Ever heard of the 19th Century sport "Pedestrianism"?
Aug 6, 2021 14:01:40 GMT
Rey Kahuka likes this
Post by Jep Gambardella on Aug 6, 2021 14:01:40 GMT
Some kind of endurance race - contestants would walk around a track for SIX DAYS, and whoever did more laps would win.
www.bbc.com/future/article/20210723-the-strange-19th-century-sport-that-was-cooler-than-football?utm_source=pocket-newtab
The rules were simple – essentially, contestants were required to walk in circles for six days in a row, until they had completed laps equivalent to at least 450 miles (724km). They could run, amble, stagger or crawl, but they must not leave the oval-shaped sawdust track until the race was over. Instead they ate, drank and napped (and presumably, performed other bodily functions) in little tents at the side, some of which were elaborately furnished.
(...)
Whether we're adapted to it or not, pedestrianism only enjoyed a brief moment of limelight.
By March 1881, interest in this strange sport had fallen off a cliff. It was the final days of the O' Leary Belt – a rival six-day competition set up by the athlete Daniel O'Leary, who apparently decided this was a better use of his fabulous riches than building his rival a bridge. Reporting from the scene, the New York Times described "six miserable wretches" toiling wearily around the track, in front of a meagre crowd "not sufficient, either in numbers or enthusiasm, to encourage the six men".
When the celebrity pedestrians Hughes and Hart had retired, public interest had vanished overnight. The venue was almost empty during the day, and at night, the audience was less than 10% of what it had once been. The newspaper concluded: "This fact points to an inevitable conclusion, that the people are at length awakening to the fact that walking matches, if they are not hippodromes [circuses] in the worst sense of the word, are brutal exhibitions at best, and ought not to be tolerated in a civilised community.”
The shameful realities the reporter was referring to had always been the sport's dark secret. While it might sound wholesome to go for a six-day stroll, pedestrianism was more of a spectacle of pain and delirium than athletic prowess. With no or little sleep, an excess of champagne and frequent injuries, elite pedestrians routinely spent half the race staggering round the pitch.
"It was horrible, but it was entertaining to people at the time," says Algeo.
By March 1881, interest in this strange sport had fallen off a cliff. It was the final days of the O' Leary Belt – a rival six-day competition set up by the athlete Daniel O'Leary, who apparently decided this was a better use of his fabulous riches than building his rival a bridge. Reporting from the scene, the New York Times described "six miserable wretches" toiling wearily around the track, in front of a meagre crowd "not sufficient, either in numbers or enthusiasm, to encourage the six men".
When the celebrity pedestrians Hughes and Hart had retired, public interest had vanished overnight. The venue was almost empty during the day, and at night, the audience was less than 10% of what it had once been. The newspaper concluded: "This fact points to an inevitable conclusion, that the people are at length awakening to the fact that walking matches, if they are not hippodromes [circuses] in the worst sense of the word, are brutal exhibitions at best, and ought not to be tolerated in a civilised community.”
The shameful realities the reporter was referring to had always been the sport's dark secret. While it might sound wholesome to go for a six-day stroll, pedestrianism was more of a spectacle of pain and delirium than athletic prowess. With no or little sleep, an excess of champagne and frequent injuries, elite pedestrians routinely spent half the race staggering round the pitch.
"It was horrible, but it was entertaining to people at the time," says Algeo.
Crazy stuff!
