Cats/Running

MrMoonX said:
yeah its called an ultra marathon, such as 135 miles in one day through one of the hottest places on earth, the badwater marathon ;)
Click to expand...

That's not really running though is it, more like walking. If the animal can move at any speed I'd still back an Arabian Horse or a Siberian Husky to be able to complete an 135 miles journey.

The winner of the 2012 Badwater Ultramarathon did it in just under 23 hours, that equates to an average speed of 5.8 mph (which is a small tad faster than walking speed). In the endurance tests on Arabian Horses they made them do 60 miles at an average speed of 16 mph. So if the horse could just walk or even trott I'd back it to complete the 135 miles marathon course (and beat any human to the line as well).
 
estebanrey said:
Eh?

My argument is that you can't compare a human running down a kudu with a human trying to run down a cat and the size of the animal plays a part in why that direct comparison is flawed.

So how am I the one ignoring physical attributes? Your argument seems to be if a man can catch a kudu he can catch a cat, which IMO is too simplistic and ignores the differences between the animals and the situation.
Click to expand...

Actually my argument was more along the lines that a cat would be much easier to catch than a kudu. It cannot compete with our heart and lungs, nor our ability to sweat, eat and drink. The little things heart would likely give out. The video was mostly just to show the method actually working.

You make the argument you couldn't catch a cat because of it's size. Using the same argument, we can catch the Arabian Horse you mentioned above then?

estebanrey said:
But I don't think to would ever get to that point. The human would just give up long before the cat did or either got 'jelly legs'.
Click to expand...

I disagree. Sure, you and I would give up. If it was your dinner, you'd catch it.
 
aln said:
Actually my argument was more along the lines that a cat would be much easier to catch than a kudu. It cannot compete with our heart and lungs, nor our ability to sweat, eat and drink.
Click to expand...

Um cats can eat and drink and being far better hunters they'd probably have time to catch a few birds and mice whilst they were waiting for you to catch up with them.

The ability to sweat thing is also a little flawed. Humans need to sweat because of the way we are designed and how our body maintains heat, other animals deal with this problem (if it's even a problem for them) in different ways, I don't think it's as simple as saying human sweat is the be all and end all in body temperature maintenance.

aln said:
The little things heart would likely give out. The video was mostly just to show the method actually working.
Click to expand...

But again, the video shows a large heavy animal being knackered out. Can you seriously not see that the animal's size and weight is playing a major part in why that animal gets to the point where it just collapses? Can you seriously not fathom how this effect would be greatly reduced in a smaller, lighter animal that doesn't need lots of energy to move?

aln said:
You make the argument you couldn't catch a cat because of it's size. Using the same argument, we can catch the Arabian Horse you mentioned above then?
Click to expand...

Once again you are willfully misrepresenting my argument. I don't keep making this about size like you claim, I only mention it in comparison to the kudu hunting video where it makes a difference.

The Arabian horse can by default out run a human even over long distances so the human would 'drop' before the horse did. A kudu can't out run a human over long distances hence it gets caught.

The size bit of my argument only comes into play when we're discussing how good an animal is and regaining and using the energy it does have when it facing a human who can outrun it overlong distances. I'm not saying there is a direct correlation between an animal's size and a human's ability to catch it, I'm saying that when chasing down an animal you know that over a straight long distance race you could beat, catching it becomes harder & harder the smaller it is in a non continuous race (like in the OP).

aln said:
I disagree. Sure, you and I would give up. If it was your dinner, you'd catch it.
Click to expand...

You'd could try.
 
Last edited:
^ lol


Personally in a hypothetical situation (eg a completely clear environment) I reckon a human would have a cat, purely due to our ability to pace things out. The cat is ridiculously fast, but my legs are 36", the cats is considerably less. I know cats are fast and agile, but I genuinely doubt cats are built for running for a considerable length of time.

Of course the argument is ridiculous, a cat will just go straight up a tree, or run and be hidden in seconds.
 
Most of you are missing Kwerks actual distance.
The cat has only got to run for 1km out of the area and you lose and I reckon a cat will do that easy.

And Gilly, my quickest 1k is 3min 45secs over 5K so if it was just 1k I should be a bit quicker.
And if you can't beat a 55 year old then I suggest you kill yourself :)
 
Dimple said:
Most of you are missing Kwerks actual distance.
The cat has only got to run for 1km out of the area and you lose and I reckon a cat will do that easy.

And Gilly, my quickest 1k is 3min 45secs over 5K so if it was just 1k I should be a bit quicker.
And if you can't beat a 55 year old then I suggest you kill yourself :)
Click to expand...

Actually we're just having two different arguments. I agreed it was impossible to get the cat within 1km but suggested if it was in a locked box, we could get the cat. We then argued about that because it was more interesting than kwerks rules. :p


estebanrey said:
The ability to sweat thing is also a little flawed. Humans need to sweat because of the way we are designed and how our body maintains heat, other animals deal with this problem (if it's even a problem for them) in different ways, I don't think it's as simple as saying human sweat is the be all and end all in body temperature maintenance.
Click to expand...

