Eddie Izzard

Use this board for general non-cycling-related chat, or to introduce yourself to the forum.
mw3230
Posts: 1162
Joined: 31 May 2007, 11:22pm
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne

Eddie Izzard

Postby mw3230 » 28 Feb 2010, 8:48am

Eddie Izzard ran 43 marathons in 51 days. How on earth has he achieved this level of fitness and stamina. Is it sheer guts. What would be a cycling equivalent?

I'm damn sure that cycling 100 miles is easier than running 26 and a bit
Retired and loving it

User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 50934
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Eddie Izzard

Postby Mick F » 28 Feb 2010, 9:26am

I've always wondered what the equivalent of a running marathon is in cycling terms.

I think that regular marathon runners don't find marathons daunting, just the same as regular cyclists don't fine 100 miles daunting - at least I don't! But the other way round?

So I suppose it's horses for courses. I don't think I could run a mile, let alone 26, but put me on a bike and I can pedal all day.
Mick F. Cornwall

mw3230
Posts: 1162
Joined: 31 May 2007, 11:22pm
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne

Re: Eddie Izzard

Postby mw3230 » 28 Feb 2010, 9:56am

Mick F wrote:I've always wondered what the equivalent of a running marathon is in cycling terms.

I think that regular marathon runners don't find marathons daunting, just the same as regular cyclists don't fine 100 miles daunting - at least I don't! But the other way round?

So I suppose it's horses for courses. I don't think I could run a mile, let alone 26, but put me on a bike and I can pedal all day.


Perhaps there is some formula for measuring the amount of effort/power/energy used in an average marathon and then translating that to the bike - any medics or scientists want to assist?
Retired and loving it

User avatar
fraxinus
Posts: 146
Joined: 4 Oct 2009, 9:07pm
Location: West Midlands

Re: Eddie Izzard

Postby fraxinus » 28 Feb 2010, 10:10am

Not sure about this but I think I heard that he did not do a lot of training before this feat. When cycling there are times when you are coasting or not working too hard but running is constant there is no rest from it. I suppose there is running and sort of fast walking and he was probably doing nothing else apart from resting. But still impressive and for sure I could not do it.
So many bike rides so little time

rualexander
Posts: 2474
Joined: 2 Jul 2007, 9:47pm
Contact:

Re: Eddie Izzard

Postby rualexander » 28 Feb 2010, 10:13am

This page has an interesting chart of the calories used for various activities :
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/exercise/SM00109
Looks like jogging and running uses far more calories than cycling, which seems reasonable given that cycling is more efficient and you never get to freewheel when you are running!

So, for a rough calculation, say you ran a marathon in four hours at 800 calories per hour that would burn about 3200 calories, to burn 3200 calories cycling would require that you ride for around double the time, so you'd be looking at about 100 miles plus.

User avatar
Si
Moderator
Posts: 15183
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 7:37pm

Re: Eddie Izzard

Postby Si » 28 Feb 2010, 10:31am

I'm guessing that even when there is a similar calorific outlay, that running is harder because cycling is none-impact. Three weeks of marathons would leave the knees some what worse off than three weeks of TDF stages?

But, there again, you don't have such a problem with air resistance when running due to the slower pace.


anyhoo, damn fine achievement!

User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 50934
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Eddie Izzard

Postby Mick F » 28 Feb 2010, 10:43am

The cycling column in the link was only "leisure" cycling.

I know that Garmin and Ascent etc are questionable with respect to calories, but they probably aren't too far out. Here's some stats from my records:
Cheddar YHA to home on Mercian - 106 miles - 5806 cals
52 miles on a Raleigh Chopper - 5071 cals

Looking for rides that burned 3200 cals, I find about 50 miles is on Mercian.

