Sound vs Silence

11213141517

Comments

  • Liverbird - what is RBL in relation to fat girls?? I am intrigued........

     There are clearly some passionate responses on this blog. I responded many pages ago and am a great believer in choice and taking responsibility for oneself whilst running. I seem to pant like a rabid dog when I run and so hate listening to myself. I have my MP3 on but can not tell you what I am listening to as I do not actually listen to the music but use it more to focus. I ran a very tiring 12 miler yesterday and did acknowledge the Rocky music which was well timed for my last 1/4 mile and brought a smile to my very tired and red face.

     Live and let live - Simon.

  • *had to read back*

    I said RFL - Race For Life. You don't have to be fat to run it!

    I have nothing against it either (it's how I began running and I was a fat bird then!!) but my objection is simply that women enter it with NO INTENTION of running even a metre, and because they know they can walk if they want to, they get in a line and link arms and treat it as a jolly. It is called RACE for life, and I think they're missing a trick by not putting in a bit of training and at least giving it a proper go. Who knows, it might improve their fitness and start them off on this mad world of running......!image

    Just a personal opinion, though you understand. I know RFL raises bucketloadds of dosh for Cancer Research and I hope it continues to do so!

  • Simon/Slo Sho - I wasn't intending to be disrespectful or distasteful in putting forward the argument about deaf runners. I was just trying to show the contradiction in the logic of "ban MP3's because MP3 users can't hear" but "allow deaf runners because they can't hear"

    And again - always the assumption that .... (slo sho) 'an ipod wearer is voluntarily unable to hear' and (valleyboi) 'I realise that the people wearing them can't hear you coming' - not all MP3 users have the volume so loud that it cuts out all noise. Several of the pro-MP3 posters to this debate have said this.

    OK - now to play Devil's Advocate .....back to the deaf person vs MP3 wearer. Again I don't intend to be disrespectful - I just want to explore the logic of the situation.

    Here you are, a non-MP3 wearing runner coming up behind a slower runner and needing to get by. If you see they are wearing headphones, you assume the worst and expect them not to have heard you. You may have to shout or get into their peripheral vision before they notice and let you pass. OK, a slight delay but you do get past.

    The next slower runner is a non-headphone wearing runner - this one should hear you even though you're still behind them - they move over and you get past - you don't even need to slow down as you know they will move over. .....

    (Now dons horns and pointed tail)

    ... but how do you know this runner isn't deaf? Do you run the risk of running into them because you assume they can hear you and will move? At least with the headphone wearer you have visible warning that they may be difficult to pass!! Surely that makes it safer, rather than riskier.

    How can you tell if the runner in front is deaf or can hear? If the runner in front is wearing headphones, how can you tell how loud they have the music? Surely some of the onus for passing safely lies with the person who is doing the passing.

    OK - I'm not saying it isn't inconvenient or inconsiderate ... but there have been several other examples of 'inconsiderate' posted here.

    So - should MP3's be banned, and deaf runners have signs on their backs - for 'health and safety' - or should we all just be a little more tolerant.
  • once you get hit by a car you never wear them again! and i was on the pavement!  Simply dangerous end of story!
  • With the volume turned down you might be able to hear a car, you won't hear a bike.

    shenders, that is ridiculous - no one overtaking should risk running into anyone: of course the onus lies on the overtaker. However, if the runner they are overtaking is weaving all over the place because they are not aware of the runners queuing up to overtake them then that is their fault, and they are to blame if they get hurt becausee they are being inconsiderate.

    I don't think (many) people were complaining that in a race they shout and overtake (in fact, who would do that? Surely if the person being overtaken knew you were trying to overtake them they'd speed up?!). Most people were referring to marshalls shouting. A deaf runner would probably be extra-cautious in, for example, crossing a road during a race. People with MP3s are not used to such additional caution in their everyday lives. The only instance may be where there was, for example, an ambulance coming along the course behind the runners and the marshalls asking runners to move aside to let it through. If a deaf runner could see that a marshall was clearly trying to say something they would probably respond to the actions of the people around them, or, if it wasn't clear, stop so that they could lip-read. If this werent the case, in this instance you would hope that someone would grab them and pull them into the side. I wouldn't expect to have to do this to someone wearing a headset.

    Race For Life - it is an occapational hazard of those particular events. If you are planning to run it you need to get a long way up the field. If you are planning to run it at any sort of speed you need to be on the first or second line. If you don't do that then you can't really complain because that's what it is - a run/walk mass-participation event. If it annoys you that much go and run a 5km somewhere else and get sponsored to raise money for cancer research uk.

    -------------------------

    Anyway, in the interests of open-mindedness I took my zen on an easy run around the field where the rest of my group were doing a track session last Tuesday (I raced Wednesday). I did:

    1km warm-up alone

    3km with one earpiece in with someone

    3km with both earpieces in, tempo, alone

    1km warm down without music with people.

     I found:

    * the music did detract from it being a very boring run

    * the music only did anything to set/improve pace or cadence when both earpieces were in

    * the music was very distracting to pace - for example, songs that started or finished slowly caused loss of rhythm/tempo. This is what is difficult in race - people suddenly and inadvertantly slowing.

