Gotta love the parents who subtly mention to their kids’ high school coaches about how they know a bit about running because they’ve done a marathon. It’s always so awkward. lol
Or in the case of my high school, the coach's only running background was that he ran a marathon. Needless to say, our program wasn't very good.
I’m sure you handled the very good unsolicited advice better than me. It takes everything I’ve got to not say “that’s great that you want to help, but stfu and you might learn a thing or two.”
In my early corporate days, I was known as the young runner because I would run at lunch to get my doubles in. The co-workers knew I was good, but not really the extent of it. Zero concept of any difference between sub13, 14, 15, or even 16… or even sub12! About once a quarter, someone would say, “you know Steve in accounting us a big runner, too, right? In fact he’s done marathons and even qualified for Boston!” I would reply, “Yeah, I know! Steve is great wow wow wow!” But Steve was kind of a douche bc he knew what was what, but he’d play along like he was better! Oh well.
I would actually tell them that I welcomed help and that practice starts at 3:00 (when they were always working), that they could meet with the AD and sign some volunteer paperwork, and that they would have to talk to me about my system because there are many ways to coach runners but when a system works there has to be consistency.
One person helped and she ran with the girls and always deferred to me.
I struggle to tell the difference between my local college band and the new york philharmonic sometimes too. They both 'play' volin, so whats the difference?
To people on this board the difference between a 2:10 mara, 3:00 and 6:00 is three different worlds, but unless you exsist in the running space, they are all marathon runners. If you've got really fast at running to impress Sally from accounting, im sorry, you've wasted alot of time training, its not going to work.
Maybe someone will read that article and be inspired to start running and improve there lives, in which case, good on WashPo for posting it.
I'm not going to be sarcastic (as many are- that's the nature of typing an answer out). I see your point and I agree.
I think the initial issue was that the faster runners aren't, say- accommodated.
It's almost as if they're ignored so as not to "hurt" the slow runners.
It's at the point in my club where faster runners are leaving. Why?
My club is always complaining that they have too much money. We're non-profit we have to spend money.
Someone will suggest funding a trip to club nationals. The refuse because it will leave out the slow runners.
OK, they'll have free get togethers and club events because they benefit everyone.
The awards at club races are few- overall top 3, the winner in 10 year age groups.
We've asked to expand them- we get a very sarcastic- yeah, that will matter to about 10 people.
Without belaboring the point- it's to the point where it's unfair to the fast runner.
My friend has 6 marathons (all at 15:00/mile or slower). I don't care what your time is but there's a difference between walking/jogging 26 miles off of 10-15 mpw and training (even 40-50 mpw) and running to your potential.
That's not the point. You're right but that's not the point here.
And, bottom line, the point isn't something that actually matters but it does.
Yikes. Instead of talking about runners who are bad at running, maybe we need to be talking about writers who are terrible at writing. She's going to finish several marathons before you even get around to actually making a coherent point.
Thank you for admitting that you're wrong. I appreciate the humility. Maybe you just can't comprehend beyond the obvious. It takes thinking. Have a good day.
I struggle to tell the difference between my local college band and the new york philharmonic sometimes too. They both 'play' volin, so whats the difference?
To people on this board the difference between a 2:10 mara, 3:00 and 6:00 is three different worlds, but unless you exsist in the running space, they are all marathon runners. If you've got really fast at running to impress Sally from accounting, im sorry, you've wasted alot of time training, its not going to work.
Maybe someone will read that article and be inspired to start running and improve there lives, in which case, good on WashPo for posting it.
I'm not going to be sarcastic (as many are- that's the nature of typing an answer out). I see your point and I agree.
I think the initial issue was that the faster runners aren't, say- accommodated.
It's almost as if they're ignored so as not to "hurt" the slow runners.
It's at the point in my club where faster runners are leaving. Why?
My club is always complaining that they have too much money. We're non-profit we have to spend money.
Someone will suggest funding a trip to club nationals. The refuse because it will leave out the slow runners.
OK, they'll have free get togethers and club events because they benefit everyone.
The awards at club races are few- overall top 3, the winner in 10 year age groups.
We've asked to expand them- we get a very sarcastic- yeah, that will matter to about 10 people.
Without belaboring the point- it's to the point where it's unfair to the fast runner.
My friend has 6 marathons (all at 15:00/mile or slower). I don't care what your time is but there's a difference between walking/jogging 26 miles off of 10-15 mpw and training (even 40-50 mpw) and running to your potential.
Instead of whining about your running club striving to accommodate all members, why don't you and the other "serious" runners start your own exclusive club?
We all know that this is why the TCM was cancelled, not because it was going to be hot, but because too many 8 hour Tik-tok hobby joggers would have complained on line.
I struggle to tell the difference between my local college band and the new york philharmonic sometimes too. They both 'play' volin, so whats the difference?
To people on this board the difference between a 2:10 mara, 3:00 and 6:00 is three different worlds, but unless you exsist in the running space, they are all marathon runners. If you've got really fast at running to impress Sally from accounting, im sorry, you've wasted alot of time training, its not going to work.
Maybe someone will read that article and be inspired to start running and improve there lives, in which case, good on WashPo for posting it.
I'm not going to be sarcastic (as many are- that's the nature of typing an answer out). I see your point and I agree.
I think the initial issue was that the faster runners aren't, say- accommodated.
It's almost as if they're ignored so as not to "hurt" the slow runners.
It's at the point in my club where faster runners are leaving. Why?