They pant. Have you ever seen a cat pant? I have, they don't look healthy nor energetic.

estebanrey said:
But again, the video shows a large heavy animal being knackered out. Can you seriously not see that the animal's size and weight is playing a major part in why that animal gets to the point where it just collapses? Can you seriously not fathom how this effect would be greatly reduced in a smaller, lighter animal that doesn't need lots of energy to move?
Click to expand...

I accepted your argument that the cat would expend much less energy than the kudu right away. I then suggested it was nullified based on the ability of the cat to store a much lesser amount of energy.

Surely we can both accept both points, so the difference between our opinion is you think the cat would be able to continually recover enough to always escape, where I think it'd die of exhaustion.

If you think your arguments are a slam dunk, that worries me. If you think it's a difference of opinion, then fair enough. :)
 
Last edited:
aln said:
Actually we're just having two different arguments. I agreed it was impossible to get the cat within 1km but suggested if it was in a locked box, we could get the cat. We then argued about that because it was more interesting than kwerks rules. :p
Click to expand...

YOU CAN'T CHANGE KWERKS RULES - IT'S THE LAW.
 
I think if I just sit there and meditate, the cat won't be spooked enough to run away. Soon enough, the cat will fall asleep, and I am more than capable of catching a sleeping cat.
 
I don't believe a cat can run 1 km non-stop. Imagine putting one on a treadmill, can you see it running for 1km? Nope.
 
estebanrey said:
Even so I'd like to see a human against a Siberian husky which can run at around 12 mph for 6 hours a day (they do this for 11 days straight in the Iditarod sled race) or an Arabian horse which can run 60 miles at 16 mph. [..]
Click to expand...

Both those animals were engineered by humans for that purpose. So I'd argue that wolves would be the best example. Wolves, like humans, have the ability to efficiently sustain a moderate speed.

Temperature matters a lot, though, because humans are top dog (every pun intended!) at shedding heat. Put a fit human and a fit husky endurance racing at 0 C and the dog will win. Put the same two endurance racing at 30 C and the human will win.

There is a "man versus horse" marathon in the UK, by the way. It's usually won by a horse, though not always, but it's not an even match because each horse is carrying a fair bit of extra weight (a rider). That implies that a horse on its own would comfortably beat a human over a marathon distance in mild UK temperatures.
 
Gilly said:
Wolf? Kangaroo? Ostrich? Brown hare?

They go too fast and too far for us to keep up. You'd lose sight of them before they got tired enough to be kept up with.
Click to expand...

Persistence hunting can still work if the hunter can track while running. Keeping the animal in sight isn't necessary.

Tracking a small animal while running strikes me as rather a tall order, though. I doubt if someone could do it for a hare (or a domestic cat). They can't leave much of a track to follow.
 
estebanrey said:
That's not really running though is it, more like walking. If the animal can move at any speed I'd still back an Arabian Horse or a Siberian Husky to be able to complete an 135 miles journey.

The winner of the 2012 Badwater Ultramarathon did it in just under 23 hours, that equates to an average speed of 5.8 mph (which is a small tad faster than walking speed). In the endurance tests on Arabian Horses they made them do 60 miles at an average speed of 16 mph. So if the horse could just walk or even trott I'd back it to complete the 135 miles marathon course (and beat any human to the line as well).
Click to expand...

There have been reports of wild wolves travelling 120 miles in a day. Not well substantiated, but there's enough evidence to show it's a reasonable claim. That's for wild wolves, moving at will. If (for some strange reason) a wolf was pushing it for an endurance race, it would cover more ground.

So a horse deliberately engineered by humans for endurance and controlled by humans could do it, but it would be pretty close to natural behaviour for an unaltered wolf. My guess would be that it would be pretty close to natural behaviour for a husky too.

It's a bit startling that so few other animal species can outrun humans. Physical abilities aren't what come to mind if you're looking for something humans are better at than almost all animals. There are normally a slew of more specialised animals that outperform humans in physical things.
 
aln said:
[..]
I disagree. Sure, you and I would give up. If it was your dinner, you'd catch it.
Click to expand...

While I agree with your general argument, that's a bad example. While a human could run down a cat, it wouldn't be worth doing for food because it would take so much effort. Also, if you so desperate for food that you were persistence hunting a domestic cat to eat it because it was the only thing to eat, you'd probably be too weak to catch it.
 
estebanrey said:
[..]
The ability to sweat thing is also a little flawed. Humans need to sweat because of the way we are designed and how our body maintains heat, other animals deal with this problem (if it's even a problem for them) in different ways, I don't think it's as simple as saying human sweat is the be all and end all in body temperature maintenance.
Click to expand...

It's not far off being the be all and end all. Panting will shed heat, but it's nowhere near as effective as having lots of sweat glands all over the place.

Other animals do deal with the problem of overheating, but not as well as humans. The way most animals deal with the problem of overheating is to find shade and stop moving. You don't usually see domestic cats having trouble shedding heat because they don't usually exert themselves enough to need to do so. Wild cats do though, and they deal with the problem by expending as little effort as possible when hunting. Sneak as close as possible to prey and run as little as possible. The most extreme example is, unsurprisingly, the cheetah. They'll overheat in a few hundred yards and have to stop to cool down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom