Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
Options
SuperSix Project
The materials in this website are in no way intended to replace the professional medical care, advice, diagnosis or treatment of a doctor, qualified personal trainer, therapist, dietitian or nutritionist Runners's World, Part of the Hearst UK well-being network © Copyright 2017
Comments
marathonmummy...
1. Well done on starting in the right place - many don't!
2. You seem to have started the race with an illness due to the fact you had sponsorship and personal reasons for doing so. That's great and was very important to you and those you know. However, the consequence of that is having to accept that the VLM organisers will have to clear away the course as per their contractual obligations.
3. Sorry I'm not in to the charity thing. To me it's a race where you test yourself against the course, condition and other runners, but if that's what it was to you, fair point which has been discussed on other threads for years.
4. Why would anyone wish to donate less to what was no doubt a worthy cause because you were completing a personal challenge that was an LDWA (long distance walking association) event or indeed any other event because it was not VLM? If your cause is worth the support, it's worth the support no matter how far it is.
Rowan...
From what I saw towards the back of the field, many people had set out to disadvantage themselves by walking in groups, wearing fancy dress etc so if it was not a `pleasant experience' then it's self inflicted.
It's hard to understand how you did not understand how fast you'd be - surely your training and build up races would have given you some indication? It must be an unpleasant experience having them pack up around you, but then I wouldn't want to do the race if I thought that was a possibility.
Anyway, I don't think that the super six project is about preparing for the worst - more about trying to get people faster!
I think we'll have to agree to differ Hilly.
For me, and many millions of other people, the London Marathon is the premier charity fundraising event in the sporting calendar. Those of us who choose to run slowly or to 'disadvantage themselves' by wearing fancy dress aren't lesser beings. It's disingenuous to suggest that people would be able to raise as much money doing a long distance walking event. They aren't world famous and covered on international television. The marathon has a wow factor which other events don't inspire.
Thanks for your reply. It's interesting to hear the viewpoint of other runners.
Thanks runnerman for finding and posting that. Some interesting phraseology..
`Exclusive' team. The tone of what I have read is trying to be inclusive, not excluding people.
`Same level of mentoring....as top flight athletes'. Some comments on this thread question that.
`Fleet-footed frontrunners' - sub 3 is not the front of the field, even for a woman (45 on the mass start even excluding the elites).
`Represtentative of a full range of abilities'. I know one guy who took his pb from 2:25 to 2:19 applied and was rejected, as well as many in the sub 2:45 range, where there was no representation.
`Tried and tested route to your race day goal' Erm, not on the evidence of the last few years!
Yes, I realised after I read that back that you didn't say that, sorry! But whilst you (and I for that matter) would give as much for a LDWA, there are lots of people out there who don't get excited about anything unless it's a big deal.
It's been an interesting experience reading some of the threads on here. I've grown up in a family of marathon runners, none of whom ran for charity, but all of whom have done London several times. I had no idea there was an issue between charity runners and (for want of a better word) proper runners.
The one thing that I really dont like about these type of projects and indeed the whole charity bandwagon is that it seems to completely remove the common sense option of DNFing when appropriate.
Why continue if its just not happening on the day? DNF and save yourself for another day is the rational approach for all sorts of reasons. Sammy Wanjiruu didnt have any qualms about calling it a day at 30K when the wheels had fallen off, and why should he?
If the net result of charity involvement and this SSX project is to heap inappropriate pressure to finish at all costs and at the same time the St Johns people keep reporting being overwhelmed with needs for assistance then you have to question what its all about.
as KK has said on the forum......her mother is more impressed that she did the London marathon than doing and ironman or a double ironman........
whilst runners know the degree of hardship needed to do all the different events.sadly to the general public.they will support for a big marathon mlike London whilst they might not for other lesser known events..........
so raising money for the london marathon is easier than for other events................
Another great point PRF
Having the experience to know when to drop out is invaluable.
As you posted on another thread, bombing and finishing because you know you're having a bad running day is one thing and admirable in many ways. However grinding to the finish when you know you're ill could be construed as putting your own health at risk and by extension the future welfare of your family.
I like the way this thread has always stuck to the arguments in question in a respectful way. Well done all!
I ran VLM this year as a first time marathon runner, I wasn't part of a super 6 or running for a charity I ran because I wanted too. I took my training seriously and got to the start in good health.
I struggled from about mile 23 and at the end sought medical attention / advice as I am diabetic.
Half an hours rest and I was on my way.
My wheels hadn't fallen off one was a bit loose, would you have puleed out at that late stage?
I never felt out of control and went to the St.Johns as a precaution, they were glad to help and said I had done nthe right thing. I guess running injured or when really "in trouble" is another story!
Ah I have missed the point
Of course being my first one I thought only I could feel that bad but reading through the various threads obviously not .
Having now completed it there is no way I would have started having been ill a few days before it would be madness.
The difference between the hype and the reality is quite striking. What has been discussed on this thread is how to bring the reality closer to the hype (by preparing the runners more thoroughly for the challenge) and also in more recent posts about tempering the hype to match the reality of this year's experiences.
If RW could temper the hype a little by not using such overplayed language and if the training the runners undertook could fit them a little better to match the hype we might be able to meet somewhere in the middle where expectations meet reality.
Well, what a thread for me to make my first forum post on! I tend to lurk lots and keep quiet. This has been a very interesting read and thanks to all for that. For what it's worth, my thoughts on this one are that we're running the risk of throwing the baby out with the bathwater here.
Lets not lose sight of the fact that the project offered by RW & Lucozade is a fantastic opportunity - quite frankly I'd give a vital part of my anatomy to be involved (although maybe not a leg. 26 miles is a long way to hop). There was a post towards the beginning of this thread that questioned whether it is time to end the Lucozade Super Six project. From my point of view, this has to be an unequivocal 'no'.
I may have only been running for 5 1/2 minutes, but I'm not sure I'd change the format much either. There are arguments about whether the targets are structured right, or whether it should be a longer programme - all valid questions, but there is the possibility of losing sight of the woods for the trees. These things inevitably end up being something of a compromise as the relationships between athlete & coach, sponsors, magazines, web sites & readers have to be structured in such a way as to make that relationship accessible to the wider audience, so that people can relate to the journey each person takes. That level of accessibility is part of what makes the programme what it is - the chance to watch each person's journey as they prepare. That could be a double edged sword at times I guess - supersixers over the years are the only people who can answer that one.
I'm also not sure whether we're framing questions about the project the right way. The implication seems to be that because only one person hit the target, the rest somehow failed, and that's just not how I see it. To me, every one of them, whether they hit the target, or didn't make the start line succeeded because they put themselves out there, they put they effort in and they've inspired others at all levels to look at themselves and think 'just maybe..', or 'I remember when...'. To imply that the project didn't succeed because they didn't make their target times somehow belittles that achievement, and personally I'm not comfortable with that. I hope all six get to look back at the process in time and feel glad they were a part of it. In short, the success of the project is measured not in hours, minutes & seconds, but through the stories of the people concerned, the relationships made with each other and with others through the forum & magazine. The journey is the end in itself.
Nicely written post Russell. I don't think anyone has questioned the achievements of the 6 suggested they failed. What is in question is whether the programme delivered them to the startline in the best shape possible to hit their well publicised targets.
It's the achievement of the package they received, not the achievement of the runners on the receiving end of that package that is under review. I think with a little less sensationalism and a little more hard thinking the individuals concerned might have a better end to that journey.
If the `journey is an end in itself' then let's dispense with the time targets and switch to a target based on personal profile or mpw.
I do take your point, but to me it's more about language than project structure. At the serious risk of committing heresy here, the targets were exactly that - targets, aspirations, goals. Not exam pass marks. When you look at it from that perspective there's no problem and everyone can focus on what they should be focusing on - congratulating all of them on their achievement.
You could change the target but you'd undermine some of the programme's accessibility by doing so.
Surely the evaluation of any project includes whether pre-set targets were met? Again, no-one has critisised the SSXers themselves or suggested that they have failed but the program itself has a record of not meeting its own stated goals.
You are confusing achievement and success. In some ways it's more of an achievement to run a 3:30 when sick than a 3:05 when healthy. But success is a different thing - that must be measured against something more concrete.
There is a point of view that would say the whole project was a success because of the process - but who in life gets anywhere measuring against such vague, unmeasurable goals?
It could be RW and Lucosade are the only ones that met tangible, measurable targets - such as website hits or something.
Hilly all I can really say is if you've never had a race which didn't go according to plan, you are lucky. If you are told you are going to get a medal up to 8 hours, are expecting to do 6, and find yourself in the clear up zone while doing 6.30-7 then I don't think it's unreasonable to be a little surprised. Not everyone knows that the course is going to start being cleared up over an hour ahead of official closure. And the course being cleared up IS dispiriting, however you look at it, and even if you are prepared to be in that zone.
You'd drop out if you couldn't get what you considered to be a reasonable time. Fair enough. But while we are respecting each others training we also need to respect there are lots of different motives.
It also occured to me that for someone expecting to run around 3 hours say, who's maybe never run for more than about 2.30 in training, to then take 7 hours getting round is a bit nuts, and probably really does risk further injury. For someone expecting 6 to drop down to a time of 7 is more reasonable (if still disapointing). We are trained to keep going for the longer times, and the change in times is smaller.
Not to be horrible to the super six. But they were part of the marketing gimmick.
It was a Lucozade Sport promotion and designed to push sales and for RW to
attract new members and subscribers. Even if the six failed, its a success for
Lucozade and RW.
To give six people, support, mentors, blogs and goodies while the rest have to do
it the hard way, without support, mentors and have to buy their goodies. But many
succeeded in their goals.
RW and Lucoazde can create a project without the need for six people.
Where everyone can be part of the project. If they create a package where you have to
sign up through subscribing to RW for a year. That generates income for RW.
In return, those signed up get schedules, advice, subscriber only forums with mentors,
discount on Lucozade Sport and adidas goods. It will be like the super six project but
available to everyone. LS and RW will be a winner regardless.
Rowan - I've had many races that didn't go to plan, so I'm well aware how dispiriting it is. Ok, so the medal should have been available, but it's not reasonable to keep Central London shut for a few stragglers.
A 3 hour runner very often goes over 3 hours on a training run. I've done runs up to 4 hours off road in the past.
In races I don't DNF if not getting a time I want. I only DNF if feeling unwell or there's some kind of injury lurking.
I respect other people have different motives and so will sign off on that note as this thread is not about fast/slow!
I'm not a good runner, but have competed at a non- athletic sport at international level in the past.
I don't think it's about the time targets, although they don't help.
The psychology of suddenly going from an anonymous individual, competing in a relatively low- profile sport, for your own satisfaction, to suddenly being " in public" at a big, nationally- recognised event can be devastating.
Someone made a comment earlier about "it's not the Olympics"- I think it was one of the coaches. I was worried by that lack of insight- It WAS for these guys. This was probably their biggest lifetime sporting goal.
The psychological support offered even at, say Commonwealth Games level, was, in my case, inadequate to deal with the problems - I came unhinged at my first big event, despite/ because of an unexpectedly good result.
For those who are disappointed with the outcome, I can't imagine how bad this must feel- it's bad enough to be privately disappointed, but trying to deal with press briefings/ corporate events under these circumstances is harrowing, to say the least.
A plea to RW- please get some psychological help for these guys, and sort out the post race situation. I know you have sponsors obligations to fulfil, but to expect an injured runner to show up at the events, and to interview the SSX'ers immediately post race is cruel.
Finally WELL DONE to all the SSX'ers- you've been a great team, I think you've been let down by the system RW have created, and I hope you can enjoy your next marathon, with all the knowledge and experience you've gained, without being under the spotlight.
I know full well how it feels to have a bad day but I think that the psychological aspect is being overplayed. It's NOT the olympics, even for them, and if they need psychological help after this then they're too sensitive. Tricialitt......"Harrowing"?......a little OTT methinks.
They knew what they were getting into. I don't see how RW have let them down.
The Prize? The opportunity to be part of an exclusive VLM 2010 team and receive the same level of mentoring and nutritional support as top-flight athletes.
So the six should have the same treatment as top-flight athletes. But top-flight athletes don't
have mentors. They have coaches and so on. The super six didn't get that. All they got was a
plan to follow and advice from their mentor. You won't see Paula Radcliffe training for a marathon
with a mentor.
As said before, the super six is a Lucozade promotion with RW. So the concept isn't about
the super six but to promote the product. If all six failed, then the promoter are the winner.
If I was chosen, I would feel slightly cheated to go for a prize to achieve a goal but become
a marketing tool to sell products.
I wonder what proportion of runners make a pb in any one marathon? Assuming that they are not first timers.
*edit*
Really not a good idea for me to get involved in this debate
I think the psychologically harrowing bit of running is what sort of makes it interesting for me. If I didn't like the psyche side then I'd stop running - problem solved
Personally I would decline any offer of professional "help" on the psychological side: I get lots of support from runners here and on Fetch and for me climbing the mountain and depending upon self reliance and personal reserves - with some support - is part of the satisfaction of making it - or not making it but giving your best in the process.
And even if i fail I know I will ultimately feel better for having made the attempt.
The SSXers always get lots of positive vibes from their supporters on their own threads - that brings its own pressures but also helps to bear the runners upL: I personally think that is enough - but then i am deeply suspicious of the positive effect of psychological counselling anyway. I'm fairly sure i would be more stressed by being picked than if i hadn't but the level of support would also be higher than anything I would have experienced before - from professionals and runners.
Just my opinion - other views are available
Stepping up your training, adjusting to new plans in approaching a marathon - things go wrong, people fail - that's part of the excitement and if all SSXers made their targets I doubt that would be consistent with what marathons do - they can make you and break you and the best laid plans of mice and men oft gang agley.
Mikey, I hope you win a place in the super six next year, let's see how you OH copes with it. Best Wishes
Mikey
The SSXs put their hearts and souls into this. I've seen some of what one of the SSXs in particular has been through and in my eyes, they were let down big time. To be given the option of having a trained professional to debrief with is nothing but reasonable and right.