My club is always complaining that they have too much money. We're non-profit we have to spend money.
Someone will suggest funding a trip to club nationals. The refuse because it will leave out the slow runners.
OK, they'll have free get togethers and club events because they benefit everyone.
The awards at club races are few- overall top 3, the winner in 10 year age groups.
We've asked to expand them- we get a very sarcastic- yeah, that will matter to about 10 people.
Without belaboring the point- it's to the point where it's unfair to the fast runner.
My friend has 6 marathons (all at 15:00/mile or slower). I don't care what your time is but there's a difference between walking/jogging 26 miles off of 10-15 mpw and training (even 40-50 mpw) and running to your potential.
One of us could be a ventriloquist and the other could be the dummy on this topic. I can imagine a running future where some marathoners stop at a hotel along the race course and finish the next day. And again, I don't have any problem with that, well, maybe at that extreme I would, unless those people are trying to pass off what they're doing as being no different from what people who have really pushed and challenged themselves are doing. I remember Ron Hill commenting on the masses in today's marathons to the effect of what they're doing is good but it's not the same thing he had done.
Funny how a person who remains fat is now considered more "inspirational" than someone who loses weight.
I know a girl who went from obese to fit over the course of a couple of years. She probably lost at least 100lbs and ended up being relatively fast, at least by local level marathon standards. When she made a proud post on IG showing a side-by-side of what she used to look like compared with what she looks like now, she got blasted for fat shaming.
If this girl had remained 100 pounds overweight and slogged through 8 hour marathons, she would have been an inspiration. Because she actually got fit and improved herself and acknowledged that she feels a hell of a lot better now that she's not obese, she apparently is a fat shamer.
I'm not going to be sarcastic (as many are- that's the nature of typing an answer out). I see your point and I agree.
I think the initial issue was that the faster runners aren't, say- accommodated.
It's almost as if they're ignored so as not to "hurt" the slow runners.
It's at the point in my club where faster runners are leaving. Why?
My club is always complaining that they have too much money. We're non-profit we have to spend money.
Someone will suggest funding a trip to club nationals. The refuse because it will leave out the slow runners.
OK, they'll have free get togethers and club events because they benefit everyone.
The awards at club races are few- overall top 3, the winner in 10 year age groups.
We've asked to expand them- we get a very sarcastic- yeah, that will matter to about 10 people.
Without belaboring the point- it's to the point where it's unfair to the fast runner.
My friend has 6 marathons (all at 15:00/mile or slower). I don't care what your time is but there's a difference between walking/jogging 26 miles off of 10-15 mpw and training (even 40-50 mpw) and running to your potential.
Instead of whining about your running club striving to accommodate all members, why don't you and the other "serious" runners start your own exclusive club?
Why do you take this post as whining? All I see is a description of what's going on in his club.
Instead of whining about your running club striving to accommodate all members, why don't you and the other "serious" runners start your own exclusive club?
Why do you take this post as whining? All I see is a description of what's going on in his club.
HRE- you get it. Some don't. I suspect it's probably because people insert their own interpretation of emotion into typed words on social media.
My club is 52 years old. I first joined 52 years ago as a 12 year old. I've seen the change we're talking about happen very gradually.
One long time runner used to say, about our local area, that we had no "back of the pack".
While other areas had the very, very slow runners.
Not that the times were elite, but I had a friend, a few years older than I am, who was an 18:30 guy in his mid-30's. I respected him for showing up to all the races because he was so slow, finished near the back every time and never had a shot at any kind of award.
Now, I'm 64 and run about 22-23 for 5K (in my defense on about 20 mpw) and people think I'm some kind of superstar.
In my best years I lived around DC and ran for what was then the most competitive club in the area. We won several national road championships, not an accomplishment akin to winning a Superbowl, but not a thing just any club could do either, and we always multiple qualifiers for Olympic Trial marathons.
And even then there were runners in the area who thought we were elitist or snobby. I could never understand why. There were no performance standards for joining. Any of those folks who thought we were snobby could have joined and drunk as much beer as they wanted at the monthly meetings if they paid their dues. If we sent a team to out of town races the club paid a potion of the expense and everyone was given the same amount.
What seemed to bother some other area runners was that all of us had things we wanted to accomplish in the sport, whether it was qualifying for an Olympic Trials Marathon or qualifying for Boston, and worked seriously to achieve them. Someone whose marathon times were on the high side of five hours and was happy "just finishing" could have joined. But I'm not sure they'd have felt comfortable unless they set some personal goals beyond just finishing. And I think that was one of the real values of being in that club. You wanted to get as close to the level of the OT qualifiers as you could or you wanted to be one of the guys responsible for winning a national championship. And you got better, even if not as better as you dreamed of, you got better than you'd once believed possible. I just don't see improving one's running as a strong a motive for most of today's runners and that's fine. It only bothers me when I see someone claim that a 5:12 marathon is an accomplishment that's no different than a 2:15 one.
Our society runs on two principles: envy and a lack of personal responsibility.
Almost universally, people are jealous of those that have more money, better looks, nicer things, and more talent. Rather than finding a different path to fulfillment, it's much easier to drag others down by minimizing accomplishments, accusing the successful of underhanded deeds, or eliminating standards of excellence. If that cannot be done, then simply blame nebulous forces, shadowy conspiracies, and fate for your shortcomings. It's never your fault!
Lydiard called it "The Tall Poppy Syndrome." Instead of trying to grow your poppy to the height of the tallest ones you cut the tall poppies down to the same height as yours.