Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
Is the rest of the World
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
In a smaller race, you may not have the facilities to make a great time, but your competitors all have the same lack of facilities and still the race is fair.
No, I say the sport isn't suffering the for fancy dress, dogs, pushchairs etc, I say it is suffering from an obsession with the clock that turns every race into a time trial instead of a 'race' in the true sense. It is, after all, this obsession with times that causes people to start the race as close to the line as they can.
Even if the dog owner were at the back, so would be some runners. I know quite a few people who are scared of dogs.
There is an obvious safety issue - tripping over dog/lead. Muzzle on dog? etc.
Also is it fair on the dog? It's not good for them to run too far on hard surfaces.
What's the point of entering with dog anyway?
If you take your place rather than times argument, then Paula Radcliffe would not bother pushing real hard for her 2:14 marathon, or tergat his 2:04, or Montogomery his 9.76, or Michael Johnson his 19.39 etc. They would always do just enough to win. Same follows for club runners; it isn't just about position, it is about how well you perform against the clock.
Jose: quantity or quality - now that is a real dilemma. I ask this question as a comparison: If you asked football fans whether we should focus on getting 11 players good enough to win the world cup or concentrate on getting more people to play Sunday League football, then I'm sure you would get the more who would rather we win the World Cup. So as an athletcs fan my heart is torn over whether I want to see more runners or better quality runners.
In this politcally correct world I should opt for the former. But as a die hard athletics fan who has followed the sport since I was barely old enough to run myself I would love to see us have four or five Paula Radcliffe's!
If there are more people at the grass roots end of the sport there will be a greater opportunity for people to be exposed to a sport which they may find an unexpected talent for. And that will eventually find its way to resources and facilities, more races, etc.
So we have the brigade who appear at the GNR to be on TV. But they may enjoy the experience and think about maybe training for next year. Without exposure sports can't progress. I also go diving and orienteering, and both sports regularly have built into the club structure "come and try it" events. Perhaps we should look on the FLM & GNR as CATI events for running? And the wonderful thing about it is that you can be a beginner in the same race as a world record is set!
I can't remember who said this, but one quote sticks in my mind: "I would rather see 10,000 people running round a track as best they could than see 10,000 people in the stands watching one person run".
I wonder if any of the pompous posters on this thread have ever contended the lead in a race?
As for dogs, I doubt any of the posters have tripped over a dog in a race. People who enter races with dogs are, in my experience, the most sensible and considerate dog owners and keep their mutts out of trouble. As for fairness on the dogs, in case you hadn't noticed they're rather better built for running than we are and would happily run much further than their owners!
beat that
It seems the alledged slower/fun runners expect to get respect from faster runners.............. WHICH THEY DO GET, but a lot of the slower/fun runners seem to think it's a one way thing.
It seems the rest of the world is taking over 'our' sport (in saying 'our' I mean all those of us that wish to compete against others and themselves to the best of their ability)
I feel it is more 'pompous' to expect everone else to ruin their own shot at reaching their goal purely because you can't be honest about your own ability or lack of it.
A lot of people seem to read what they think they see written, not what the words actually say.
Eldest daughter was so alarmed by the crowding at the GNR that she swore she would not compete again unless she had an elite qualifying time. She is perhaps fortunate that she has that ability - there are many others who do not.
Its entirely right and proper for runners of all abilities to want to run a good time at events like the FLM and GNR. Its also entirely right and proper for people to enter who wish to simply complete the course in aid of a charity with little or no thought as to their time or position - provided they recognise and enter into the spirit of the event (ie its supposed to be a race not a street party or a carnival) and make at least some attempt to prepare. The same applies to fancy dress (there are some fancy dress runners who can run times that would put many here to shame).
Personally if I wanted to do a fast time I'd do a smaller race, but I can well understand those who want to say that they did their best time at the London Marathon.
As to dogs. Well I train with my dogs, but on race day they stay at home. I really don't think that dogs have a place in mass participation events no matter how well trained or behaved - sorry.
The organisers do their best, but at the end of the day it is down to us as runners to behave sensibly and to educate others to do the same.
Perhaps an open letter from the forum to the national press outlining the safety concerns, and asking people to respect both the event and each other ??
This is the correct place to have the debate, and for what its worth that's my contribution. I hope I don't sound too pompous.
The stats show that the strength in depth of UK distance running has been decimated over the last 20 years. In contrast the numbers of participants in the FLM or GNR has increased 5 or 6 fold.
