NYT article on the other victims of marathon training

I could relate to some of the info in the article or at least the issues it raised. When I started out, I had the problem of wanting to talk about my training and relate to others who were going through the same thing, but I limited how much of that I would talk about to non-runners because I could tell it was boring. I joined the local running club so that I could talk about that stuff, and I enjoy that give-and-take in the club environment. Even there, though, you have to be socially conscious enough to know how much to talk about yourself before turning people off. Talking about running is fun for me, though, and I don't need to be talking about myself to enjoy it. It is nice to hang out with people now and then who can empathize with the journey. I started a new job right before I ran Boston this past time, so the first thing most people knew about me was that I was a marathon runner. It was embarassing to me to be introduced that way repeatedly, but the attention has died down and I am happy about that.

I figure that when running causes tension at home that it is just the nominal issue that is bringing out other potential problems. I am divorced, and my ex-husband got increasingly uncomfortable the more I ran. I was not obsessed and did not spend a lot of time doing it, but it did involve a lifestyle change from a couch potato and night owl to an active and morning-oriented approach to weekends. Even though he ran, too, I think he felt threatened by my running, especially when I got faster than him. I think that reaction was an indicator of larger issues, and the tension we faced was there all along only now came to the forefront. I do not think that running was responsible for my divorce. It could have been anything that we did not share and that made me stronger. When I went to graduate school, the same thing happened, only that had a limited time frame and we were able to stuff the issues under the rug once it was over.

I think the article hit closer to home for more posters on this board than they care to admit. Perhaps the muscle stimulater was a bit much and Mr. Cohen has a few too many shoes, but the part about after the race and how the training continues I think is true. A local running club here in town has a message board on which a number of the runners have posted their own little blogs about their marathon training while others schedule a long run and then go on ad naseum about the run later.

I dated during 2000 one of the women in the 10,000m at the Olympic Trials. The focus was on running and workouts all the time. It was what is needed to be the best in your sport and while I'm a decent local talent (15:45 5K that year) I wasn't looking at the Trials, so to me it seemed at time overboard, just as I bet some of the actions by the subjects of this article look to their spouses.

I'm guessing several of the prior posts are self-centered about their running but are afraid to look in the mirror and admit it. I've tried to tone it down at my house, but putting in serious miles (90+) is stressful in any marriage. I just try and be more accomdating and less run-centric during the time when I am back from my run. When I come through that door the run is over and I am back to being Dad and Husband. If I didn't do this I'd guess in time I would be divorced as I'm sure a 24-7 running lifestyle would get old in the house. Running may be a passion for an hour or two a day of mine, but so is my family and for a lot more time during the day.

i think that you are COMPLETELY missing the point expressed here by others. yes, if you are training to be a national or world class athlete, you have to make significant sacrifices to get there and, for better or for worse, often family life is what gets sacrificed. this rube, however, sucks and barely cracks 4 hours in a marathon. it doesn't take massive sacrifices and a muscle rubber to get one to a 3:49 marathon. the fact that he is acting (pretending) to be a serious runner and killing his family life is what makes him such a loser.

And most of the posters on this are a long way from being national or world class.

I agree a 3:50 marathoner is overboard with the number of shoes he has, the 80 mile weeks and everything else, and I also stated in my post there are sacrifices to be made to be a good runner, but again, most of the posters (say 90%) on this board may dream of national (Oly Trials qualifiers) or world class (actually made a world team), but they are local and perhaps regional class.

This article makes me believe that for some reason, OCD runners with poor social skils tend to associate with victim-mentality whiners.

*skills*

hold the phone wrote:

Good article, thanks for posting it. The Times does a pretty good job of covering running (both recreational and elite), relative to most other big media outlets. Whatever happened to Gina Kolata's Personal Best column -- is it still running?

I like Gina Kolata, and getting caught in the rain

I'm not much into health food, I am into champagne

3:50, 2:50, 1:50 has absolutely nothing to do with it. That is the point.

