login
Marathon Winner DQ'd for iPod
-
No new posts
|
 2009-10-08 10:13 AM |
Master  1376    Chicago |  Subject: Marathon Winner DQ'd for iPodNot sure if this has been brought up or anybody has seen it, but the winner of last weeks Lakefront Marathon in Milwaukee has been disqualified after pictures showed up of her crossing the finish line with an iPod tucked into her shorts. I guess she used if from mile 19 - 21. She was actually the second place finisher as the first place woman was DQ'd for taking outside assistance. The woman who finished 3rd gets the actual win. Craziness in Wisconsin  Marathon Runner DQ'd |
| 2009-10-08 10:21 AM in reply to: #2449499 |
Veteran 294 Papillion, NE | Subject: RE: Marathon Winner DQ'd for iPod I really don't understand the rule of no ipod, whether it be marathon, tri, etc. It isn't like an illegal substance is being used. It is something everyone can do if they so choose. Now I can see if it is blasting in your ears and you don't yield or create a hazard, but really, what is the big deal with wearing these? |
| 2009-10-08 10:23 AM in reply to: #2449499 |
Pro 4277 Parker, CO | Subject: RE: Marathon Winner DQ'd for iPod Bummer for her about the DQ but I'm sure she new the rule about ipods before the race. I wonder if they DQd everyone wearing an ipod? |
| 2009-10-08 10:24 AM in reply to: #2449499 |
| Subject: RE: Marathon Winner DQ'd for iPod Regardless of whether or not one agrees or disagrees with the "no iPods" rule, the rule still stands, and if you are a good enough runner to win a marathon, even a small one, it's pretty insolent of you to flaunt the rules, b/c you've probably raced enough that you know better. She deserved what she got, imho - rules are rules, even if you don't like them. |
| 2009-10-08 10:26 AM in reply to: #2449521 |
Pro 5169 Burbs | Subject: RE: Marathon Winner DQ'd for iPod DJS - 2009-10-08 11:21 AM I really don't understand the rule of no ipod, whether it be marathon, tri, etc. It isn't like an illegal substance is being used. It is something everyone can do if they so choose. Now I can see if it is blasting in your ears and you don't yield or create a hazard, but really, what is the big deal with wearing these? that is exactly why they aren't allowed --- when you are running with other people during a race you need to be aware of what's going on around you. what if an ambulance was coming up behind the runner? I'd like to think she would HEAR it coming, but who knows? and, besides, rules are rules. If you don't like them (you being the proverbial YOU, not you DJS!), run an iPod friendly race. Edited by trishie 2009-10-08 10:27 AM |
| 2009-10-08 10:26 AM in reply to: #2449499 |
| over a barrier | Subject: RE: Marathon Winner DQ'd for iPod Two thumbs up to the RD that had the nads to enforce the rules.... |
| 2009-10-08 10:26 AM in reply to: #2449525 |
Champion 7495 Schwamalamadingdong! | Subject: RE: Marathon Winner DQ'd for iPod rayd - 2009-10-08 10:23 AM Bummer for her about the DQ but I'm sure she new the rule about ipods before the race. I wonder if they DQd everyone wearing an ipod? The website stated that the rule only applied to the elite. Regular folks were discouraged from wearing iPods, but it was allowed. |
| 2009-10-08 10:28 AM in reply to: #2449499 |
Veteran 294 Papillion, NE | Subject: RE: Marathon Winner DQ'd for iPod I understand it is a rule, that is not my point, how did it become one and what is the justification? It makes no logical sense. They say you won't be as aware of your surroundings, well, what is their response to someone who is hearing impaired? Are they not allowed to race? They say it gives a compeitive edge. Well so does certain types of shoes, clothing, etc., so should we standardize what can be worn? |
| 2009-10-08 10:34 AM in reply to: #2449540 |
Sensei Sin City | Subject: RE: Marathon Winner DQ'd for iPod I did a bike race a couple weeks ago and would have loved to use my Ipod. But, figured the rules that apply to tri probably apply to bike racing as well so I left it at home... I was surprised to see how many in my catagory were using them... I asked about it, and someone said the rule only applies to the Cat 1 people/pro/elite, and the lower catagories could. |
| 2009-10-08 10:34 AM in reply to: #2449533 |
Veteran 294 Papillion, NE | Subject: RE: Marathon Winner DQ'd for iPod TheSchwamm - 2009-10-08 10:26 AM rayd - 2009-10-08 10:23 AM The website stated that the rule only applied to the elite. Regular folks were discouraged from wearing iPods, but it was allowed. Ok, this makes even less sense. So, the non-elite are more aware? As stated above, if an emergency vehicle is coming through, the non-elite will be more aware with music blasting? If you are going to have the rule, then be consistent with it. Before everyone gets all riled up, I am just stating my opinion and thoughts, not trying to start an argument or reinvent the wheel. |
| 2009-10-08 10:35 AM in reply to: #2449499 |
