Runners World

Seconded. Why all the RW bashing on LetsRun? RW has plenty of pro training tips and elite running news. LRC can benefit a lot from reading RW. It caters to both the LRC crowd and hobby jogging crowd. After all, it's Runner's World, not Elite Runner's World or Hobby Jogging Runner's World. It's supposed to be highly inclusive and cater to all sorts of cliques, niches, and interests.

Browns win! wrote:

Why all the hate for RW here? I don’t read it. Just curious.

How much weight have you lost following their diet tips?

Successful on the dating scene?

Got your winter coordinated outfits together based on their fashion advice?

And so forth....

I like looking at the pictures.

About 2/3 of RW is hobby jogger content that I skip, but the other third is valuable stuff. I think we competitive runners just have to read it more selectively. After all, don't we all read newspapers and news websites selectively as well?

Relentlessly complaining about RW is far more tiresome than reading it is.

For me, frankly, too many ads

I'm not happy that RW bought Running Times and then killed it. I liked reading the high school team section and the Masters section in RT. Eight pages of recipes is not running.

Running Times was a good magazine. Runner’s World is not worth the paper it is printed on. For some reason they send it to me and ends up in the recycle bin.

I'd bet that all the Runner's World hate is coming from victims of RW test editor Dan Roe who obliterated the field in the NY Fifth Ave Media Mile.

But for real, RW is a solid magazine for what it is. People on this forum fail to understand/recognize that competitive runners and serious fans of the sport take up such a small percentage of the overall running market. Running Times obviously tried to cater toward the more serious crowd, but ultimately closed its doors due to lack of general interest.

It sells 'shortcuts' and not the truth. I have no time for watered down media.

At one time, RW used to print training advice that worked from athletes who suceeded, now they print every bs scientific study known rather than the truth of experience.

These seem like mostly generalities. I realize that this site sees it as a "hobby jogger" publication. I used to read it, way back. I can say that I don't remember seeing much about running high mileage. Until I discovered this site, it seemed like everyone, from Hal Higdon to "Runner's World," was trying to tell me that I don't have to run high mileage.

Is that the gist?

the main reason is that the folk on LRC are not really into nuance. every decision is a binary choice between good/bad or yes/no. which means you either love Runners World and digest it piecemeal every month, or you hate, loath and detest it and hope all the journalists working on it die in a fire. LRC does not permit any middle ground.

cheers.

They once had a feature called: "Run Injury Free Forever."

Cancelled on the spot.

Runners World is for noobs. Simple