Purists or Jerks?
-
No new posts
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller | Reply |
|
2009-01-06 12:05 PM |
Expert 675 Woodridge, IL | Subject: Purists or Jerks? So I was on a running site (the Save running site that is the faux bbs from Pearl Izumi's marketers). ANYWAY, I was reading some comments about marathon running and some people were going off about people that walk marathons. While I get that the point is to run a marathon, or at least it was at some point when it originated, are these people just being snobby 'elitists'? My first inclination was to wonder "Could they even run it?" I think it's OK to try to run a marathon. I don't know that I think that it's OK to go into it with the express purpose of walking one (if only bc 8 hours is a long time to shut down city streets). But, as someone that did their first Sprint Tri with a "just to finish" mentality, I don't think I can judge. What are your thoughts - should people be in the endurance events if they don't plan on giving it their all? |
|
2009-01-06 12:08 PM in reply to: #1889535 |
Master 2009 Charlotte, NC | Subject: RE: Purists or Jerks? Well, as a slow marathoner myself, slow runner, I think "those who live in glass houses..." |
2009-01-06 12:11 PM in reply to: #1889535 |
Pro 5169 Burbs | Subject: RE: Purists or Jerks? Oh this argument again we used to have it a lot at a running forum I used to frequent. We live in a world (and esp the states) where much of the population is overweight, obese, morbidly obese... suffering from diebeties, high blood pressure, high chloresterol. IMO, anything that gets people moving, off the couch and into running shoes, onto bikes, or into water is a good thing. If someone wants to walk 26.2 mi, more power to them. Who am I to tell someone that they shouldn't do or attempt a marathon because they aren't fast/ aren't a 'runner'? It doesn't effect me and I'm happy to cheer for people when they finish. 26.2 is an awesome accomplishment... whether it's done sub 3:00, sub 4:00, to BQ, to finish, in 6.5 hrs. But, as someone that did their first Sprint Tri with a "just to finish" mentality, I don't think I can judge. well, of course. I mean, if it's someone's first ever triathlon, what's wrong with the 'just to finish' mentality? I certainly didn't have a goal time for my first sprint... actually, I don't think I've had goal times for any of my 'first' races (first 5K, first HM, first marathon). The goals started after I knew what I was working with and what I needed to do to get faster. Edited by trishie 2009-01-06 12:13 PM |
2009-01-06 12:11 PM in reply to: #1889535 |
Subject: RE: Purists or Jerks? This has been debated more than once in Tri-Talk, and even among the BT'ers, there is a wide range of answers to this... |
2009-01-06 12:18 PM in reply to: #1889535 |
Subject: RE: Purists or Jerks? Jerks. As in, anyone that judges another person's performance and/or intentions going into a race. I would add "insecure" to the front as well. |
2009-01-06 12:24 PM in reply to: #1889583 |
Expert 675 Woodridge, IL | Subject: RE: Purists or Jerks? ChrisM - 2009-01-06 12:18 PM Jerks. As in, anyone that judges another person's performance and/or intentions going into a race. I would add "insecure" to the front as well. That's pretty much what I was thinking when I read it.... |
|
2009-01-06 12:24 PM in reply to: #1889560 |
Champion 5781 Northridge, California | Subject: RE: Purists or Jerks? wurkit_gurl - 2009-01-06 10:11 AM This has been debated more than once in Tri-Talk, and even among the BT'ers, there is a wide range of answers to this... Yeah, and a lot of disagreement is partly semantics...how you define things like "race" and "run." I think the most reasonable attitude (and it's common...and it's definitely the one I hold to) is that there's nothing wrong with walking a marathon--just don't tell someone you "ran a marathon" afterwards. In my first mary, I ran 24.2 miles and walked 2 (near the end), but I've never claimed to have run it, only "finished" it. Like a lot of people, I'm proud of the fact that--since then--I have run an entire marathon, non-stop, no walking. But, as has already been said, as long as the race can support the crowd adequately, anything that gets people exercising is a positive. In my last job, one of my co-workers--who was morbidly obese even after having lost 60 lbs--planned to walk only the first half of the LA Marathon. When I saw her the next week, I'd run sub-4 and she'd taken 4 hours to walk 13.1 miles and both were big achievements. (They weren't the same achievement, however.) |
