Why have standards fallen..

13

Comments

  • So, is it a bad thing?

    Does anyone have any stats on total numbers of entrants in races? Has this increased?

    If more people are running, full stop, even though less are achieving previous elite times, isn't that a good thing? If more people are running for fitness rather than competition, isn't that a good thing.

    I guess we could also blame the big corporates, Tesco for the race for life (which I really think should be called run for life not race because it isn't really a race), Nike for the Nike 10K, Bupa for the Great Run's, Flora for their involvment in popularising the London Marathon. Because if the money invested in running is to be spread so thinly between 30,000+ runners then there's not much left over for improving the elite/GFA/Club Level training.

    But if Nike can inspire 30,000 people to get up on a Sunday morning and drag themselves around 10K, maybe even having done some training for it, isn't that a good thing in general. And why would Nike want to put that same funding into helping a couple of dozen athletes get to the top, I mean, they wouldn't get nearly as much publicity from it. They'd rather have a captive audience of 30,000 than 3 dozen, 30,000 people to buy the specially structured shoes that you HAVE to have to run these day, the HRM, the GPS, the wicking clothing etc.

    So maybe the question is how to get the money into club level sport, maybe some of you who have the knowledge and the ability to make a difference should stop complaining about declining standards, accept that maybe for yourselves it's too late, but start thinking about ways to make sure that the next generation of kids can return to those glory days.

    So, as you can see, I don't really know where I stand on this one. Just though I'd add my comments! Interesting thread as always.

  • FYI Here's the list of Race for life Venues for next year, each venue has 1 or more events with between 2 and 5000 women running, I bet there weren't that many people in the UK did a 5K in 1970?
    Aberdeen
    Abertsywyth
    Aylesbury
    Bangor
    Barnstaple
    Barrow-in-Furness
    Basildon
    Basingstoke
    Bath
    Battersea
    Bedford
    Belfast
    Birmingham (Central)
    Birmingham (East)
    Blackburn
    Blackheath
    Blackpool
    Eden
    Bolton
    Boston
    Bournemouth
    Bradford
    Braintree District
    Brecon
    Bridlington
    Brighton
    Bristol
    Bromley
    Bromsgrove
    Burnley
    Bury-St-Edmunds
    Cambridge
    Canterbury
    Cardiff
    Carlisle
    Castle Donnington
    Chelmsford
    Cheltenham
    Cheshire (Tatton Park)
    Chester
    Chichester
    Chipping Norton
    Cotswold
    Cleethorpes
    Colchester
    Colchester (Lower Castle Park)
    Coventry
    Crawley
    Croydon
    Cwmbran
    Darlington
    Derby
    Doncaster
    Dorchester
    Dumfries
    Dundee
    Durham
    Ealing & Hounslow
    Eastbourne
    Edinburgh
    Edinburgh (South Queensferry)
    Enfield
    Epping Forest
    Epsom
    Evesham
    Exeter (Haven Banks)
    Exeter (Westpoint)
    Falkirk
    Falmouth
    Fife
    Folkestone
    Gateshead
    Gillingham
    Glasgow
    Gloucester
    Guernsey
    Guildford
    Hampstead
    Harlow
    Harrogate
    Hastings
    Haverfordwest
    Hemel Hempstead
    Hereford
    High Wycombe
    Huddersfield
    Hull
    Inverness
    Ipswich
    Ipswich South
    Irvine Isle of Man
    Isle of Thanet
    Isle of Wight
    Jersey
    Kempton
    Kings Lynn
    Knowsley
    Lake District
    Lancaster
    Leeds (Roundhay Park)
    Leeds (Temple Newsam)
    Leicester
    Leigh
    Lincoln
    Liverpool
    Llanelli
    Loughborough
    Luton
    Maidstone
    Malvern
    Manchester
    Marlborough
    Middlesbrough
    Milton Keynes
    Newbury
    Newcastle
    Newport
    Northamptonshire
    Norwich
    Nottingham (Central)
    Nottingham (Holme Pierrepont)
    Oldham
    Oxford
    Paddock Wood
    Peak District
    Penzance
    Perth
    Peterborough
    Plymouth
    Pontefract
    Poole
    Portsmouth
    Preston
    Pulborough
    Reading
    Regents Park
    Rhyl
    Richmond
    Rotherham
    Salisbury
    Sandwell
    Scarborough
    Sheffield
    Shepton Mallet
    Sherborne
    Shrewsbury
    Skipton
    Slough
    Somerset (Street)
    Southampton
    Southend-on-Sea
    St Albans
    St Helens
    Stafford
    Stamford
    Stirling
    Stockport
    Stoke-on-Trent
    Stratford-upon-Avon
    Sunderland
    Swansea
    Swindon
    Taunton
    Telford
    Thetford
    Thirsk
    Torbay
    Truro
    Warrington
    Warwick
    Watford
    Welwyn & Hatfield
    Weston-super-Mare
    Wigan
    Winchester
    Windsor
    Wirral
    Wolverhampton
    Worcester
    Wrexham
    York
  • Point taken Red Haired Girl - it's great that so many more people are taking part but just watched our TV news. There was a big piece on some 50 plus NZ women who ran New York in over 8 hours - much publicity and a lot of congratulations. We also had a guy in the race who ran 2.15 - he did not get a mention.
  • RHGDU - I think you have missed the point the thread asks 'why have standards fallen' and is not asking about the numbers of people taking part or race for life dates/venues.
  • I don't think the FLM does anything to encourage the faster runners - particularly the good club runners - 'in my day' we had 7 or 8 sub 2:50 marathon runners (including a 2:29) and we all trained together - whether we could have trained harder, I guess so - certainly we could have trained smarter - but nowadays - the marathon seems to be more geared to the very elite and the very slow - One year only the first 10,000 broke 4 hours and that is, out of a field of what 35,000 -is and excuse me for saying it, crap.

