fat buddha wrote (see)
around and around and around this thread goes it's like fucking groundhog day in here now enough I say - let the thread die (despite this post prolonging it!)
I'm sure someones said that already....
RicF wrote (see)
Being a faster runner than someone else does not mean they are better than the other runner, it just means they are a faster runner. Its not the same as being a better person. Its context. The ones who raise more money are better at raising money than those who don't. As for builders having to lug weights all day, one of the fastest runners ever was a guy called John Downes who ran 100 miles a week around labouring and building all day. 49 mins for 10 miles at 38 years of age, 13 mins something for 5000m.
Lets just bold the next bit RicF wrote: "Its not the same as being a better person. Its context. "
The point, I think, being; for a lot of people the acheivement is just to get round the course (as I'm sure it is the first time anyone does a marathon), for, more experienced, others it is to get faster. The two acts are almost entirely different. Sneering at one another is not very friendly... and as such will always provoke a bad reaction... or 12 pages of tit for tat.
mg83 wrote (see)
Lets just bold the next bit RicF wrote: "Its not the same as being a better person. Its context. "The point, I think, being; for a lot of people the acheivement is just to get round the course (as I'm sure it is the first time anyone does a marathon), for, more experienced, others it is to get faster. The two acts are almost entirely different. Sneering at one another is not very friendly... and as such will always provoke a bad reaction... or 12 pages of tit for tat.
12 pages of 'tit for tat' that includes your only 3 posts !! might only be 11 otherwise.
This isn't about sneering or belittling, it started off about manners and turned into amongst other things a discussion about finishing/covering distance/running/racing and valid points were made. My 9 year old daughter can walk 13 miles. I, as of last Sunday, know that I can now run 12.44 miles, therefore I will run my first Half Marathon next Sunday. Had I not got to the point where I believed I could run it, I personally would not have taken part. Now I am fairly confident that I will run the distance and I will cherish the medal that I hope to get from running my first half, would my 9 year old be entitled to one because she can walk the distance, of course not. On the other hand, those that complete marathons and raise vital cash for worthwhile cash have my admiration, I would much rather train than ask for sponsorship and I find that harder to do than the training so those guys clearly have a place in all of this, but saying that you have completed a marathon or similar when you clearly intend to walk a significant amount, in my opinion is not the same. I have no doubt that I could walk/run a marathon right this minute but I wont. If the day comes that I can run one then I will, and at that point take my medal and hang it right alongside the one from my frst Half.
Those that finish in front of me at a race do so only because of their good fortune to have better genetics or time to train more.
Those that finish behind me eat my shorts.
I think a fair number of people train properly, dedicate the necessary time to the task and know that a pan flat course in fine weather is not likely to be a problem for them. For those aiming to "just get round the course", fair play to them if that is their target, I will certainly not think less of someone on that basis, but some of them will still get round better than others. Be it natural ability, better prepared or willing to suffer a little bit more... they ARE better at getting round the course.
Anyway, last from me on this.
Re: Rich Jackson:
Yep, my only 3 posts. Have lurked a bit for a short while - thought there was some interesting issues raised amongst the sniping (from many corners).
Personally, I'm along the same lines of thinking as you, I dropped out of the first half I signed up for because I knew I would be able to do it justice (probably a mix of lack of confidence and training - also 2hr drive away). Ive now done 4 marathons with a PB of just under 4hrs, which isn't a time thats going to set the world on fire, it is what it is - the time speaks for itself no need to decide if its running, walking jogging.
My point being if you run 2.40, good for you, the time speaks for itself. As does 3, 3.30, 5, 6, 7 etc. 7hrs may be a fully walking time - but its still better than the 95% (or whatever it is) of people who dont do it at all.
For the first time I went down to actually see the London Marathon.
I was standing outside Buck House at the 300 yard point before the runners turn right to meet royalty.
I saw a quick glimpse of the winner of the mens race and the first British guy home as well as the womens wheelchair race.
Things I saw and heard and felt;
1. The wheelchair athletes go at an unearthly speed and may in fact be in league with the devil.
2. Running at 4.20 pace really doesnt look fast even when your spitting distance from the runner.
3. That bald bloke in his late 40's running with small steps hardly swinging his arms is according to his friend capable of running a 2:20 marathon but has a chest infection this marathon so will be happy with his finish time of 2:30.
4.Being able to finish the London Marathon before the little orange cones are taken away at the 300 yards to go point should be the only deciding factor of who is allowed to have and raise children.
5. Finally any runner who can get home before the afore mentioned little orange cones are taken away and still have the presence of mind and strength to blow a kiss to the crowd or raise their hands to applaud the crowd ( actually saw both)should be allowed to walk into Buck House and ask for tea and have it served while they post run stretch in the Grand Ball Room
I think getting round 26.2 miles on foot is an achievement, regardless of whether you run, walk or hop it. Or a mix of all three!
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 |