2009-01-06 12:28 PM in reply to: #1889535 |
Cycling Guru 15134 Fulton, MD | Subject: RE: Purists or Jerks? There shouldn't even be an argument. Unless a race director puts out a rule about a time limit (usually prescribed by permits and course closures) than anyone can enter and participate all they want! What always kills me is to hear the faster people complaining about the slower people. Gimme a break!! Within the first 1/2 mile you will never see any of them again until you are lounging around eating post race goodies watching the later finishers!! I applaud anyone getting out there and doing it. As long as they know the ettiquette of not starting in the front and blocking other runners, they can crawl for all I care! |
2009-01-06 12:29 PM in reply to: #1889535 |
Master 1529 Living in the past | Subject: RE: Purists or Jerks? So many ways to go with this....hmmm. Let's start with this...So what does "giving it their all" really mean? One could interpret this as only those who competed and dropped dead upon crossing the finish line met this criteria, but that's a bit snarky. So how about we interpret this as only those "intending" to swim, run, bike, climb, etc. the whole event distance need sign up....nah, tough to assess "intent" up front and also a bit snarky. I say we leave it to the person and the rules set-up by the event no judgement needed - they paid the money, they participated within the rules and did or did not finish the event. I'll save my sanctimonious bleatings for some meatier thread in COJ. |
2009-01-06 12:31 PM in reply to: #1889535 |
Champion 15211 Southern Chicago Suburbs, IL | Subject: RE: Purists or Jerks? Just to add some feul to the fire and some thoughts. There are "walking only" events that will pull people if they are found running. Reverse elitism? There are Marathon events that are possibly going to do this because they can't guarantee the safety of the walkers if they are out before or after the race. There are people that are "starting" up to 3 hours before the race officially starts so they can finish before it officially ends. I figure, if you can't make the cut off time, then don't do it. Just my opinion. |
2009-01-06 12:32 PM in reply to: #1889535 |
Extreme Veteran 344 | Subject: RE: Purists or Jerks? This is a really dangerous topic because I have seen how defensive people can get on either side of the fence. I think that what Trishie said is really important. The average lifestyle is becoming increasingly more lazy, so whatever gets people off the couch and out into the world is a good thing. This sort of stuff used to get to me, but I have since just learned to mind my own business and respect other's wishes to complete a race however they choose, because at least they weren't the other 99% of our countries population who chose to lay around on the couch instead. |
|
2009-01-06 12:37 PM in reply to: #1889535 |
Master 2010 Falls Church, VA | Subject: RE: Purists or Jerks? >should people be in the endurance events if they don't plan on giving it their all?
for some people, walking 26 miles IS giving it their all |
2009-01-06 12:39 PM in reply to: #1889535 |
Master 2355 Houston, TX | Subject: RE: Purists or Jerks? If there is a 6-1/2 hour time limit on the race, be prepared to finish within that time limit. If there isn't.. just be prepared to finish the race. |
2009-01-06 12:45 PM in reply to: #1889535 |
Alpharetta, Georgia | Subject: RE: Purists or Jerks? Well considering Pearl Izumi thinks "joggers" are not real "runners"... http://www.wearenotjoggers.com/home I guess they know who they |
2009-01-06 12:48 PM in reply to: #1889665 |
Subject: RE: Purists or Jerks? lisac957 - 2009-01-06 10:45 AM Well considering Pearl Izumi thinks "joggers" are not real "runners"... http://www.wearenotjoggers.com/homeI guess they know who they are want to market to. It's not beginners. And franky, that attitude is a huge turn off to me. It's the same attitude the OP is talking about. Hijack time to defuse a nasty topic, but your post made me think of it... Brian Fantana: So the team pancake breakfast is tomorrow morning at nine, instead of eight. |
2009-01-06 12:50 PM in reply to: #1889535 |
Expert 675 Woodridge, IL | Subject: RE: Purists or Jerks? You are a smelly pirate hooker! If I am the OP can we just turn this into an Anchorman quotefest?! I didn't want people to get angry (thought I think we all believe the same thing)!
