Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

100 yr old runs TO marathon


Recommended Posts

wowzer :blink: ...100 years old and finishes the marathon!!!! it took him 8hrs but ***king hell I wouldn't be able to walk it with my buggered knee :( ...

Well, last week a woman waddled the Chicago marathon at 39 weeks pregnant and then delivered her baby a few hours later.

Also, a 27 year old died while running the Toronto marathon. He was about 300 meters short of the finish line.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, last week a woman waddled the Chicago marathon at 39 weeks pregnant and then delivered her baby a few hours later.

Also, a 27 year old died while running the Toronto marathon. He was about 300 meters short of the finish line.

the death of the 27 yr old was unfortunate you don't expect anyone so young and fit dying, I'm sure everyone feared for the 100yr old at the beginning of the race...

Link to post
Share on other sites

the death of the 27 yr old was unfortunate you don't expect anyone so young and fit dying, I'm sure everyone feared for the 100yr old at the beginning of the race...

Well, every year there is at least one story of someone who appears fit and is young(ish) who ends up dying.

As for the 100 year old - I didn't fear for him at all.

Given that he's made it to 100 and that he had been training for the race there isn't anything to fear.

Link to post
Share on other sites

More interestingly, or, apparently not given the lack of media coverage, Canada's own Ed Whitlock, 80 years old, ran the Toronto marathon and did it in 3:15:54.

A new world record!

And he's Canadian.

He was 296/4,000 runners.

Not only did he beat everyone in his age group but everyone within 20 years of his age (he beat everyone from age 60 and up).

I guess not as exciting as a 100 year old "running" a marathon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

More interestingly, or, apparently not given the lack of media coverage, Canada's own Ed Whitlock, 80 years old, ran the Toronto marathon and did it in 3:15:54.

A new world record!

And he's Canadian.

He was 296/4,000 runners.

Not only did he beat everyone in his age group but everyone within 20 years of his age (he beat everyone from age 60 and up).

I guess not as exciting as a 100 year old "running" a marathon.

damn impressive for an 80 year old...still a 100 year old running a marathon has to rank IMO among the top human physical accomplishments of all time, I've never met someone that age who could even walk around the block...in fact I've never even met one who wasn't in a care home rolling around in a wheelchair...
Link to post
Share on other sites

An 8 hr marathon is 3.25 MPH. A quick time military marching pace is 3.4 mph. The 80 year old was cranking off 8 minute miles. Two amazing human beings

The 100 year old was doing 18 minute miles while the pregnant woman in Chicago did 14 minute miles and then went to the hospital to give birth to a 7 pound baby.

So three amazing people.

Link to post
Share on other sites

India didnt keep any birth records back then

Perhaps, perhaps not. Ever been to India?

There is no other place on earth with a greater love for paper of all sorts, official records and record keeping. It is a nation of bureaucrats, they love it there. There are forms for everything imaginable and entire buildings full of them and their keepers.

So I do not concur automatically that there are no birth records, I think it highly probable there is a record, perhaps in many copies. It is also possible that it cannot be found.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps, perhaps not. Ever been to India?

There is no other place on earth with a greater love for paper of all sorts, official records and record keeping. It is a nation of bureaucrats, they love it there. There are forms for everything imaginable and entire buildings full of them and their keepers.

So I do not concur automatically that there are no birth records, I think it highly probable there is a record, perhaps in many copies. It is also possible that it cannot be found.

Or, as gusyer repeated from an article on this matter - India didn't keep birth records in 1911.

In fact, even after the Registration of Births and Death Act in 1969 the registration of births is still inconsistent and unsatisfactory [PDF].

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be very surprising if India kept them, since the country did not exist as a nation until 1947. Who knows what they did in Punjab, one of the wealthiest areas of the country before and after the nation was established.

Lineage is important to Sikhs.

Well, I'm going to go with what was presented in the news rather than the opinion of some anonymous poster.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I'm going to go with what was presented in the news rather than the opinion of some anonymous poster.

The date of creation of India as a nation is not an opinion.

Neither is the relative wealth of Punjab, or the fetish for records. The level of bureaucracy in India is staggering for a Westerner.

You are welcome to believe otherwise.

Your faith in what you see on the Internet or on CBC is heartwarming.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The date of creation of India as a nation is not an opinion.

Neither is the relative wealth of Punjab, or the fetish for records. The level of bureaucracy in India is staggering for a Westerner.

You are welcome to believe otherwise.

Your faith in what you see on the Internet or on CBC is heartwarming.

I was not referring to the creation of India.

I was referring to whether or not he had a birth certificate. Given that India, nowadays, still has a unsatisfactory system in place I wouldn't be surprised if it was as bad, and possibly worse, in 1911.

As for my faith in the CBC - I'm pretty sure I saw it in the Globe and Mail and I always believe everything I read in the G&M. :P

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was not referring to the creation of India.

I was referring to whether or not he had a birth certificate. Given that India, nowadays, still has a unsatisfactory system in place I wouldn't be surprised if it was as bad, and possibly worse, in 1911.

As for my faith in the CBC - I'm pretty sure I saw it in the Globe and Mail and I always believe everything I read in the G&M. :P

I don't know whether or not he had an official birth record. Given the nature of where he is from(which is Punjab, not India), it is certainly possible.

What I understand is that he did not produce an acceptable proof of age.

There are two potential reasons for this: he does not have one and therefore cannot provide it, or he has one and chooses not to provide it. Either one is possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know whether or not he had an official birth record. Given the nature of where he is from(which is Punjab, not India), it is certainly possible.

What I understand is that he did not produce an acceptable proof of age.

There are two potential reasons for this: he does not have one and therefore cannot provide it, or he has one and chooses not to provide it. Either one is possible.

Which is pretty much what I've been saying from the outset.

Your mind seems to be as bureaucratic as India/Punjab. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...