• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1521 days ago

    That’s pretty cool. However, no human has ever won by more than 15min, and every horse has a 15min delay built into their times. So even the biggest winning margin of nearly 11 minutes would have lost to the horse if they had started at the same time.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2121 days ago

      The horses also all had humans on their backs. To my knowledge, none of the humans had horses on their backs.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        0
        edit-2
        20 days ago

        For it to be scientifically accurate of a comparison, the ratio of weight:human needs to be equal to that of rider:horse, not a direct flip.

        In case my phrasing is confusing, to illustrate what I mean here is an example: a 200lb horse carrying a 100lb human is equivalent to a 100lb human carrying a 50lb weight.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          317 days ago

          Things don’t scale linearly like that. Many things are proportional to either the surface (so x²) or volume (x³) or complex combinations of those.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      119 days ago

      This study analyzes historical results of three different man versus horse races (in Wales, in Virginia, and in California). The data shows that human performance decreases with temperature, but less so than horses, so that 30°C is approximately where the best humans can start outperforming the best horses that year.

      I would think that even with 15 minutes of intermittent pauses/checks, that time is still productive for cooling the animal and would add less than 15 minutes to the theoretical total if they were allowed to run the whole time.