How is our sport in the shitter? I don't seem to notice all these strange phenomenons that all you people do that tell you our sport "isn't popular enough" or "doesn't get enough coverage." In fact, I can't even relate to this sentiment. I just run and enjoy it, and I'm constantly around other people who enjoy it as well, and there are always plenty of fans and competitors at races. Please explain how this or anything indicates that our sport is "in the shitter."
Things that aren't "in the shitter":
NASCAR
McNuggets
liposuction
Bud Light
Casinos
WWE
Type II diabetes
Lady Gaga
Facebook "friends"
Clown wrote:
[quote]Contrversity wrote:
Since wind isn't a consideration with invalidating marathon records, a fast course could be set up following the rules of keeping the start and end points within 30% of the total distance by running with a tailwind for 17 miles, turning around and finishing against the wind for the last 9.2.
Welcome to the Rotterdam Marathon.
The entire premise of this thread is false. People are not talking about the marathon at all. They are not turned off by a wind aided marathon. They, like any other average sports fan knows that wind aided times in our sport don't count. An the average Joe understands why wind aided times don't count.
They are not talking about this. Not in airports, not in work conversations, not in a house, not to a mouse. Not here or there, not anywhere. They do not talk, they don't give a damn. They are not talking about it Sam I am.
haha YO wrote:
You have no idea how many people who are usually not running fans are actually talking about running this week, going on and on about the record. You have no idea how much it turns them off to running when you have to say "Well it doesn't count because some people came up with some rules that make it inelgible, there was a tailwind, it drops some (despite Boston being well known to Joe Average for Heartbreak Hill)" Call it the record. Part of marathoning is about getting lucky with conditions. Geb set his record with damn good pacing and perfectly cool weather, you gotta get lucky.
This argument could also be used to justify using steroids in baseball, for example. There is no question that the homerun feats of McGwire and Sosa during the 1998 season brought more excitement to baseball as did Barry Bond's subsequent steroid-fueled feats. I guess by your reasoning, baseball should just decide that the ends justifies the means...Why not allow Bolt, for example, to run 9.2 with a big tailwind and have it count as a world record? I am sure your average moron would temporarily get excited about this if he heard about it, but remember, once a record is achieved with the perfect storm, it may not be easily surpassed for some time, thus negating to some extent the frequency of these ostensible collective orgasms which you impute to the masses upon hearing about new world records.
I think the sport is doing fine.
my name is whaaa? wrote:
How is our sport in the shitter? I don't seem to notice all these strange phenomenons that all you people do that tell you our sport "isn't popular enough" or "doesn't get enough coverage." In fact, I can't even relate to this sentiment. I just run and enjoy it, and I'm constantly around other people who enjoy it as well, and there are always plenty of fans and competitors at races. Please explain how this or anything indicates that our sport is "in the shitter."
Well, let's see. Bowling is on f***ing ESPN every god-damn weekend and we're lucky if some amatuers with handheld cameras show up to major events like Mt. Sac and the Payton Jordan Invitational. If that isn't being in the shitter I don't know what is.
chet wrote:
This argument could also be used to justify using steroids in baseball, for example. There is no question that the homerun feats of McGwire and Sosa during the 1998 season brought more excitement to baseball as did Barry Bond's subsequent steroid-fueled feats. I guess by your reasoning, baseball should just decide that the ends justifies the means.
Yeah. Before you know it MLB will start counting wind-aided home runs. The idea of scoring a home run off a hit ball that wouldn't have made it out of the park without a tailwind is just crazy talk. That would just ruin the game.
13.1 with the wind = 1:01.30, against the wind, 1:05???
haha YO wrote:
my name is whaaa? wrote:How is our sport in the shitter? I don't seem to notice all these strange phenomenons that all you people do that tell you our sport "isn't popular enough" or "doesn't get enough coverage." In fact, I can't even relate to this sentiment. I just run and enjoy it, and I'm constantly around other people who enjoy it as well, and there are always plenty of fans and competitors at races. Please explain how this or anything indicates that our sport is "in the shitter."