Unfortunately this is a result of the "culture of mediocrity" which i feel has become acceptable today. Today it seems perfectly acceptable to slow jog/walk these larger races, waving to the crowd and try to get on the TV usually accompanied by being patronised by Hazel Irvine with that stupid der-der-der-der-da-da der tune humming in the background.
The work culture of this country has changed beyond recognition. How many people have the time and even the energy to put in the hours needed by a championship runner.
Add to that the changing face of the British family, where a husband/partner is required to take a share of domestic duties.
A runner who is suffiently dedicated to put in the necessary hours will probably find him/herself in relationship difficulties.
This I feel is the real threat to our athletic heritage
Football on the other hand is a very different matter. I'd be interested to know how many people make their living soley from football compared to those who make a living out of running.
A shame some people have to throw out phrases like `small minded' and `pompous' at those they disagree with.
The more the merrier as far as I'm concerned.
There's nothing wrong with wanting to run a pb @ FLM, just as there's nothing wrong with doing it for charity or a on-off personal challenge. There's room for all of us, it's just a question of striking the right balance.
However, we missed an important point. I don't think anybody starting to run at his/her 30s can be world champ (unless is at a veterans competition). Who has to be the champions of the future are those starting running at earlier ages, can be 8 can be 18, can be even 20 something. And for that kind of people fun runs are as important as a day out watching 40,000 running the FLM, including people suffering happyly at mile 23 to reach their goal.
My beef was that it was being suggested that people who were slow/walked/brought their dogs were spoiling the events. They aren't, they're joining in, adding to the spectacle and probably raising lots of money for charity.
I guess the 'spoiling' concerns come from: 1) they take places away from people who actually want to run and 2) they get in the way of faster runners.
There is no good way of dealing with either of these. The latter will never be dealt with all the while people are over-ambitious and dishonest or inexperienced. It will always happen. As for restricting the race entry places to the faster runners - how will the beginners ever get into running? Lots of beginners run barely faster than a walk at the start, but the success of completing the course incites them onto bigger and better (and faster) things. For some, like Michael Watson, even walking the course can be a far bigger achievement than us mere runners can comprehend.
Or is there another way that they spoil things that I haven't grasped?
And I apologise for the "small-minded" comment - my irritation got the better of me.
I guess the 'spoiling' concerns come from: 1) they take places away from people who actually want to run and 2) they get in the way of faster runners.<<quote
That's a bit of a contradictory quote there.
Slower runners per se are not the problem. Runners who knowingly put themselves down as being faster than they really are spoil the enjoyment of others. They are not necessarily the slowest runners.
As for taking places away from people who actually want to run, there's more than enough events to go around, missing out on one ballot or whatever isn't going to kill anyone.
I'm all for a spectrum of abilities taking part (I'm not an elite runner myself). It's the participation of those who show little consideration for other runners that I'm against.
This is all tangental to the original argument that the standard of running in this country has decreased. I'd go further and say that the standard of sport in this country has decreased. So I think the emergence of "fun runners" and charidee runners is a peripheral reason for declining running standards, I think it may be a wider societal attitude towards sport.
Now, where did I leave my "Open University" tank top ...
I started writing another long post and then thought, nah, who cares if british sport goes up the spout, there's a bottle of red wine with my name on it at home. Maybe it's attitudes like that which are turning the sport into what it is! :-)
1. Every mass race should have championchips
2. Stagered starts of 1-5 mins depending how many were in each start pen.
3. Those who put down their time to start in the front pens should have to provide proof of time like for the GFA at FLM.
I know this is sort of what happens at FLM and others but with staggered starts and championchips everyone would have a bit more space to run and accurate times.
Maybe then all would be happy!
Obviously, there'll always be those who will try to beat the system, but it would work better than what's happening in mass races now.
I for one would love to continue to enter and run fast times (for me)in mass races where the support of fantastic crowds could help me to a PB-yes going for a time is important for me! But I've stopped entering these races (apart from FLM and Bristol this year, both chipped races) because I refuse to get worked up by inconsiderate runners who start too far forward.
I don't feel I'm missing anything really as I run about 25 smaller races a year and know by doing so I'm supporting the backbone of running-the smaller clubs!
Mass events are great, but it's the club races throughout the country that to me is what running is about!
Each and every one to their own!!
Happy running:o)
I will be running FLM 2004 for Parkinsons as it is a tribute to my Grandfather and it will be my first marathon. I ran the Gorilla Run and collected money as again, even tho it was only 7k, it was a challenge.