Why doesn't the slowest runner get a prize too!
I ran a race recently and was at the prize giving afterwards and thought, why don't we get prizes for being the last runner.
Surely we put it just as much effort as the quicker runners!
Not that I'm taking anything away from the quicker runners, just wish I would run that fast.
I know some people dread the idea of being last, and to make a fuss of them for it wouldn't make them feel better!
Besides, in longer races the winners have had their prizes and gone home long before I finish (and I'm not last!)
With a 5k that wouldn't be a problem, but a marathon might be a different matter
Too easy to cheat! Wouldn't it be agony to watch?!
Quite a few races do spot prizes - make a sprint for the line and collapse over the other side and you're quite likely to get one of those in my experience.
Actually, I would say on average the quicker runners have spent far more time training than those at the back so have made more 'effort'. That's not to say the relationship between effort and acheivement is straight forward.
Hard to say really - I've known some people to drop out when they realise they arent going to make the cut off - so usually all the finishers are within the limits. Certainly IMDE for the last 2 years - all the finishers were within the limit - they get the fireworks.
Yeah I suppose
Doesn't matter how much effort I put into training I am just a born plodder.
Mellifera: "I would say on average the quicker runners have spent far more time training than those at the back so have made more 'effort'"
I'm not convinced of that. As someone who's slow and does long distance my training sessions are often longer than those for someone quicker. If we are both doing 10 mile runs, then I'm going to be out twice as long as some quicker runners. Of course the actual figures will vary, but I'd say on average the slower you are the longer the time you spend training.
Well really most 'races' everyone gets a prize, like a medal, T-shirt or whatever. And of course there's going to be a few who really do live to train. I still think that you can't say that the people further forward have always spent longer training than the slow people down the back. If you've got two people using the same training plan then the slower person will have done just as much as the faster person, and spent a lot longer doing it.
And if 'the clue' is the word 'race' then maybe all of us who are not going to win should give up and go home. Be a lot less people doing a few 'races' then....
At the end of the day,running is meant to be a serious competitive sport. Just because-unlike most other competitive sports,where you can only compete against those of a similar standard to yourself-I can line up behind sub-30 10k or sub-65 Half Marathon runners,does not mean I am as worthy of a prize as they are.
The level of dedication and intensity of training put in by the elites is WAY beyond 99% of us.
That doesn't mean that anyone should "give up and go home".Sharing in the race experience and challenging your own PB's is reward in itself,but the prizes should be reserved for the winners.
I think they should be given roller skates or something
should we also have prizes for all those who are last in their age category too, Male and Female ?
and team prizes
seems a bit elitist to me to give just one prize to the absolute slowest.
and you'd need to have dope testing, just to make sure they hadn't taken some kind of performance impeding drug
Visit the official Runner's World page
Follow Runner's World on Twitter
Other Natmag-Rodale Sites
Run For Charity
About Runner's World
Runner's World is a publication of Hearst Magazines UK which is the trading name of The National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.
Website powered by: Immediate Media Company Ltd. | © Runner's World 2002-2013 |