At the risk of being uncharitable, why so many running spots given to charity?

David - if your local running club is registered with UKA they can apply for a certain number of places dependent on the size fo the club. My local club gets 5 places as it provides marshalls and another 5 club places but we have 500 members, so its another ballot process. But no one ever said life was fair! It will make getting a plce even sweeter!

And as for the charities having to pay 10% of the £2k to VLM (actually I think its more), this probably represents a smaller figure that the charity uses in 'admin' costs! I worked for an international charity in Africa for 6 years and you'd amazed how little of your fiver you donate actually reached the 'ground' as it were!

But good luck anyway!

X post with Wilkie on the club places

David Falconer 3 wrote (see)

Don't get me wrong, Im a big fan of charity and the good it does, but it does seem like they get an awfully high number of ticket allocations, and while Im all for people who don't bother to train one iota but because they have lots of friends and contacts can raise the several thousand they need so they can trot around the course in 6 hours, going slower than I could walk it ....... seems a tad unfair to those who want to take part that might make some token effort at actually trying to 'run' the marathon but dont have access to a huge workforce or friends that can dump several grand into your kitty.

I do think your comments are a tad unfair -
I got a charity place for the last VLM (2012), it was the first marathon i had ever done. it took me forever to raise the £1600 required for Asthma UK, and a lot of effort, It also took me 6 hours to complete (running a lot of the way!) and i trained very hard. (I also completed it on 3 hours sleep and on the worst day of the month possible but thats beside the point)
I hate the attitude that just because its a charity place, people are not trying hard, and also hate the inference that because it takes 6 hours you have done it slower than a walk (how is that possible anyway?) Have you tried walking at a pace of 4 miles an hour for 6 hours? i think you mean slower than you could jog it would be more accurate?

lol Max's mum ....... now youve made me feel really small ..... alls Im saying is that say take my particular case, I work as a contractor, so I constantly flit between different work places doing IT stuff for them. I dont think management would be very happy about contractors sending out company wide emails. So its not feasible for some of us to raise £2k or whatever for a place. Also I guess just over 4mph for 6 hours is a lot (although you are taking my words at literal value when I say walk the entire way, perhaps walk 90% of the way and jog the other 10% is a more accurate description of a 6 hour journey). In the gym, I regularly walk around 4mph in between sprints, so you can definitely walk at this pace, but like you say maintaining that pace for 6 hours might be another issue, but you have to admit you could definitely walk most of the race and do a very light jog for the rest to make it in under 6 hours.

why sub 4 SR.........thats pretty slow for a regular runner..............i think it should be sub 3............

and for a non runner to run/walk in 6/7 hours takes as much of a challenge as for a regular runner to runsub 4.............none of them are going to win so neither of them should feel entitled tio take place

Sussex Runner - I like your idea but  wouldn't wave starts at VLM be easier? Sub four hours start at 9, post 4 hours at 9:30 - that way you could squeeze another 15000 places in? Same overheads so VLM makes more profit, slightly slower club runners get places and the charities still get to fleece everyone

did you watch the snowdon marathon coverage this year........2000 runners........showed the 3rd place man and the second place woman walk...............they still did impressive times and got the silverware at the end..........

its the first to finish .rules of the race say nothing about walking

clearly not small enough.
in the gym you walk at 4mph, for ooh, about a couple of minutes?

most of the miles i did were under 12 mins. i ran the first half actually then put in walk breaks for the rest (and spent 30 minutes q-ing for the loos 4 times as well)  but as you are clearly out to put people down i see no further point is discussing it.
If you want to do a marathon without charity runners in it, then do one, no-one is stopping you, stop wingeing and get on with it. . 

Max's mum - You are allowing yourself to get worked up when I have no intention of offending you. In fact if you had posted earlier that your time included 4 * 30 minute breaks queing for the toilet, then it would have made more sense to say you ran most of the way.

Tell you what, next post I make is going to be about politics, that way no-one can be offended.

Sussex Runner - lol ...... I think I'll discover the magic of Bognor Regis in 2013 instead!

sorry SL......you could say the same arguement for sub 10 not being slow as the world record is sub 10 as well..3:59 is slow..............just the same as 5:59 is slow..when guys can run it in little over 2 hours.we are all slow runners

.........

Z-list celebs.  Hmmm... I'd like to think the organisers deeply regret giving Jade Goody a place, considering her attitude is now seemingly held up as an "example" of a charity runner's approach.  Waste of space.

No, the point stands - equating charity runners with a casual attitude towards training and not taking the race seriously is unfair.  Maybe you can broadly categorise charity runners into two groups:
(a) People desperate to run the marathon, who to some degree or other begrudgingly go down the charity route to gain a place.
(b) Charity fund raisers who choose the marathon as a genuine challenge which they hope will attract lots of sponsors.

By your own admission, group (a) runners are pretty much like you, .i.e. keen runners wanting to do a marathon, except with different circumstances meaning they're more likely to accept going down the charity route.  So no reason either way that they should disrespect the distance. Group (b) people are in it to raise money for a charity. Chances are they've chosen to run a marathon because it is a genuine challenge, and more likely to make people put their hands in their pockets than sitting in a bath full of baked beans, a sponsored silence or a Race4Life.  Why wouldn't these people prepare themselves just as well as any others for the task ahead?

Anyway, cracked record... get quicker and claim yourself a GFA place or go and do another marathon. 

Sussex Runner (NLR) wrote (see)

Don't worry David. Some people on here are prepared to go the extra mile to take offence at something. To be fair Max's Mum is usually made of sterner stuff.

This type of thread usually does tend to get a bit offend/offended which is why I've been a bit tongue in cheek about it. Sound off all you like but nothing will change. Go for a local marathon instead.

thanks sussex (i think?) not sure if that was a compliment or not?
I should have ignored the thread really shouldnt i, must be feeling unwell this morning.
was thinking of going for the Purbeck Marathon next year, hopefully that classes as a proper marathon, not a charity runner in sight, although i dont think i'll be anywhere near Steve Ways time of 2:56 especially given all the hills. I'll have to make sure i walk all of it in order to come in under the 7 hour limit.