I Never Realized How Thin-Skinned Slow Runners Are -- thanks, Deadspin

LOL, he's responding to the comments.

"I feel like I'm in good shape. I'm 27 and usually run 8 minute miles for about three miles a couple times a week. 7:05 for 26 miles is INSANELY FAST."

"This is true, in the sense that you'd have to be insane to consider that fast."

I'm not surprised at all.

Humor, jokes, most are lost on runners. Running is mostly autism mixed with varying low to mid levels of exercise and athleticism.

Yes its hard to run 80 miles in a week. I did it, over a million people have done it. It doesn't make you special get over yourself.

Don't ever go to reddit/r/running then. Wow. Very thin-skinned people about being slow. Saw anything about races being about beating people, they get very mad.

I once said that marathons shouldn't give medals just for finishing, they shouldn't take pictures of people who aren't getting a podium finish, and the cut-off times should be much, much less. People got very, very mad.

Have been on a site where the average 5K was in the 24 to 27 min 5K range. Oy, the stories I could tell! A guy reported doing a tempo at sub 7 and he got chastised for being "intimidating." No clue. A 2 hr half marathon is every bit as good as 1:10 because the 2 hr takes longer and the person is less efficient and has to work harder.

lumanwalters wrote:

Don't ever go to reddit/r/running then. Wow. Very thin-skinned people about being slow. Saw anything about races being about beating people, they get very mad.

I once said that marathons shouldn't give medals just for finishing, they shouldn't take pictures of people who aren't getting a podium finish, and the cut-off times should be much, much less. People got very, very mad.

Well entertain yourself with the reddit comments on this article, it's just beginning:

A lot of them ought to lighten up. It's long forgotten now but qualifying standards used to be a lot more stringent for Boston. For men 18 to 39 it was 2:50, and 3:10 for 40+ masters. I don't even recall what it was for 50s, or 60s, nor do I remember women's times but maybe something like 3:15 or 3:20 for open 3:40 for masters.

Bring back some real standards and no charity joggers at Boston!

Do people even read the posts that they comment on? I mean, look at this from the reddit link:

kardioversion: "I think his times are off/he's using the old qualifying times. Now it's 18-34 y/o males need a 3:05"

Those are exactly the times that he cites in the Deadspin article!!

veteran of the slowbie wars wrote:

A lot of them ought to lighten up. It's long forgotten now but qualifying standards used to be a lot more stringent for Boston. For men 18 to 39 it was 2:50, and 3:10 for 40+ masters. I don't even recall what it was for 50s, or 60s, nor do I remember women's times but maybe something like 3:15 or 3:20 for open 3:40 for masters.

Bring back some real standards and no charity joggers at Boston!

If you are a 40-44 year-old male, the qualifying time is not so much slower now: 3:15 versus 3:10.

My favorite comment on there is the guy that gives a real long explanation about how "hard" it is to qualify and how he barely missed. He also mentions he is 6'0" and 205lbs. Well no sh#t it would be hard when you still weigh 205lbs at only 6 foot tall! I guess the fact that he was likely lugging around 20-25lbs of belly fat didn't help his cause!

I do think genetics play a big role in qualifying. I'm 6'2" 195 lbs and tried several times to qualify and have missed by a few minutes each time because of late race cramps. I can run a 1hr 20 min half marathon so its not just a matter of fitness. Some people are much more genetically predisposed to endurance running just like playing basketball maybe be harder for some while others "just have it" to start with.

Just something to keep in mind as this site seems to lose focus of how small a % of the population can run a 15 min 5K, in fact I'd argue that an 18 min 5K is still a solid time although I'm probably in the minority on here.

Reg fields wrote:

I can run a 1hr 20 min half marathon so its not just a matter of fitness.

Half fitness/preperation and marathon fitness/preperation are not even close to the same. Running a good half doesn't mean sh*t for the marathon. Just ask Tadesse.

Whitest kid you know wrote:

Yes its hard to run 80 miles in a week. I did it, over a million people have done it. It doesn't make you special get over yourself.

Interesting... my guess is that the number of people who have run over 80 miles in a single week is well under a million.

Dennis Reynolds 2.0 wrote:

Reg fields wrote:

I can run a 1hr 20 min half marathon so its not just a matter of fitness.

Half fitness/preperation and marathon fitness/preperation are not even close to the same. Running a good half doesn't mean sh*t for the marathon. Just ask Tadesse.

How about if your 20 mile long run was completed in 2hr 20 mins, 4 weeks out with the last mile being done 6:38 and plenty left in the tank.....Genetics play a big role in this, I get your point but its hard to specify all of the necessary info in one post.

The point I'm really trying to make is that training hard doesn't assure everyone of a sub 3:05 which is a fact sometimes lost on this site.

Reg fields wrote:

How about if your 20 mile long run was completed in 2hr 20 mins, 4 weeks out with the last mile being done 6:38 and plenty left in the tank.....Genetics play a big role in this, I get your point but its hard to specify all of the necessary info in one post.

dude, you got more than one problem if you can do that but not break 3:05

Reg, here's a fact that will improve your running if you apply it correctly, I 100% guarentee it.

Running hard and running smart are not the same thing.

I thought the article was freakin hilarious

Leo the Lion wrote:

Reg fields wrote:

How about if your 20 mile long run was completed in 2hr 20 mins, 4 weeks out with the last mile being done 6:38 and plenty left in the tank.....Genetics play a big role in this, I get your point but its hard to specify all of the necessary info in one post.

dude, you got more than one problem if you can do that but not break 3:05

It's just leg cramping, I never get tired, the legs just start cramping around mile 23 or so...again, I think genetics play a large part in this as I've been cramping my entire life after workouts.

there were no female qualifying times in the 50 or 60s. women couldn't run in the boston marathon until the early 70s.

Reg fields wrote:

It's just leg cramping, I never get tired, the legs just start cramping around mile 23 or so...again, I think genetics play a large part in this as I've been cramping my entire life after workouts.

holy shit! you start cramping in the last 6 miles of a marathon? that must be some special genetic defect that only happens to certain people and not everyone. i wonder what they call this phenomenon.