So, are we saying that I could do two "marathons" a day?
Surely not, so there must be more to it than just calories.
Mick F. Cornwall

Jamesy
Posts: 98
Joined: 15 Dec 2007, 7:00pm
Location: E. England

Re: Eddie Izzard

Postby Jamesy » 28 Feb 2010, 10:58am

I always believed that cycling enabled you to travel twice the distance for half the effort of walking, or something similar.
I simply cannot imagine the effort involved in running that many marathons in the time frame he had. The man is a star!
"Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest". Robert G. Ingersoll

groveller
Posts: 244
Joined: 1 Feb 2007, 3:10pm

Re: Eddie Izzard

Postby groveller » 28 Feb 2010, 12:47pm

Eddie Izzard's achievement is amazing, I just can't imagine the suffering he must have gone through. Top man.
When I was in my forties I was time trialling and running.
My best marathon time was 3h17min.
Best 100 mile TT time was 4hr 25min. Both very average.
I found recovery from marathons took longer than 100mile time trials. But they both hurt like hell!
No doubt it varies from person to person. But to do marathons back to back day after day is staggering as is ultra long distance cycling.

User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 50934
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Eddie Izzard

Postby Mick F » 28 Feb 2010, 1:20pm

Yes, he's a star in many ways. Marathon runner, and did you see him in "The Day of the Triffids" over Christmas/New Year? Great stuff.

Having seen a marathon runner in training locally, she runs with consummate ease in a relaxed way. As I said, I couldn't run a mile, but these folk run round the block as a breeze - ten miles is a walk in the park. I wonder how much "effort" they put in as opposed to mere amateurs. I can ride 100 miles. I know many people, and most couldn't even ride a mile let alone a 100. They hold me in awe, but I think little of it.

I eat like a horse when I'm getting the miles in - 5000 cals a day? If I did that every day, we couldn't keep up with the shopping bill. No doubt Eddie Izzard has a HUGE appetite!

I remember a thing on TV about the great Geoff Capes and how much he had to eat to stay at the top. Steaks, eggs, pasta, veg and potatoes, bread, fruit, milk ...... the list was endless - every single day. They piled it all on a table to demonstrate how much food he ate. There was nothing of his wife, and he was MASSIVE. How she coped, I don't know!
Mick F. Cornwall

User avatar
fraxinus
Posts: 146
Joined: 4 Oct 2009, 9:07pm
Location: West Midlands

Re: Eddie Izzard

Postby fraxinus » 28 Feb 2010, 6:12pm

"Eddie Izzard: Marathon Man. Documentary series following the comedian as he tackles 43 marathons in 51 days." Thursday 4th March 10.30pm BBC3.
So many bike rides so little time

User avatar
McVouty
Posts: 386
Joined: 21 Jul 2008, 5:32pm
Location: Stirling

Re: Eddie Izzard

Postby McVouty » 28 Feb 2010, 6:36pm

Back in the pre pie era, I was a serious, though untalented, marathon runner (p.b. 2.58.05, Edinburgh 1986, for what it's worth). Running a marathon is MUCH harder than cycling 100 miles - I'd guess that the cycling equivalent is attempting an hour record on the track.

PW
Posts: 4519
Joined: 23 Jan 2007, 10:50am
Location: N. Derbys.

Re: Eddie Izzard

Postby PW » 28 Feb 2010, 6:50pm

I can ride 100 miles, with camping gear. I can't run a marathon, so I'd think that puts it in perspective. :mrgreen:
If at first you don't succeed - cheat!!

Jamesy
Posts: 98
Joined: 15 Dec 2007, 7:00pm
Location: E. England

Re: Eddie Izzard

Postby Jamesy » 28 Feb 2010, 7:23pm

Cycling will always involve some freewheeling, thank goodness. Running on the other hand, up OR down, requires constant effort.
I know which I find most enjoyable!
"Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest". Robert G. Ingersoll

toontra
Posts: 742
Joined: 21 Dec 2007, 11:01am
Location: London

Re: Eddie Izzard

Postby toontra » 28 Feb 2010, 7:32pm

In my mind I've always thought that a marathon is the equivalent to about 150 cycle miles, so a multiplier of just over 5. Not sure where this information came from (or if I just invented it) but having run a bit and cycled many 150's it seems about right.