    * my balance was affected

    * people were much better company than music (and I am someone who isn't very good at talking and running at the same time).

    In conclusion, fine for an easy run in a safe location like I was in. However, would never consider wearing them anywhere else or for a session or race which required concentration or consistency. I also wouldn't wear them anywhere with an uneven surface. 

    I support a race ban wholeheartedly.

  • DiS - How was your balance affected? That's a really interesting finding.

    As for RFL, not been involved in years now. The distance isn't a challenge and I'll leave it to those who want to be involved. I think the "get on the first / second row" is good advice in most races if you don't want people walking after 200 yards in front of you!

    8iron - how did you get hit by a car on a pavement? Shouldn't you be on my stupid injury thread?image

  • Nature provides a splendid soundtrack for my runs.

    And I have to shout at the dog every now and again (run with our 2 year old black lab). 

  • Particularly with headphones in one ear found I was slower to react to correct balance if, for example, treadding on a big stick, ducking to avoid being taken out by tree branch and when turning sharp corners. Hearing and balance are connected, but I'm not sure if it was physiological or simply the existence of a distraction.
  • Shenders - I see your points, but the point still remains that deaf people have no choice in the matter, whereas MP3 wearers decide to make them selves partially deaf.

    Hy - you were on a training run, right? I have never said that people should not be able to use them whilst training - thats silly! But when you enter a race, you are bound by the rules - and I would hope that you would respect them and not use an MP3 if asked not to.

    I personally just hope a blanket ban comes in...then people will find out if they can run properly or not without their crutch in both ears.

  • crutch in both ears....that sounds painful image

    sorry Simon, I tried resist....truly I did.

    <continues to sit back and watch amused as the debate rotate into another circle>

  • ...Then I would be genuinely impressed image
  • If you've got a crutch in both ears, people will have to run further to get round you.....

    There! We've sorted that problem out!image

    Next......

    Iraq, anyone?image

  • pmsl! Liverbird!

    God I wish I wasn't so immature.....

  • liverbird - maybe!!  46 mph in a 30 mph zone off a pavement police had camera too.  6 points and £180 fine. then bloke dissapeared!!  not my finest hour!!
  • boing for simon Forbes
  • Don't forget that a lot of it depends on your running style, some "go inwards" and tune out exterior noise/distraction, others "go outwards" and are much more aware of their surroundings.

    I can't listen to music while at home - can't listen to it if reading (book/paper etc) as I'm too aware of it, yet I need it when I run.  I take my MP3 player, wear earpieces and have the volume at a level where I can hear traffic/pedestrians so I'm safe and so are those around me.

    As soon as I start out, I tune out the outside world - it's just the type of person/runner I am.  That said, I have had problems with pedestrians when coming up to them, calling out "excuse me" etc , they are so engrossed in their conversations that they haven't heard/noticed me.

    I also ran a race a few weeks ago where people were running alongside each other, talking. By chatting and running abreast like that, they were just as much of a nuisance and  actually made it more difficult to pass them as the choice was either through the middle, (practically impossible, not to mention bad manners!!) or around to one side - again, difficult to negotiate and then breaks stride patterns etc.

    I use my MP3 player and am proud to say I do!

  • I'm not an expert but I do know that hearing and balance are related. 

    Recently - fell off a horse onto my back and literally saw green - both hearing and the feeling of being able to balance (sitting, standing and walking) were affected for about 2 hours. 

    Also when I had chronic fatigue, I noticed that when I was very fatigued, I could either listen or could stand - I couldn't do both stimultanously.   

  • I know that alcohol and balance are related.......image
  • Sorry, did Simon say he wanted a blanket ban, I thought this thread was about banning music, not blankets.....................

  • OK, I apologise, irreverent post!  Dragging this into the realm of?
  • I want to ban banning things. It should be banned.imageimageimage
  • I'd like to ban bands. And Band Aid. And banners. And banks.

    Especially banks. Robbing swines.....image

  • you've lost it image

    delirious.....

  • I'm with liverbird actually!
  • By the way...its ears and balance that are related...not hearing as such.  Its something to do with the fluid in the labrynth...as long as thats ok, balance is cool...get an infection (labrynthitis) and then your balance goes.  You are perfectly capable of listening to something and balancing at the same time otherwise we'd all fall over everytime someone said something to us.

  • Crash!! (falls on the floor!)
  • Take yer ear phones out CJBA!! lol!

    .............. I'm not expert you know!

  • Didn't David Bowie have Labyrithitis? image

    (You're right Simon - probably have lost it)! image

  • LB when David Bowie had Labyrinthitis he couldn't walk on the floor so he had to walk on the ceiling image

  • Wan't it Lionel Richie who walked on the ceiling?  Don't forget though, David Bowie was a lad insane, perhaps because he used to run listening to music too, particularly if he used those wonderful tape-recordermatrons that they used in those days.  Imagine the damage you could do with one of those in each ear!image

    Whoops, seem to have dragged a perfectly serious topic down to the level of the "pun" thread!image

    Horses for courses - a bit of tolerance all round is no harm. 

Sign In or Register to comment.