When? Where? What's the difference between such people and what we are today?
2007-01-27 04:33:07 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/mid_/3801177.stm
How about 2004? Britain has had an annual man vs horse race now for 27 years. 2004 was the first time a man won.
The thing is, however, that all creatures have their limitations, so depending on how you phrase the terms of the race, it's quite possible to get all kinds of unlikely results.
In the example I've given above, they made it an endurance race with just a running man against a horse with a rider. That evens up the odds a bit, neh? One could just as easily put a ten-foot wall in the middle of the course, and it would be the horse who pretty much never won instead of the man.
And so it goes for most animals. Cheetahs run really fast, but only for short distances. Albratrosses would win most endurance flying competitions because they can glide without spending hardly any energy, but because of their great size if such a race involved lots of starting and stopping they would probably become exhausted. A shark's unique physiology allows it to swim straight up and down in water quickly without getting 'the bends', but it can't stop swimming at all or it drowns.
Humans, being smart, pick race conditions where they can win, no matter how comparatively feeble their natural capabilities are. Heh heh.
2007-01-27 04:41:06 · answer #1 · answered by Doctor Why 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Modern competition horses have been bred for performance, so they are sure to be better than their historical ancestors.
Modern human athletes have better equipment, training methods, and diets, so they are also sure to be better than their historical ancestors. So, it probably pans out.
That's an interesting answer above, about the human winning a 22-mile race against a horse, for the first time in 25 years. If it had been a 44-mile or 66-mile race, then there would have been a human winner much sooner, or even straight away. The longer the distance, the greater the human runner's advantage, as suggested on the web site below.
I found another evolution discussion forum, in which one poster said "it's been conclusively proven that, over time, there is NO land-based mammal that can't be outpaced by a man eventually", but he didn't quote a source.
2007-01-27 06:33:10 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Breeders' Cup Turf sprint - Strike the Deal (#12) gray Goose Breeders' Cup Juvenile - D'Funnybone (#5) Emirates airways Breeders' Cup Turf - Conduit (IRE) (#2) Breeders' Cup classic - two times Over (GB) (#5)
2016-12-03 02:56:35 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
sure anybody can outrun a horse if you pick the track. let's say you run a 100 meters race. pick four ways on a twenty-five meter narrow track. while the rider is wasting time turning the horse around, you are winning the race. you can adjust based on your on levels of endurance.
2007-01-27 04:45:36 · answer #4 · answered by Mr. 210 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Try researching Britain's History first. The English introduced horses to the U.S. Good Luck!
2007-01-27 04:39:19 · answer #5 · answered by Winwon (Cherokee Nation) 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It can still be done today ... it just has to be a very short race. Humans can accelerate to top speed faster than horses (but a horse's top speed is higher than a human's, so once the horse finds his stride, the human has no chance. Unless it's a slow horse :)
2007-01-27 04:42:45 · answer #6 · answered by Kosmo 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I can outrun a sawhorse if I get warmed up first.
2007-01-27 04:42:58 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