Confuzzled wrote:
If a race is advertised to be open for a certain amount of time and you are under the pace needed to complete the course in said time, then I totally agree with the point being made. I would assume that a back of the pack runner would expect to have the same amenities as everyone else. If they are behind cutoff pace then I would expect that those amenities would be removed if they are allowed to stay on the course.
Except then you'd have the back-of-the-backers in the way of the faster runners which could be a really messy situation....
nonelitestart wrote:
More races should allow these back of the pack types (say 6:30+ marathon) to start two hours earlier than the real runners. Things might not be fully set up as they start, but it won't be torn down when they finish their lengthy voyage.
...besides, even if you did this, the back-of-the-packers would complain that they didn't receive the same treatment at the start....lol
nonelitestart wrote:
More races should allow these back of the pack types (say 6:30+ marathon) to start two hours earlier than the real runners. Things might not be fully set up as they start, but it won't be torn down when they finish their lengthy voyage.
MeHereYouWhere?! wrote:
Confuzzled wrote:
If a race is advertised to be open for a certain amount of time and you are under the pace needed to complete the course in said time, then I totally agree with the point being made. I would assume that a back of the pack runner would expect to have the same amenities as everyone else. If they are behind cutoff pace then I would expect that those amenities would be removed if they are allowed to stay on the course.
I agree 100%. From what I read of the article, she(?) was ahead of the pace (barely) and they were already breaking down the race course. That, to me, is unacceptable and the sign of a bad RD.
If You Bulk It, They Will Come wrote:
Can understand to a degree, but author didn't win me over with the tone. Any realization of the labor and costs needed to provide a full, safe experience for every last participant?
Before criticizing, author should give up 4-9 hours of a weekend day, arriving on or before 6:30 a.m. to volunteer for a half-marathon or marathon that remains open for 6+ hour finishers. It's a lot to ask of people.
Should we also demand earlier (faster-- there, I said it) finishers stick around to provide a festive finish for stragglers?
The race scene has, IMO, improved over time for the slower finishers*, but people have to realize what it entails to put on a long-distance running race.
* I remember a point of contention-- among our state's running association-- when a regional marathon, c. early 2000s, should keep the course open to 5.5 hr (from 5); those pointing out the downsides were condemned as elitists.
Nothing wrong with starting from the bottom wrote:
But if you are still waddling round in last place after six years, you are doing something wrong.