Why so much hate for uncompetitive runners?

You know, reading through all these posts and the more I think about it, there's just no good rational justification for these feelings of annoyance towards slower runner. Yeah, sure, people who are slow who subscribe to the "penguin" mentality are legitmately irksome, but (and I'm not proud of this) there are some people in life who are just annoying. You can't pinpoint specifically why they're annoying without sounding like an ass yourself, but you know they are. It's not a nice thing to feel, but that doesn't mean competitive runners don't still feel that way anyway.

These people are like the kind of guy who goes to the gym and gets on the pull up bar and does three low quality pull ups, grunting the whole way. Of course, later, he'll describe to his buddies what a tough gym workout he had today. You're there putting in quality sets, but for all anybody else knows, your workout was the same as his. The guy's clearly an ass, but if you were to try to explain to someone why he's a clown, what would you say?

They're the guy who comes into work complaining about what a busy weekend or difficult weekend he had when most of his problems are self-created. Forget the fact that you have twice as much on your plate as him; the guy just goes on and on, and it's extremely evident that his woes are self-inflicted.

I guess it just feels like a mockery of the sport. When people who don't run fast get respect for their "accomplishments" and you know they have the means to train harder but don't, it feels like they're disrespecting the sport. It's not right, and it's not rationally justifiable, but that's how a lot of runners feel.

pecking order! not nice.

I don't mind fun runners. However, it makes my blood boil when you go to enter a high profile race and you cannot enter because its full up with the majority of fun/slow runners who just aim to finish the race! let alone race!

Why call it a race if the best runners cannot enter?

In my opinion, there is a big difference between your friendly casual runner, and the "penguin" types.

I know many of the former, and they're good people. They're running to be fitter, and/or because they enjoy it, and these are good things. If they're out there enjoying running and not being annoying, I have no problem with them, and I am happy to enter the same races as them.

On the other hand, the "penguin" attitude of being some kind of a special breed because they are slow, and thinking that somehow this makes them better or harder working than others, that is somewhere between irksome and downright infuriating. For example, from (http://www.johnbingham.com/penguin.html):

"the word "Penguin" has come to mean a person who runs more for the joy of running than for recognition and public rewards."

This is goddamn ridiculous. For someone like me (train hard and place high but never win a race of any significance), there is no public recognition, no rewards. To act like anyone who isn't ass-slow is just doing it to be superficial is downright insulting, and that alone makes me hate Bingham.

Exactly. Time is not the issue, if you compare "competative runners" to the real elites you quickly realize all of us except about 30 people on the planet should really be "runners". It's the attitude, show up and lay it on the line, whatever that best may be.

Because I have to zig zag around them for the first mile of the race.

SimonT wrote:

I don't mind fun runners. However, it makes my blood boil when you go to enter a high profile race and you cannot enter because its full up with the majority of fun/slow runners who just aim to finish the race! let alone race!

Why call it a race if the best runners cannot enter?

:::cough::: BOSTON :::cough:::

Swingline wrote:

Exactly. Time is not the issue, if you compare "competative runners" to the real elites you quickly realize all of us except about 30 people on the planet should really be "runners".

What exactly are you saying, Vizzini? I do not think it means what you think it means.

GVXC wrote:

Running in any way is good, but "true" running is done with raw, animalistic instincts in the heat of intense competition where you will do whatever it takes to beat the person next to you.

...or alone, 14 miles into your 18 mile run at night in the 33 degree driving rain b/c you had family stuff to do all day.

That was me last night.

Here is what I will say about it...

I like that people are running. I want everyone to run. I guess I just get jealous sometimes. I won a local marathon earlier this year and was barely mentioned in the article the next day. The paper had a huge, front-page write up on the local Weight Watchers group who had 3 ladies walk it together.

I ran sub 2:30 and although it isn't super-duper fast, I felt it was worthy of at least a blurb. Having the whole race boiled down into a Weight Watchers story was insulting. I actually had some of my dad's friends give me shit about winning "the fat old lady race."

A similar thing happened this fall with a half-marathon. I think the local paper hates me.

That being said, I am a huge proponent of people being active, so if this is the only thing I have to complain about, I guess I am willing to put up with it.

This really isn't any individual persons fault. Its all down to this civilisation we live in, with most people being idle, fat and lazy. There is no way i would be proud of myself for finishing a 5k, 10k or even half marathon race. We are all supposed to be superior animals. Most people in this world cannot run for 30 seconds without having a heart attack, or falling to the floor because of the rubbing together of their thighs setting them on fire!

If you put everybody in the jungle, they wouldn't last 2 minutes!

There is hate for everyone and everything on this site.

Most posters are young and immature.

The hate or not-liking of non-competitive runners is that the one or two times during the year that the media actually covers a local road, they rarely cover the top 3 runners. They look for the blind-necropheliac-one legged midget who is running to raise money for his organization. doesnt matter that they just averaged 18 minutes miles.

The one time that the local 2000 10K is covered, I'd rather them do an expose on the top three runners than their freak and geek show articles or videos.

somewhere in the middle wrote:

The hate or not-liking of non-competitive runners is that the one or two times during the year that the media actually covers a local road, they rarely cover the top 3 runners. They look for the blind-necropheliac-one legged midget who is running to raise money for his organization. doesnt matter that they just averaged 18 minutes miles.

The one time that the local 2000 10K is covered, I'd rather them do an expose on the top three runners than their freak and geek show articles or videos.

Take it easy man. I get your point but damn. More people care about Team Hoyt than your mediocre ass. How about you learn to appreciate that it might be a hell of a lot easier for you.

that sucks about the weight watcher ladies stealing your thunder, i feel ya.

Deep thoughts wrote:

Most posters are young and immature.

That's not true.

I have to say that I was pretty annoyed when I was third in a race with 5,000 people (it is shocking how few people these days train at all seriously, even over 40 mpw) when the top three overall, like all the age group top three, just got a framed poster of the race, with advertisements over much of it, when I could have skipped the 4,000 miles running this year and just dressed up like Ms. Pac Man, walked the course, and won three hundred dollars in the costume contest, which did have substantial prize money.

The only thing that I resent about races becoming little festivals is that I sort of feel like a d-bag going out and busting a nut at one of those things when everybody else is just fooling around.

what is this penguin thing?

um, sign up early.

there are plenty of "elite" only races fun runners can't enter.