Edit: I never spell the word 'just' correctly the first time. Edited by SKDickey 2009-01-06 12:51 PM |
|
2009-01-06 12:54 PM in reply to: #1889535 |
29 | Subject: RE: Purists or Jerks? Let me throw this in...Eastern Continental Trail through-hiker Scott Bergman walked 25 miles every day for over 50 days on the Florida Trail, and then was only 1300 miles into a 5000 mile hike. Walking or running, that's a LONG way to go for that long. While I reverence marathon runners, we all need to remember that there are always going to be people who can smoke us in terms of endurance. |
2009-01-06 12:55 PM in reply to: #1889535 |
Extreme Veteran 556 TX | Subject: RE: Purists or Jerks? My closet-psychologist opinion on people that get upset about the "slower" folks is that they are simply afraid that those people dilute others' perceptions about what they have accomplished. They simply don't like being considered in the same category as those they consider physically inferior. Kind of sad. |
2009-01-06 1:02 PM in reply to: #1889535 |
Elite 2768 Raleigh | Subject: RE: Purists or Jerks? This subject always cracks me up, I am amazed at how many people actually care what other people do in a race... I have a friend who is the #1 ranked amature masters in the US (Bruce Gennari) This guy is balls to the wall. I was talking to him and asked him what is one thing he would like to change about racing Kona and his words were "I would like to say I actually ran all of the marathon during the race". So this is a guy who at some point has had to walk a portion of the race at every IMWC he has been too. So big deal if you walk part of it... and if someone else gives you flak about them tell them to kiss it... THey are jerks |
2009-01-06 1:06 PM in reply to: #1889723 |
Sensei Sin City | Subject: RE: Purists or Jerks? Maybe it's just me but. I think I should run them. But I don't care at all what anyone else does. |
2009-01-06 1:07 PM in reply to: #1889535 |
Runner | Subject: RE: Purists or Jerks? Personally, I would never enter an event that I wasn't going to give my best effort. If walking is your best effort, then more power to you. But I'm an elitist who takes great pleasure in competition. I don't propose to deny people the opportunity to enter whatever they want, but I reserve the right to think that a race is still a competition, and not just a checkbox on my life list. |
|
2009-01-06 1:08 PM in reply to: #1889600 |
Pro 3906 Libertyville, IL | Subject: RE: Purists or Jerks? tcovert - 2009-01-06 12:24 PM I feel more badazz being able to tell friends that I walked a BQ cuz I needed to fill up my fuel belt bottles at the aid stations. Awesome! It makes it sound like I didnt even break a sweat and could go sub 2 if i actually ran.wurkit_gurl - 2009-01-06 10:11 AM This has been debated more than once in Tri-Talk, and even among the BT'ers, there is a wide range of answers to this... Yeah, and a lot of disagreement is partly semantics...how you define things like "race" and "run." I think the most reasonable attitude (and it's common...and it's definitely the one I hold to) is that there's nothing wrong with walking a marathon--just don't tell someone you "ran a marathon" afterwards. In my first mary, I ran 24.2 miles and walked 2 (near the end), but I've never claimed to have run it, only "finished" it. Like a lot of people, I'm proud of the fact that--since then--I have run an entire marathon, non-stop, no walking. But, as has already been said, as long as the race can support the crowd adequately, anything that gets people exercising is a positive. In my last job, one of my co-workers--who was morbidly obese even after having lost 60 lbs--planned to walk only the first half of the LA Marathon. When I saw her the next week, I'd run sub-4 and she'd taken 4 hours to walk 13.1 miles and both were big achievements. (They weren't the same achievement, however.) |
2009-01-06 1:16 PM in reply to: #1889535 |
Coach 10487 Boston, MA | Subject: RE: Purists or Jerks? It sounds like it... It looks like it... It smells like it... wait a minute, I think ummm, yes I am sure it is; hello Off-Season topics! |
2009-01-06 1:17 PM in reply to: #1889535 |
Extreme Veteran 1942 In front of computer when typing this. | Subject: RE: Purists or Jerks? Any exercise is better than nothing, so more power to ya if you decide to walk, rather than run, a marathon. Walking 26 miles is a good days' effort! The only place I might take issue with it is if someone never shuts up about running a marathon, when they actually walked the whole thing. That would just be odd. If they said "I did a marathon", that is cool. Or if they walked parts of it, thats fine too. But if you set out to walk a marathon and then say you ran a marathon, that would be disingenuous. But in reality, I really don't care what someone says they did, as long as they get out and do it. |
2009-01-06 1:21 PM in reply to: #1889535 |
|