    Maybe there are just not that many good runners around -
  • RHG - I think you are right but VO2 is also right - it's good that these events get people running (I do object to R4Ls women only policy but leaving that aside) but that doesn't invalidate people who want to run or talk about running as a competitive sport rather than a participation event.

    Someone said on an events thread yesterday (Dovedale Dash) that where you finish in this kind of race doesn't really matter - I don't mind other people thinking like that - it's nice that people get what they want out of a race - but to a fair few where you finish or how fast is important. I admit when I hear someone say they've just completed a race I always ask them what their time was rather than whether they enjoyed it.
  • Interesting thread.

    There's no inherent reason why increased participation should lead to declining standards at the top end, and obviously more participation in sport is a positive thing in its own right. However, mass participation has created some knock-on effects for runners at higher levels.

    1. The culture of low mileage training. A couple of years ago, a guy from Nike came to my club to do gait analyses. When I got on the treadmill, he asked me what kind of weekly mileage I did. He was surprised when I said 70-80. He must have asked that question to a lot of club runners, and it says a lot that he was surprised by numbers like those. Anecdotal evidence I know, but still interesting. I'm far from elite standard, yet I'm one of only two people at my club that I know have ever run over 100m per week in training. Most people assume that this kind of volume is (and I quote) "crazy" and certain to produce injury.

    2. The assumption that training for a race is something that you do in a block of time ranging from 10-24 weeks. There is little sense of running your best races as something that takes years of preparation. It may be that many runners never discover how good they could be because they never put in the long-term conditioning work that might yield its real rewards 5 or 6 years down the line. I've recently been reading Coe and Martin's 'Better Training for Distance Runners'. The discussions of Seb Coe's training show that there was always a long-term plan in which current performances are seen as steps on the road to better ones in the future rather than as ends of themselves. In contrast, many of the senior men at my club are still running almost the exact same times that they were 5 or 6 years ago. That lack of progression is worrying.

  • Speaking to a friend who has been running since the early 70s standards have been declining steadily ever since. When he was at his peak running 48 mins for 10 miles (though he admits he's not sure how ccurate the courses were) there were very few road races so it meant everyone would travel to one race and competition was fierce. Nowadays it is not unusual for runners to avoid a race in order to avoid their rivals and they can run another race nearby.

    Those who consider themselves decent club runners today are really mediocre compared to 15 years ago. Just look at race times to see this is true.

    A lot of runners don't want to put the effort in, it's easier tojog a training run than it is to really work hard and there's always tomorrow.

    Schools were a breeding ground for athletics as well as other sports but sport there is virtually non-existent.

    The Government Sport for all attitude has encouraged a culture of mediocrity rather than one of excellence. This means many soon get bored with trying to keep fit when there is no real goal to aim for.
  • My sister's gone to Romania to teach English in a school. My mother was telling me that, "she doesn't have to teach before 12 because the children do four hours of PE".

    I said, "Oh right, per week?"

    "No, every day."
  • They did 4 hours of sport in Nazi Germany as well.
  • U/A - I think there was some research in Scandinavia that linked a large amount of sport with academic success - so maybe there is something in it that the current generation in the UK are missing.

    Stories about how standards have dropped abound - I recently did a 5 mile race that has been going several years and some of the older runners were spouting statistics on how standards in the event have changed radically.

    OK so the evidence heavily supports the hypothesis that standards have indeed dropped so what are we going to do about it ? :-)
  • BR - Where did you heard that? Complete nonsene.
  • WardiWardi ✭✭✭
    BR.. the 1983 10 miler I mentioned in the first post. Unfortunately our club wasn't formed at this time, though this race was the catalyst. The race was organised by a number of local helpers including 'the Methodists'. The course was accurate. Unfortunately no age or gender results were recorded, just names, times and positions. The race was won by Steve Anders in 48:07, 2nd A.Dewhurst (Holmfirth) in 48:33.

    In 1989 Colin Moore, International standard runner from Bingley Harriers came along to try and break Anders' course record. He couldn't do it, 48:37, and acknowledged that the CR was a corker. It was never broken.

    BTW, our club V60 has an England vest for a home countries International tournament in Dublin this weekend. His recent half-m at Selby turned out to be the 3rd fastest V60 half in GB this year, hence his call up. Very chuffed he was.
  • AQA textbook for GCSE History giving a timetable for a girl's school in Nazi Germany. Sport from 2pm to 6pm daily Monday to Saturday.
  • LOL That must be right then :)

    My dad was born 1930 and I can assure you his PE was maybe 4hrs per week, like most schools. There is difference between propaganda and reality! Ie. projecting a picture of healthy kids and what was reality. This may have been at a few schools only!
  • I think the source quoted was more for teenage kids, the boys being trained for the army and the girls for motherhood. Your dad might have been a bit young for the 4 hours per day.
  • I don't think BR's post is relevant. The 80's wasn't in the 'dark ages' but I agree things have changed significantly since the 'war'. Mcd's and cars dominated even if less so than today. I do think the poding club has something to answer for but I also think the traning was more intense and less geared towards high mileage and more of the higher intensity training runs; with a few obvious exceptions.

    I agree with Tom's post in most respects and BR's point about so called stress and the demands of work really were not there in the 80's,(even if teacher's working hours have plummeted!)


    BR Dinner break. You mean beer beak don't you:-)
  • "I don't think BR's post is relevant. The 80's wasn't in the 'dark ages' but I agree things have changed significantly since the 'war'. Mcd's and cars dominated even if less so than today."

    What I said was that the people running in the 1980s were not brought up on McDs and cars as kids, giving them a higher base of fitness. People of my age who were kids in the 80s were finding these more prevalent which may help explain the lower level of fitness across the board for people in their 30s. I would guess it's even worse for people in their 20s as you add in mass computer game ownership and fears for child safety into the mix.

    I was lucky in that respect as I was allowed to come and go on my bike - that was my hobby - cycling all over Hull and district with no obvious fears for my safety. I don't know if I'd be as happy if one of my kids take themself off for a whole day's exploring like I used to.
  • DustinDustin ✭✭✭
    Great thread, and frankly don't know the answer, but I believe it to be the culture prevalent as BR amongst others have eluded to, with a lack of emphasis on sport for youngsters.

    Can't remember who posted it earlier, but part of the reason I gave up athletics when I left school (early-mid 80s) was that despite running 2.15 for the 800m I struggled to figure in the top 3 at sports day - that and the lack of enthusiasm from Medway AC to any newcomers.
  • As a father of a 15 year old (a time when you are probably deciding what to do with your life) I think there may be another factor. In my daughter's year the best athletes (and some are obviously destined for elite standard) are tracked on to professional rugby (we are in Gloucestershire). I think the same thing happens with professional football in other places.

    Dare I say that for a young teenager distance running may not seem as glamorous?
  • I think with football you are probably already in the system long before you reach 15 - not sure when they can sign forms (14 maybe) but certainly by 11 the best players are linked to clubs, and outstanding kids could easily be tracked from the age of 7 or 8. Bit of a tangent but I think it's dangerous to think you can predict a kid will become an elite standard athlete - I've played plenty of football with lads who were on the books with league clubs, a lot simply don't progress. Similarly with cycling - I train with a guy who was the national junior 10 mile TT champ - OK so he's still pretty good but nothing outstanding.
  • I should add that i was playing football for pub teams - so you can see these lads must have got worse with age if anything!
  • B Rubble, but in Gloucester you have Dave Farrows group (and without courting too much controversy) which contains some of the very best young athletic talent in the UK.
  • There seem to be numerous different strands going on across this thread.
    The one that began it concerning the decline in standard of a particular local road race might be a bit misleading. This doesn't necessarily indicate a decline in standard - it could just as easily be interpreted as the decline in status of the particular local road race - maybe events like BMCs o the track are where the best of a regions MD/LD runners go to face off rather than local road races.

    The decline in 20th/50th/100th in national rankings and the dropping of standards for GFA are however more accurate measures of the decline that still need explaining.

