FLM article in this months RW mag

I just want to post a comment about this article. I ran the FLM this year as a beginner. I started running about a year ago and ran it one month before my 50th birthday and finished in just over 5 hours (slightly slower than I hoped). However the majority of those featured were serious runners, nearly all finishing in the top half of the field. I can remember picking up this magazine when I started for guidance and information, however for people like me who may do the same for next years race, they will certainly not find it inspiring! On the contrary it could be very off putting. How about featuring the 'ordinary' runners who do get there but at their own pace?


  • fat facefat face ✭✭✭
    There are piccys of people who took 4:42, 5:24,4:22,4:54,4:10,4:54.

    I wouldn't have said that these are times that aren't achievable for the majority of people.

  • To be fair to those at RW Towers, I thought the coverage was good. The idea of taking pics of runners as described above was ok.
  • I accept your comment about the slower times but obviously they didn't stand out - I checked my views with my non-running husband. He too saw that the novive runner wasn't really featured as those with slower times had run several marathons before. If there is now the need for the introduction of websites such as easyrun for beginners/less serious runners doesn't that tell you that websites such as these are becoming too serious? I know I don't normally use this site as I had some snotty comment when I started about my pacing being wrong when I asked for some advice and I didn't even know what they were talking about!
  • fat facefat face ✭✭✭
    Sorry, I didn't mean to offend you beatty. For what it's worth, I think your time, as a 50 year old novice is a very creditable one indeed, ans warm as well. It took me 4 attempts to get under 5 hours and that was in my late teens /early twenties.

    I think you're doing fine.
  • "How about featuring the 'ordinary' runners who do get there but at their own pace?"

    its a race - the aim is to finish with as many people behind you and as few in front of you as is possible. So there for you would expect alot more coverage of front runners.

    This applies to any form of sport...You wouldnt expect to watch a high profile superbike race and give give coverage of anything but the front runners. The brutal truth is nobody is really interested in the guys who just qualify.

    the FLM is a notable exception in its coverage as it is heavily slanted to the charity event side of it so in general the latter parts of the field get abnormally high exposure.

  • No offence taken - its just my little hobby horse :) thanks for the compliment
  • WilkieWilkie ✭✭✭
    Beatty, as jason X says it is a sporting event, and a large number of people are 'serious' runners, and want to read about the winners and good club runners.

    It gets a huge amount of coverage - which other city marathons get hours on the BBC?

  • Just make sure you look good on the BEEB nxt year when they carry on that continuous feed from the finish gantry. I'm going, but I haven't a THING to wear!
  • Hi there jasonX. Your aim (to beat as many other people as possible) may not be the same as many other peoples' aim in the same event.

    I have run a number of marathons now (11 in the last 18 months), never with the intention of "beating" other people. Always with the intention of doing as well as I can. Depending on the conditions and the course, this might be the aim of getting a PB, the aim of enjoying the event and the views, the aim of finishing strong, the aim of finishing at all. Sometimes I've finished in the top 35%, sometimes in the bottom 35%, depending on the field and the conditions. In fact, I am not sure of that, because it has never occurred to me to find out.

    Running a marathon, enjoying it, and feeling you've had a good run is enough for me. I suspect that I may be an average-ish RW magazine reader, if I were bothered to read it. But frankly, it has so little in it of interest that I rarely do.
  • Do you never push yourself to catch the person in front then Wombat ? That always helps me to do well. Ok- well-ish...
  • ... in a marathon, at the start I am focussing on avoiding that urge. At the end I am willing to take any motivation that might drag me along a bit faster!
  • Aha - so you doooo want to beat other people ! ;-)

    I know what you mean about the start though - too easy to hare off and blow up.

    So much better to ease in and then pass them all later in the race.
  • Sorry jasonx but you just sum up what I was complaining about. The FLM is more than a race - I expect stuff about the front runners but FLM is about people - people acheiving individual goals for whatever reason often against personal strugles and seemingly unbeatable odds - that is what makes it what it is. You only had to see the Adidas wall for that.
  • fat facefat face ✭✭✭
    But also the FLM wouldn't be what it is if it wasn't for the fast runners. It is well known for being a fast course and world bests have been set there so it attracts more elite athletes and therefore more sponsorship and therefore extended TV coverage.

    Everyone has their own part to play in the success that the FLM has become.
  • I think what makes this forum good is that it's extremely inclusive. Plodders and slow-coaches, midpackers and good club runners all just enjoying our hobby. Heck there are even te odd few representing their country who post here.

    I don't see why the magazine should cater exclusively for absolute beginners or the people on the back of the field.

    The fastest runner featured in the specific article ran 2:53 on his debut, that's a good club runner (as his 483rd finishing position indicates). Good to see the sub 3 runners are 'ordinary' runners too, how can that be off putting?
  • You can read about peoples charity FLM efforts in the local paper, you can watch hours of footage of people getting around the FLM on TV if that takes your fancy.

    whats the adidas wall by the way?

  • fat facefat face ✭✭✭
    Quite right Imski. There are people who have represented their country on this forum and I for one certainly value their input. There are folks who do crazy things for charity, peeps who push wheelchairs around marathons, a bloke who did a triple ironman, people who walk around marathons, people who do marathons as often as they can, new runners asking advice about Race for Life. There's always a thread where you can be amongst like minded people.

    You're never alone on here.
  • I'm not saying the serious runners shouldn't be in the mag - just include everyone just once!
  • FreemersFreemers ✭✭✭
    I did like the fact that the fast guy in the article (the first picture I think) was quoted as saying something like "I knew fairly early on I wasn't on for a fast time..." And then it said he'd done 2:50-something!
  • WilkieWilkie ✭✭✭
    I think the problem is space, Beatty.

    They can't include everyone, so have to make a decision.

    RW is a magazine aimed at runners. As previously mentioned, other publications will carry articles about charity runners and so on.
  • Include everyone else just for once?

    From my perspective Runners World caters almost entirely for the beginner and hardly at all for the serious runner.
  • Absolutely. Didnt they start a subsiduary mag called 'Performance Athlete' aimed at the 'sharp end' runners? I get a great deal out of the magazine, whether it's reading how top runners train, or how to fund-raise etc. The only negative I have is the prevalence for adverts. But I guess that keeps the price relatively low.

    I see the mag as an extension of the website, rather than the other way round. Would you agree?
  • So we think it's an editorial thing? I rather assumed it was because the RW snappers needed to get the shoot done and everything packed up, whether for cost, practicalities or convenience.
  • ...it would certainly be a first for RW to actively decide to exclude the slower end of the market. Wouldn't it?
Sign In or Register to comment.