Extreme Veteran 417 Buford GA | Subject: RE: Marathon Winner DQ'd for iPod Rules a rule is where I stand she broke it and thats what it is. I have associated the rules against radio communication as another reason why they do not allow them and especially in this case for elites only. Sure you can tell what a nano or a shuffle is and that its probably only laying music.. but whats to stop someone from saying their iphone is their "ipod" and being on the phone the whole time with a coach or spotter giving someone updates? Which in regards to the usat rules i believe radio communication was not allowed. I also wanted to just add.. damn she's cute ETA: yes I know this was not USAT but was just relating it to what we may know better... oh and again.. cute Edited by mrtopher1980 2009-10-08 10:36 AM |
| 2009-10-08 10:35 AM in reply to: #2449540 |
Sensei Sin City | Subject: RE: Marathon Winner DQ'd for iPod DJS - 2009-10-08 8:28 AM I understand it is a rule, that is not my point, how did it become one and what is the justification? It makes no logical sense. They say you won't be as aware of your surroundings, well, what is their response to someone who is hearing impaired? Are they not allowed to race? They say it gives a compeitive edge. Well so does certain types of shoes, clothing, etc., so should we standardize what can be worn? Being able to hear and take direction on the course without interference from an Ipod make logical sense to me (as stated in a previous post). |
| 2009-10-08 10:38 AM in reply to: #2449563 |
| Subject: RE: Marathon Winner DQ'd for iPod Aikidoman - 2009-10-08 11:35 AM DJS - 2009-10-08 8:28 AM I understand it is a rule, that is not my point, how did it become one and what is the justification? It makes no logical sense. They say you won't be as aware of your surroundings, well, what is their response to someone who is hearing impaired? Are they not allowed to race? They say it gives a compeitive edge. Well so does certain types of shoes, clothing, etc., so should we standardize what can be worn? Being able to hear and take direction on the course without interference from an Ipod make logical sense to me (as stated in a previous post). x2. And since being hearing impaired is NOT the same as willingly wearing an iPod, I'm quite sure the same rules do not apply, as physical challenges most often cannot be discriminated against (and I don't mean that they should be, but for example, there are certain jobs that require you to be in perfect form...like military stuff, etc). |
| 2009-10-08 10:41 AM in reply to: #2449499 |
Expert 1099 Broadlands | Subject: RE: Marathon Winner DQ'd for iPod a quote in the article from Goebel herself: "I wasn't listening to it earlier in the race," she said. "I wasn't going to put the music on unless I thought I needed it. So.....if she thought she needed it, this implies it gave her some boost/benefit in the race. She benefitted form using something that was banned for elite athletes, the DQ should stand. Personally I think it is a daft rule, if an ipod helps an elite athlete focus, or drive harder, so what, everyone can use it. But I don't make the rules, and will never be in the place of having prize money taken away for breaking them so what do I kow :-) |
| 2009-10-08 10:45 AM in reply to: #2449499 |
Champion 7036 Sarasota, FL | Subject: RE: Marathon Winner DQ'd for iPod |
| 2009-10-08 10:47 AM in reply to: #2449557 |
Sensei Sin City | Subject: RE: Marathon Winner DQ'd for iPod DJS - 2009-10-08 8:34 AM TheSchwamm - 2009-10-08 10:26 AM rayd - 2009-10-08 10:23 AM The website stated that the rule only applied to the elite. Regular folks were discouraged from wearing iPods, but it was allowed. Ok, this makes even less sense. So, the non-elite are more aware? As stated above, if an emergency vehicle is coming through, the non-elite will be more aware with music blasting? If you are going to have the rule, then be consistent with it. Before everyone gets all riled up, I am just stating my opinion and thoughts, not trying to start an argument or reinvent the wheel. It could be due to a bigger governing body, such as Olympic or internation rules governing the sport. If you are pro, you may need to follow more than just the local rules or rules for AGers to be ranked in the world standing and/or qualify for event/olympic teams, etc... For example it triathlon. The non-elite can wear a wetsuit in warmer water than the pros... |
| 2009-10-08 10:48 AM in reply to: #2449499 |
| Subject: RE: Marathon Winner DQ'd for iPod Outstanding! More directors need to enforce some of these rules more or else take them off the books. |
| 2009-10-08 10:48 AM in reply to: #2449499 |
Expert 1379 Woodland, California | Subject: RE: Marathon Winner DQ'd for iPod Last weekend at the Mission Bay tri (where ipods were not allowed) my sister witnessed a woman using one who was oblivious to people trying to pass by her on a narrow part of the course. I'm sure not everyone using an ipod during a race is as unaware as this woman was, but having music in your ears does take away from being able to hear and focus on other things. After all, that's why people use them, right? They give your mind something to focus on to help you get through the pain of racing. |
| 2009-10-08 10:49 AM in reply to: #2449563 |
