Races should only be for FAST people

Most runners compete against themself

The error here is that the OP was never able to compete at a "high level". So knock it off.

You missed the point Mr. No Name,

We have defined "fast" and "high level" as being good enough to win a local race ( ie 15:00) Compared to how many people in a given community of non-professional runners are able to hit that, 15:00 is an Elite time.

ukathleticscoach

That's only plausible in a context where the athlete is continuously improving, a situation which is clearly outside our parameters for this question.

Hey Competerer,

News Flash: I know of a local training run where 4 or 5 of us can go out at 5:45 pace for a 6 miler, and turn it into a dead sprint over the last half mile for bragging rights if we so pleased.

Open your eyes. Runners tend to be competitive even outside racing lines.

Speak for yourself Off the Grid,

I don't perceive anything "fun" about getting your ass whooped by a half a dozen anonymous road racers at my local Bunny 5K

Wait $30 on a race? Holy shit.

that is life - there is always somebody better than youThey earn more money than youThey have a bigger houseThey are invited to more prestigous meetings/conferences etcIt never ends. So you can a) be a competitve dick the rest of your life and find no joy in anything or b) do the things you like.The whole point of competing is to keep finding bigger events until you DO get your ass whipped. Is *your* mantle too cluttered w/ OG golds these days?

call me jack wrote:

Speak for yourself Off the Grid,

I don't perceive anything "fun" about getting your ass whooped by a half a dozen anonymous road racers at my local Bunny 5K

I know you are just on here to try to argue with people, but I will play along, if only because I have a different view than a couple of years ago. I ran in college, wasn't ever that great, middle of the pack. After college I didn't run for about 3-4 years because I was sick of it. I took up a challenge with one of my friends on a mile race, and started training again. I found out that I loved to train again, I wasn't sick of it anymore.

So we hopped in this indoor mile race. You know what else I found? That racing is really fun (not the during it part, we all know it is horrible) but the part before (nervousness) and the part after (bench racing, talking to the people you raced against and a feeling of accomplishment). Win or Lose, it is fun to compete against other people. I know you probably don't feel like that right now, but I hope that eventually you come around to it. While I am not as middle of the pack as I used to be, it is the same thrill to outkick someone running a 17 minute 5k as a 15:30 5k (my middle of the pack PR).

There is one point I do agree with. Paying 30 bucks to run a race is ridiculous, but the guy who put the thing about the cost/benefit analysis was right (even if jokingly so).

Speak for yourself Off the Grid,

I don't perceive anything "fun" about getting your ass whooped by a half a dozen anonymous road racers at my local Bunny 5K

Well, your trollish, assholish question was "why does someone else race," not "why should I race?" What's un-fun for you may be an orgasmic delight for others.

In fact one suspects you're generally a miserable bastard and there's plenty you don't enjoy that others do. If you want to claim your non-enjoyment, your dysphoria, is part of what makes you not just separate from but also superior to the rest of us, have at it. Most of us would rather enjoy life than enjoy our self-image of being too good to enjoy life, but hey, your choice.

And if you'd ever been in the 99.99th percentile at some pursuit, you'd know firsthand that participation in something else at a 98th percentile level, or 95th, or 80th, or even 40th can be a hell of a lot more fun than always feeling like second place would be failure and first merely what's expected.

The truest answer is even more general than Off the Grid's: "because he wants to."

ukathleticscoach wrote:

Most runners compete against themself

just sounds wrong-is it themselves?

not a grameican question wrote:

ukathleticscoach wrote:

Most runners compete against themself

just sounds wrong-is it themselves?

Usee inner self, it`s more betterer

Well, first of all this is not a troll attempt. This is a topic that I believe merits discussion especially for those who used to be fast and are not any longer. As I said, it is being born of personal experience.

Second, I'm not here to say what someone else should or shouldn't do. If you take that route, you've completely mistaken my point. I probably should have worded the thread differently, but be that as it may, the question still stands.

For those who say racing is "enjoyable" regardless of place or time, you have yet to articulate exactly how or why. Explain to me how you get a thrill of outkicking someone for 16th place in a local road race.

call me jack wrote:

Funny how everyone seems to be skirting around the question, as if to search for an answer that isn't readily available.

It's not a rhetorical question. I challenge anyone to come up with a coherent, intelligible answer.

A runner who doesn't race is not a failure. And she need not quit. The question remains - why race?

Ok, then. Here is the answer to your question. They like to run races. That wasn't so tough to figure out.

call me jack wrote:

You missed the point Mr. No Name,

We have defined "fast" and "high level" as being good enough to win a local race ( ie 15:00) Compared to how many people in a given community of non-professional runners are able to hit that, 15:00 is an Elite time.

No, youhave defined it that way. And it is not an elite time and you were never that fast anway. 15:00 is not even close to being fast.

You were never fast. You have never belonged in a race in your life

Obviously, we're quite lacking in the deep thinking department.

No shit. We've already established that. What's there to like about it?

15:00 is not fast?

That's funny because there's a guy in my town ( BTW we're one of the top 10 largest cities in the country) who runs those times and he's been undefeated the last 15 years. Go figure. Sorry dude, that IS fast around these parts. Let's not start comparing apples with oranges, I never said it was fast in comparison with the nation's best.

call me jack wrote:

Obviously, we're quite lacking in the deep thinking department.

No shit. We've already established that. What's there to like about it?

No "deep thinking" went into my answer because no deep thinking is required for your question. People run races because they like to. That's really all there is to it.

Their reasoning for liking to race is really irrelevant. People should do what they enjoy regardless of the underlying reasoning for their preference, so the fact that people like to race is sufficient explanation for why people run races. Do you think that people who like to race for one reason should race while people who like to race for another reason should choose not to race? I don't.

You wouldn't have races to run if it weren't for the 95% of the field paying their entry fee. This money allows for the road closures, timing companies, awards, etc. If local races were just people contending for the win the rest would not be possible.