hardcore, I’ve seen people on the internet say that it took them months (up to a year) of lifting weights 2-3 times a week to reach the level described as “untrained” =) Unfortunately I was unable to find any other table of strength standards, so this one will have to do, I guess!
My current best idea for endurance is to keep the 1 mile run requirement, but add an option of achieving “Level 1 No Physical” for people who won’t qualify for the strength and endurance parts at this time. (In all other respects the levels should be indivisible, i.e. you don’t get moral whuffie points for achieving half a level.) Sorry and please don’t consider me an ageist or something. Even if you do choose to take your time and do the physical part, I’ll be having my trouble with the social part and you can still beat me to the finish line! =)
So to reiterate your point (and make sure I’ve got it). Level 1 for any particular skill will likely be unchallenging for anybody that already has skill in that level… but will in fact be challenging (possibly quite challenging) for people that have never attempted it before.
I didn’t realise we were working on making the whole set to be indivisible! That actually makes it more interesting! :)
However… optionally taking out the physical I think would be very important.
For instance people that have a herniated disc would never be able to do the weight-lifting training… ever. Similarly with running and people that have destroyed their knees. It’d be a shame if somebody could never get level 1 because of an injury even if they’d be level 5 in all the other skills…
Anyways—otherwise I think it’s a pretty cool idea.
Can I also suggest that those of us working on a level record the time/effort it takes to reach each level (and whether we think we were starting from scratch). That can possibly help us to calibrate the different “areas” a bit better.
Middle-aged people are not worse than young people at long distance running. The current male world record for the 24-hour run was set by Yannis Kouros at age 41, and the current female world record was set by Mami Kudo at age 45 (Wikipedia).
I really want to revert the endurance requirement to what it said before you changed it, because I’d like the tasks to come with a sense of challenge and accomplishment if at all possible. Making some pancakes for the first time will certainly feel to me like “wow, I made some pancakes!” Running a mile for the first time feels like “wow, I ran a mile!” (That should’ve been in all caps, the feeling is so intense!) Walking 30 minutes for the first time… feels nothing like that...
YMMV, definitely, but I think walking for a distance rather than a time preserves some of that ‘wow’. I know I was fairly impressed with myself the first time I walked a mile and a half to a convenience store, walked around to shop, and walked a mile and a half home without stopping. It might be less of a ‘wow’ than running some distance, but for level one I think attainability outweighs that.
Here is an calculator enabling equalizing for fitness among distances and times. For example. the fitness level required to do two miles in 30 minutes is approximately the same as that required to do one mile in 14 minutes and a few seconds.
Ok so we need a better understanding of what level 1 means then.
I was comparing it to the “strength” level-1 which is given as “untrained”… ie what you could possibly reasonably do without needed any time training—even though it might feel like an achievement to do it for the first time… and the particularly unskilled in an area may have to do some training to get there.
Not to you it might not… but I’m guessing you’re probably fitter than average, though you might not realise it—average is lower than you think...
As to age and running… it’s not to do with the actual age.. but the fact that most people over 30 have slacked off for a while and are unfit—especially those of us that have been working a sedentary job now for ten years (ie most of us) . It’s not related to age… but to what constitutes the “standard” level 0.
I know a hella lot of people that could not walk for thirty minutes without getting winded… and universally these would be over thirty. Those under twenty can still coast on the endurance equivalent of “natural talent”. Those over 30… have to actually work.
Still, I like the other commenter’s example of using distance. How about “walking 5k in under 40 minutes”?
I certainly felt “wow” the first time I did that.
For me.. running a mile feels more than level 1… I would get a “WOW” instead of just a “wow”… We can have lots of levels, you know.
Running 5k can be level 3, running 10 can be 4 etc etc… all wow’s of varying amounts of awesome… :)
Actually the ExRx tables that SarahC linked to are pretty hardcore, I’ve seen people on the internet say that it took them months (up to a year) of lifting weights 2-3 times a week to reach the level described as “untrained” =) Unfortunately I was unable to find any other table of strength standards, so this one will have to do, I guess!
My current best idea for endurance is to keep the 1 mile run requirement, but add an option of achieving “Level 1 No Physical” for people who won’t qualify for the strength and endurance parts at this time. (In all other respects the levels should be indivisible, i.e. you don’t get moral whuffie points for achieving half a level.) Sorry and please don’t consider me an ageist or something. Even if you do choose to take your time and do the physical part, I’ll be having my trouble with the social part and you can still beat me to the finish line! =)
Ok, that all makes sense then.
So to reiterate your point (and make sure I’ve got it). Level 1 for any particular skill will likely be unchallenging for anybody that already has skill in that level… but will in fact be challenging (possibly quite challenging) for people that have never attempted it before.
I didn’t realise we were working on making the whole set to be indivisible! That actually makes it more interesting! :)
However… optionally taking out the physical I think would be very important.
For instance people that have a herniated disc would never be able to do the weight-lifting training… ever. Similarly with running and people that have destroyed their knees. It’d be a shame if somebody could never get level 1 because of an injury even if they’d be level 5 in all the other skills… Anyways—otherwise I think it’s a pretty cool idea.
Yeah that’s about it. Guess it’s time for me to freeze the thing in its current state and write a post. Thanks a lot!
Can I also suggest that those of us working on a level record the time/effort it takes to reach each level (and whether we think we were starting from scratch). That can possibly help us to calibrate the different “areas” a bit better.
Good idea! I’ll write about that.