This is especially bad since I'm sending "Accept-Language: de,en-US;q=0.7,en;q=0.3".
Do not automatically provide bad autotranslation as default, especially if the user does accept the original language. You can prominently hint at that feature, but do not force it.
It is very close for anything up to, say, 2.5 miles (4 km) with record times of 4:02 - 4:05:
The bike will win over very long distances.
For example, the 100 mile record for a horse is 5:45:44, but for a bike it is 3:11:11
Anyone want to see horses in the TdF :)
Bikes need roads. In fact wheels in general are terrible without roads, that's why such a simple concept is rarely seen in nature and appeared relatively late in human history. Bike vs horse on road is unfair, it is like asking a horse to outswim a fish.
Man vs horse on foot is more fair, it is actually representative a natural advantage humans have over other animals. If the human wins, it means it could hunt the horse to exhaustion.
Firstly he could ambush the horse, injuring it; but let's ignore that and say it starts off fairly. He surprises the horse, it spooks and starts running. It won't run at a measured pace, it will tend to run either too fast or too slow. Psychologically it is going to be in a panicked state for an extended period of time, it's not going to operate close to peak performance as it would with a rider.
After that the man can also both use his brain to drive the horse towards a desired location as well as his determination and knowledge of previous hunts to win the race.
Doesn't that pretty much show that horse beats man except on extreme distances? The human record for running 100 miles is 11:28:03. And I do not think it would be ethical to have horses run e.g. 1000 km (human record 5d 16:17:00).
There was a really great RadioLab episode about it the other day: https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/radiolab/articles/man-a...
I think, over that shorter distance, the only reason men have won before is because the horses go through a vet check halfway - but that seems entirely reasonable given the risks.
We beat quite a few horses, many of them see it as a day out rather than a race. What I found was that horses win uphill and on the flat, but humans are vastly better going downhill. I managed to keep up with a group of horses as I could always catch up on the downhill, where the horse is at a big disadvantage.
Good luck this year! It's an awesome event.
When I saw the heading, I was convinced at the end it would say that on distances of 200 miles and longer that those few humans who do actually run these distances have better times than the best horse times...
(A handler drives about with dry clothing, spare shoes, snacks etc. At the Old Dominion 100, a handler may also accompany the runner over some portion of the end of the course--33 miles the second year. This I think is chiefly to provide a second source of judgment for the exhausted runners.)
There are documentaries of wolves and wild dogs hunting large prey by chasing them until the large prey is so exhausted and overheated that it collapses.
So I think my car might still be winning.