Veteran 294 Papillion, NE | Subject: RE: Marathon Winner DQ'd for iPod Aikidoman - 2009-10-08 10:35 AM DJS - 2009-10-08 8:28 AM I understand it is a rule, that is not my point, how did it become one and what is the justification? It makes no logical sense. They say you won't be as aware of your surroundings, well, what is their response to someone who is hearing impaired? Are they not allowed to race? They say it gives a compeitive edge. Well so does certain types of shoes, clothing, etc., so should we standardize what can be worn? Being able to hear and take direction on the course without interference from an Ipod make logical sense to me (as stated in a previous post). Then explain the logic in allowing the "lower level" competitors the use of ipods? if that is your stance. Like I have stated, though I don't agree one bit with the rule(and let it be known, I just did a race this last weekend with the no-ipod rule and yes, I did adhere to it) I am just trying to find some consistency. The allowing of some to use them, and some can't, is a bad rule. |
| 2009-10-08 10:51 AM in reply to: #2449604 |
Champion 7495 Schwamalamadingdong! | Subject: RE: Marathon Winner DQ'd for iPod DJS - 2009-10-08 10:49 AM Aikidoman - 2009-10-08 10:35 AM DJS - 2009-10-08 8:28 AM I understand it is a rule, that is not my point, how did it become one and what is the justification? It makes no logical sense. They say you won't be as aware of your surroundings, well, what is their response to someone who is hearing impaired? Are they not allowed to race? They say it gives a compeitive edge. Well so does certain types of shoes, clothing, etc., so should we standardize what can be worn? Being able to hear and take direction on the course without interference from an Ipod make logical sense to me (as stated in a previous post). Then explain the logic in allowing the "lower level" competitors the use of ipods? if that is your stance. Like I have stated, though I don't agree one bit with the rule(and let it be known, I just did a race this last weekend with the no-ipod rule and yes, I did adhere to it) I am just trying to find some consistency. The allowing of some to use them, and some can't, is a bad rule. i suspect in the end it comes down to needing to require the elite to follow the official USATF rules while still needing to appeal to enough of the general public to be able to afford to hold the race. |
| 2009-10-08 10:55 AM in reply to: #2449598 |
Resident Curmudgeon 25290 The Road Back Gold member | Subject: RE: Marathon Winner DQ'd for iPod Aikidoman - 2009-10-08 10:47 AM DJS - 2009-10-08 8:34 AM TheSchwamm - 2009-10-08 10:26 AM rayd - 2009-10-08 10:23 AM The website stated that the rule only applied to the elite. Regular folks were discouraged from wearing iPods, but it was allowed. Ok, this makes even less sense. So, the non-elite are more aware? As stated above, if an emergency vehicle is coming through, the non-elite will be more aware with music blasting? If you are going to have the rule, then be consistent with it. Before everyone gets all riled up, I am just stating my opinion and thoughts, not trying to start an argument or reinvent the wheel. It could be due to a bigger governing body, such as Olympic or internation rules governing the sport. If you are pro, you may need to follow more than just the local rules or rules for AGers to be ranked in the world standing and/or qualify for event/olympic teams, etc... For example it triathlon. The non-elite can wear a wetsuit in warmer water than the pros... It's a USATF rule, cited and linked in the article. The rule does allow for ipod use among the non-elite "at the discretion of each race director." |
| 2009-10-08 11:07 AM in reply to: #2449604 |
Champion 5376 PA | Subject: RE: Marathon Winner DQ'd for iPod |
| 2009-10-08 11:17 AM in reply to: #2449636 |
Cycling Guru 15134 Fulton, MD | Subject: RE: Marathon Winner DQ'd for iPod |
| 2009-10-08 11:20 AM in reply to: #2449540 |
Regular 73 | Subject: RE: Marathon Winner DQ'd for iPod I agree with DJS, what advantage is gained by an ipod?? some complain that it is annoying to other runners to hear it ... if thats the case, lets DQ every heavy breather and heavy striker that annoys me. |
| 2009-10-08 11:20 AM in reply to: #2449499 |
Champion 5868 Urbandale, IA | Subject: RE: Marathon Winner DQ'd for iPod There is a very clear reason for the rule. Actually, a couple. First is safety. There is no indicator - on my ipod, at least - that shows someone how loud or distracting I have it playing. The only way I can tell if the kids have them too loud - in the car, for instance - is that it sounds like there are a pack of mice having a conversaation behind me. I feel this should apply to everyone, but I ain't the rule guy. The second reason is that a few years ago Nike and Apple got together and made this thing called the Nike + for iPod. This contraptiuon, when set with a piece of hardware in your shoe - feeds you information about pace, time on the course etc.. Plus, you can pick music that helps you to run at a pace. Say you load your iPod up with music that is right around 120 BPS. If you know your pacing at 120 BPS, you can easily - or more easily - keep that pace. While this is not stated specifically as a rule, it does also break the rule of pacing by electronic device. |
|
|
|
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK