15 runners DQed for wearing headphones!

[quote]JAs wrote:

We do allow strollers if they start at the back. There are several reasons for enforcing it this year. We are a high school event and as such wish to set an example for the kids. As the mother of 3 college students, I know these IPODs are blasting and not on a setting that you or I might find reasonable, but loud enough to block the noise of an approaching car, another runner or pedestrian.

Uh Oh! Any time I hear: "Set an example for the kids" and "As the mother of..." I know what's coming next: "I'm smarter than you." "I love kids more than you." "I'm a better parent than you."

As an IPod user and the father of two school age IPod users I can tell you what your kids do and what you failed to teacher your children is not a reflection on the rest of us and our children.

I think you enforce the ban on IPods because it effects kids. I think you don't ban strollers because it would effect your fellow Starbucks mothers.

Nope, I thought it over and posted it. USATF says they don't want people being distracted and unable to hear if an emergency vehicle approaches, but there are plenty of distraction along a course to fill the void. Distractions the race directors often conjur up themselves, such as bands. Others, like the Wellesly girls, are just the nature of the beast, but are just as distracting. This is just a ridiculous rule. And as for the girl turning into the bus while wearing head-phones (JimG's post), it wasn't the head-phones that made the difference, it was stepping into the street before looking both ways that got that runner.

the gooch wrote:

You are telling me you know the volume that every single headphone wearer was using? Give me a break.

If I wear headphones and carry an IPOD with it turned off am I ok under your stupid rules?

if you don't like the rules, don't run the race...asshole

JAs' post is a good reason why I'll never run the Weston 5K. The road race nazis are alive and well.

Here we go! wrote:

Uh Oh! Any time I hear: "Set an example for the kids" and "As the mother of..." I know what's coming next: "I'm smarter than you." "I love kids more than you." "I'm a better parent than you."

As an IPod user and the father of two school age IPod users I can tell you what your kids do and what you failed to teacher your children is not a reflection on the rest of us and our children.

I think you enforce the ban on IPods because it effects kids. I think you don't ban strollers because it would effect your fellow Starbucks mothers.

The poster you refer to IS probably smarter than you - your inability to distinguish between "effect" and "affect" is rather telling.

uh_no wrote:

the gooch wrote:

You are telling me you know the volume that every single headphone wearer was using? Give me a break.

If I wear headphones and carry an IPOD with it turned off am I ok under your stupid rules?

if you don't like the rules, don't run the race...asshole

Whether I run the race or not I have the right to question idiotic statements...asshole.

I'm an RD we have the universal 'no headphones' sign on race materials. however, what bothers me about this that the no dogs or stollers rule has been around for a long time yet there wasn't this push to enforce it. Now there is the 'no headphones' rule and RDs are supposed to enforce this? If i enforce one rule, i'm going to enforce all of them and there's enough to do putting on a race than having spotters along the way documenting scofflaws.

why are the rules selectively being enforced?

What is the point of being in a race, if you are going to zone out and do what you normally do on a training run?

Oh wait, nothing is a race anymore, they are all events!

I don't think its a "I can hear" issue as much as its a distraction issue....if you are running with your iPod, jonesing to the Power Song or whatever it is..you aren't as clued into your surroundings as you'd be otherwise..because in the end if running with music had no effect on disassociation, why would anyone bother??

they were DQ'ing people at the BB yesterday too, giving them every opportunity to remove the earbuds in the closing 0.2 before yelling out bib #'s to another spotter...good for them..

Everyone talks about how to get rid of the charity types and back of the packers, enforcing this rule is the easiest way, all those Chicago walkers with shirts saying "I survived" 80 degree temps...they'd all be gone and lost without their music, taking up and bloating another sport..

I am not all that militant about being allowed to wear headphones (I personally never would), but I just don't understand why people care.

The argument seems to be distraction - well many "event" style road races create lots of distraction - bands, costumes, etc.

Or the argument is that somehow music is helping people not feel the pain of racing as intensly as they should. Should we also make everyone wear uncomfortable shoes too? Or maybe we should monitor their heartrate and VO2 levels, incase they are not running hard enough. Are we doinf this just to ensure that the back of the packers are not actually having fun?

I just find it weird that people care about this stuff so much.

Run your own race.

nothing like overreaching on your point, let's all walk around with HRM's to make sure we are doing things correctly in the world and constant ECG/EKG as well, maybe a pill for me Aldous Huxley?

BB was probably the only run I've done that had bands, costumes and such...its an exception to the typical 300-500 person race

however if a race posts a rule, and enforces it, I don't see why people should be surprised or up in arms, as if they are ambushed..

sort of like seeing a speed limit sign, disregarding it then acting indignant (everyone else was speeding, or i wasn't doing that) when being written a ticket...

JimG wrote:

They can take my headphones away when they pry them out of my cold, dead skull that was crushed by a truck I didn't hear.

Since statistically that has almost a zero percent chance of happening in a race, you should be good to go with that ipod for a long time.

masters fattie wrote:

however if a race posts a rule, and enforces it, I don't see why people should be surprised or up in arms, as if they are ambushed..

That's the amazing thing around here, the "yes, it's a rule but I know what I'm doing so it shouldn't apply to me" attitude.

Then after the rule is pointed out the "oh come on, like you've never been speeding in your car" argument is rolled out.

Do a search and see all the arguments made that drunk driving is OK.....or driving after "a few" drinks is OK because they do it all the time.

It's OK till they get hurt or they hurt someone, then they hire a lawyer, sue and claim again it wasn't their fault and weren't properly warned.

masters fattie wrote:

however if a race posts a rule, and enforces it, I don't see why people should be surprised or up in arms, as if they are ambushed..

sort of like seeing a speed limit sign, disregarding it then acting indignant (everyone else was speeding, or i wasn't doing that) when being written a ticket...

I am fine with the rule being enforced. I just can't understand why people care. But whatever. I don't really have anything else to add on this point.

masters fattie wrote:

What is the point of being in a race, if you are going to zone out and do what you normally do on a training run?

Oh wait, nothing is a race anymore, they are all events!

I am sure that the mid and back packers are really racing with the intent to win it all. Don't be so vain and stupid. Why do you have a radio in your car when you drive, nothing is a race anymore, They are all events!

As for a post stating that there are many other distractions at the big marathons, two years ago at the San Diego RNR, an ambulance was trying to get down the road for a runner who had fallen down, problem was the band right there was so loud no one could hear the siren and people from the side of the road were going out and pulling runners aside so the ambulance could get by.

That is the weakest comeback I've ever seen... If you're going to stick your nose into this hit me with something more than a grammer lesson.

and yes... grammar is spelled for your (and my) amusement.

hounddogharrier wrote:

JAs' post is a good reason why I'll never run the Weston 5K. The road race nazis are alive and well.

first they came for the headphones, and i did not speak out--because i did not wear headphones...

I only have a few questions, maybe some can answer. Were I live there are plenty of weekend races were runners wear headphones. I have not hear of any incidence nor complaints.

Now in this race, did they allow headphones last year and was there any incidences.

Also why did this race any other decide on a ban, Is it becasue USTAF decided they wanted to ban it. I would much more incline to agree with banning headphones if the race director would say I am banning it and naming an incident and not a hypotetical reason either.

Without arguing the point, I think the USTAF and RRCA instead of turing backs on the high percentage of headphone weareres and spend resourse educationg newere headphone weared on how to run safely with headphone if they chose to wear them. Lets face it ,there are plenty of people who would not start or even continue a fitness program through running without headphones. Plus there are so many headphone wearers out there the percentage of incidence caused buy headphones is astronmically low.

Instead of fighting, lets work together to make running with headphones even safer through education. Don't forget every runner that we push away might go back to being seditary plus the fact we are elimating the charity runner who helps race money for charities.

I sincerly invite any feedback on this subject.

NEPARunner.com

USATF was first and now that the RRCA has picked up the rule, you are supposed to put this on your race materials as a condition of using their insurance.

But, as i posted earlier, the RRCA had the stroller and dog rules long before this one. More than once i've had people ask if they could push a stroller in the race and i've told them that our insurance requires that i tell you no.

i'm following policy and giving people the rules but i don't plan to selectively enforce them. I can't say that i'm upset that some races are choosing to enforce the rule because people will be more likely to not use them in my race. but i really think dogs and strollers are a bigger risk. it's just less PC to tell a woman she can't push her kid in a race.