Why is 3:49 wasting their time? 2:49 isnt? 2:19? We're ALL wasting our time.

hey jagoff just because you are closer to 3:49 than 2:19 doesn't mean that the fast kids are wasting their time. Last time I checked 2:19 can win a lot of races and generate a fair amount of prize money. just ask Michael Wardian.Unless you're a nihilist nincompoop, I don't think you could argue that doing something you love and supporting your family with that venture is wasting time.Tearing apart your family for mediocrity is reprehensible.

Beethoven wrote:

3:50, 2:50, 1:50 has absolutely nothing to do with it. That is the point.

Why is 3:49 wasting their time? 2:49 isnt? 2:19? We're ALL wasting our time.

I enjoyed the article also, as they had a few yesterday too. Too bad it is only during NYCM week that we are guaranteed to see running articles in the Sports pages.

But it seems they went out of their way to find louts and boors for this article. If I was the spouse of someone that came home with a multi-thousand dollar custom tri bike, while we are trying to save for a house, there would be serious issues in the household.

I usually keep my running conversations to a minimum with my wife, and only get into details with my running buddies.

Yestereday's NYT had a few graphs showing high level finances of the NYRR/NYCM. Looking forward to another few days of marathon coverage.

"2'19 can win a lot of races and generate a fair amount of prize money"

Who cares? The only reason to run, unless you will be impoverished if you dont, is because you love running. So the question is why do you love it?

The point is some people love it because they are borderline psychotic, that goes for the slow AND the fast people.

If you run 2'19 and are psycho about it, you shouldnt run. If you run 3'49 and arent, you should. And vice versa.

that guy is insane and a loser.

golfers are much worse.

"The only reason to run, unless you will be impoverished if you dont, is because you love running."

um, are you trying to be a troll or are you just completely clueless? most people who run, run for its health benefits and don't love it at all. it burns the most calories out of any mainstream form of physical activity and doesn't require any expensive equipment or gym memberships. ask your typical jogger how much they love running and i think you will be very surprised at what you hear.

your other points defy logic so i'm not even going to respond to them (eg, people love running because they are borderline psychotic???). are you over or under 15 years of age?

Is it really correct to refer to a co-worker who regularly hears about someone else's running as a "victim"?

I guess everyone is a victim in society today. Come to think of it, I've been victimized by reading this thread and that poorly argued article.

Yes -- Gina still writes a Personal Best column. In fact, her next one comes out tomorrow (Thursday). It's a look at why some runners sustain a lot of aches/pains/injures whereas others can run and run and never experience an injury.

Gina described three real people to some experts and asked them which person they thought would be injury-free and which would have a lot of injury problems. I'll let you find out how that little game played out...

Everything in life is balance. I run 80-90 miles per week, however, I try to run while my wife's at work or sleeping in on the weekends. In reality I maybe spend 1-2 hours less a week with her then I would if I didn't run. Guys hunt, fish, and play golf for 5-15 hours a week no problem. She likes to spend time with her friends doing girly things without me and I am cool with that. You can train, work, and have a life if you know how to budget your time. Also, I don't like talking about running with her. For one she doesn't care and it's just running. What are you going to talk about? "Yeah, I ran by this tree today and it was cool honey". Really, what do talk about in regards to running that takes more then 30 seconds? Some people need to get a life or spend more time on Letsrun.com at work!

This is the question that I'm asking; even if you wanted to, how could you really spend that long describing your long run to someone? I mean, obviously there are exceptions, like if you get lost or are chased by animals or have involuntary bowel movements, but for the most part there's really not much to say about a 2 hour run beyond "took the first couple miles to warm up; after that the pace was pretty steady - I dunno, 7 minute miles or so; feeling pretty dead for the last 30 minutes, but finished pretty strong, I guess; ate a whole bunch of chocolate chip cookies when I got back, which tasted just phenomenal; so, yeah, pretty decent long run."

The egos here are amazing.

Yeah the egos here are pretty amazing. It is always good for a laugh.

Just a point about the 3:49 marathoner in the article -- if someone takes up running as an adult, breaking 4 hours is a fairly significant goal. But if someone has been running even sporadically for a many years, breaking 4 is a piece of cake. It depends on where that guy started from. But, of course, if he really is running 80+ miles a week that is another story. My guess is he is not, or maybe he had one week one time where technically he ran 80 miles in 7 days.