Well, let's see. Bowling is on f***ing ESPN every god-damn weekend and we're lucky if some amatuers with handheld cameras show up to major events like Mt. Sac and the Payton Jordan Invitational. If that isn't being in the shitter I don't know what is.
You missed the point. The point is, I don't f***ing care. I like my sport the way it is, and I don't need for it to be more popular. I don't care if average joe wants to watch a marathon on Sunday. I don't care if he's turned off by the distance events at track meets. I just don't f***ing care. Why are you so insecure that you feel the need to sell running to everyone? I love it, and I'm around people that love it a lot. And when I go to track meets, the competitors and the die-hard fans are all I really care to see there. I don't care if "average joe" is sitting in the stands with his beer cheering his ass off. I just don't care. Now shut up.
my name is whaaa? wrote:
The point is, I don't f***ing care... I just don't care. Now shut up.
Then stop posting. Posting makes it look like you care, and that's not hip these days.
botway wrote:
my name is whaaa? wrote:The point is, I don't f***ing care... I just don't care. Now shut up.
Then stop posting. Posting makes it look like you care, and that's not hip these days.
Don't care about that either.
my name is whaaa? wrote:
Why are you so insecure that you feel the need to sell running to everyone?
Good question. This sport needs to be saved from the people who are trying to "save" it.
Do you want running to be popular because you are insecure? Why are things so out of perspective? What do world records mean if we are not comparing apples to apples?
How do we measure the value of a sport? Popularity? Money? Judging by active participation, and number of organized races, running is more popular than it ever has been. The value of running is not measured by money, or number of followers, but for most people, by number of seconds (or minutes) lost, or by number of pounds (or kilos or stones) lost.
Is sport for the athlete, or for the fan? Why should I care if I bring entertainment value to people whose hardest choice in life is whether to drink Bud or Bud Light?
Why is the world record any concern for more than a handful of people? I could see why Geoffrey Mutai might want his Boston time recognized. But why does anyone else care about which world record should be "officially" recognized by the IAAF (or the IAFF?)? And why does Joe Six Pack get excited about which marathon god he should worship, as if it makes a difference worshiping an Ethiopian 2:04 versus a Kenyan 2:03?
What is the advantage of bringing "our sport" out of the shitter? What is the upside? What do people really expect running should be? I always thought running was a personal investment for a personal reward. Does anyone think that running will ever exceed bigger spectator sports like football, soccer, basketball, baseball, cricket, rugby, NASCAR, ...? Being a fan of a sport usually involves some vicarious element of having been, or potentially thinking you could have been, or even wishing you could have been good at the sport. For me, running is not about pleasing people who might want to watch me. Too many people suck at running to care about those who don't.
Just picking nits here, but corked bats are actually a disadvantage. The only "experiment" to test this was on myth busters a few years ago.
Total Knob wrote:
Those damn rules spoil everything, I'm going to write to the MLB - why shouldn't I be able to use a corked bat and hit 95 home runs in a season!
Clown wrote:
Contrversity wrote:It's not retarted.
Without these rules, we could have courses that start on top of a mountain and end at the beach.
Or we could have courses that are flat but ALWAYS with a strong tailwind because they are point to point. For example, I was on vacation at a beach town and I ran every day for a week up and down the beach. The tailwind was sick as I ran northbound. Every single day. The wind direction never changed. It gave me a 5% advantage with tailwind and a 5% disadvantage against the wind (for a total difference of 10%). I thought, "Wow, they could put on a FAST marathon here. If only point to point courses were allowed."
Since wind isn't a consideration with invalidating marathon records, a fast course could be set up following the rules of keeping the start and end points within 30% of the total distance by running with a tailwind for 17 miles, turning around and finishing against the wind for the last 9.2.
That wouldnt help. 9.2miles against 20mph winds will basically negate the 17miles with the 20mph at your back. The same wind doesn't benefit you as much as slow you down (I read it in RF and am gonna side with it)
Although maybe they could design a course that has the last bit that would be in the wind shielded so its not windy.