    I'm not sure that it is true to say that club runners set themselves lower standards becausethey think that 4hrs is now a good marathon time rather than 3hrs. Those at the sharp end, aiming for the 2:30 type times strike me in their attitudes as those most committed to constant improvement rather than feeling satisfaction at their lead over the majority - they move from achieving one target to wanting to set a new one. Outsiders may see anyone doing sub4 as "really fit" but does this really affect attitudes within athletic community?

    Whether they still suffer from lack of competition in their environment is another matter. I'd like more people around my standard to push me but we are relatively few in my area. Of those who I could train with, we all have different ways of training - eg some guys won't come to track because of a history of injuries and prefer to train off road or we aim at different distances. I'm not sure doing a type of training geared to someone other than myself just in order to be pushed by them in training would have helped me improve more than I have by prioritising what I need in the way of elements in my training (although within that I appreciate it when I have someone to push me.)

    While this may not have a great effect in hindering/helping individual club runners improve through training, the point about participation at the important age for training to have an effect, rather than having large numbers of vets in the sport is valid. If there are fewer young competitive runners, you will produce fewer elite times and sub-elite times - however smartly/intensely the individual runners are training.






  • The question of weight is an interesting one. It maybe a hindrance to those who come into the sport late with a sedentary background and carrying extra pounds, but to those who start young, and from whom the majority of elite and sub-elite are drawn, the very fact of doing sport at a young age probably means the weight of your average youngsters in athletic clubs varies a lot less from 20 years ago in comparison with that of the general population. So is it that important with regard to the elite level?

    So what plays into lower participation levels at the key ages? Bryn's post suggests it's not in the youngest age groups that the problem lies, but more in the U17 through university phase. Why does athletics have such a high dropout rate. Is it schools sports falling away at this age as league tables drive need for results at GCSE/A level? If so, why are other sports not affected? We have had two of our most successful post-war Olympic games in Athens and Sydney. England sides have won the Ashes and Rugby World Cup.
    Is it then the competition from other sports? I once heard Brendan Foster mention how popular Athletics at Gateshead was when guys like Cram and himself were running and that the leading local football sides on occasion moved their games to Friday night to avoid competing - an idea that seems laughable now. Do the multi-talented individuals choose other sports at 17/18? Does this explain why this decline seems predominantly male (popularity of rugby, football etc with men) and we have women's teams that perform well at World XC etc. Alternatively, is this male decline linked with increased familial responsibilities as Popsider and BR hinted at?

    Bryn further hinted at problems with age group training not being geared towards long-term progression. My own experience though is that not all youngsters are turned into speed demons with no aerobic endurance. I could pick runners in my club like that but equally others who run 3k times that their 800/1500 times wouldn't indicate as possible.

    Finally, I'd disagree that TV coverage is a great problem. There is greater availability now of Grand Prix/Marathon/road race coverage than ever before. Many people say that this is largely on niche channels rather than widely available, but this is true of athletics in all countries. I'd challenge anyone to give an example of any free to air broadcaster that covers Athletics better than the BBC in Europe or America and there is no resulting British dominance from this pretty decent coverage by Auntie.

  • Stuff to be thinking about at any rate...
  • MinksMinks ✭✭✭
    What a great and interesting thread. Along with all the other factors that have been mentioned, I do think that there are socio-economic elements to the decline in standards of long-distance running (marathoning in particular).

    Those who peaked in the early 80s would likely have been growing up at a time when (as well as getting out and about on bicycles, playing outdoors and probably walking to school) women tended to stay at home and raise the children. Financially this was possible because housing prices were lower and mortgages were generally sustainable on one salary. Men (and it was mostly men) were able to devote more time to training because their wives took a large proportion of the responsibility for childcare and managing the home.

    Fast forward 30 years or so and it's likely that to be able to afford the mortgage, the majority of couples both work full-time. To manage this whilst raising a family and running a home requires greater time commitment from both partners and this means less time to train. Couple this with other factors mentioned - more sedentary lifestyle generally, weight issues, greater kudos and earnings potential for talented youngsters of other sports such as football or rugby - and it perhaps shouldn't be any great surprise that the 'golden age' is past not present.
  • WardiWardi ✭✭✭
    Fair Points HC. The race in question was the now defunct Tadcaster 10. I nevertheless think the general trend downwards is true. I was talking to a couple of decent vets from Hartlepool recently who were astonished at the decline in road racing in the last 20 years.. 'I used to run 32:** for 10k and finished 20th in those days' was a typical remark.

    BTW are you still running for the Acorn club?

    Another interesting perspective Minks, who will be staying in when you two become a threesome? {o:
  • Yes I am still running for Acorn on the roads and Rowntree on Track/XC. May be my last year in York coming up though as I'll finish my MA in September next year and work may well take me elsewhere.
Sign In or Register to comment.