Streaker at NYC Marathon

Overweight??? wrote:

Just because she doesn't have ribs sticking out like some refugee? You people are insane. And a 4:31 marathon isn't exactly walking, despite what you arrogant elite-wannabes want to think. God, why are so many of you such snobs?

Maybe you have not seen the picture with a little blubber hanging over the sides. Look, I took almost 10 years off from running and after gaining 30 pounds during that time I got sick of my ever expanding waist line. During my first day running, I probably covered a quarter mile until I had to walk. Two years later I lined up on a marathon and ran well under 3 hours. For the first six months I could not have run a marathon much under 4 hours because of my years of laziness and accumulated blubber. Once I got out of that stage, if I was running slower than 3:15 pace then I felt like I was crawling. Most "normal” and fairly young (under 45) people should be fit enough to break a 4 hour marathon unless they lead a blubbery life style for which I have been guilty of myself. This girl has some blubber on her and if it was not for the rest of disgustingly blubbery society, she would look like she needs to lose a few pounds. Unfortunately I get called out on this because most people (non-serious exercisers) think having side handles hanging over the side of your pants is a normal and good thing. Well I am sorry to say that it is not!

Fat:

http://www.brightroom.com/view_user_photo.asp?EVENTID=4044&PWD=&ID=11539923&FROM=photos&BIB=17574

Sure, she could stand to lose a few pounds, but calling her fat is a bit much.

That girl is better looking than 90% of all women out there.

Wait, this is a new publicity stunt Gabe Jenning can try. Since the bike trip is forgotton, he can now do a nude run.

Guest_of_Letsrun wrote:

Sure, she could stand to lose a few pounds, but calling her fat is a bit much.

I never called her fat. In my original post, I called her somewhat overweight. She is basically fine but if she is not careful she is headed for the blubber farm like most of society. A lot of the runners around her are a lot worse off than her. Their loose fitting shirts are hiding serious beer bellies. These are the 4 1/2 hour marathoners, which look like they lead a heavy eating semi-minimal exercise life style. Anybody defending 11 minute miles as some sort of speed achievement is nuts.

You're kidding yourself if you think every 4 1/2 hour marathoner is a quasi-couch potato. I don't for a minute defend the marathon-walker-You're-All-Winners crowd, but for some people a 4 1/2 hour marathon IS an achievement. You know, full-time professional jobs, a couple of kids, a healthy marriage, maybe church or civic involvement can get in the way of doing 90 obsessive miles a week.

"Overweight???", what are you talking about? Anyone who gives in to a marriage or a full-time job is just a soft slacker who is hurting America. This is the reason the Kenyans and Ethiopians beat us again and again. Civic involvement means nothing if you're not strengthening the running community. So you have kids? Have you started their training programs already? That's the problem--we don't get them while they're young. We are horrible human beings who can't sacrifice for the greater good of American distance running. Shit, nobody should date her--she's not working hard enough to turn our running slump around. Hell, she's probably the reason our sport isn't popular!

"Overweight???", right on. Some of the rest of you need to grow up.

Overweight??? wrote:

You're kidding yourself if you think every 4 1/2 hour marathoner is a quasi-couch potato. I don't for a minute defend the marathon-walker-You're-All-Winners crowd, but for some people a 4 1/2 hour marathon IS an achievement. You know, full-time professional jobs, a couple of kids, a healthy marriage, maybe church or civic involvement can get in the way of doing 90 obsessive miles a week.

Keep piling up the excuses, everybody does it. You don't have to run 90 miles a week to be in great shape. How about 40-50 miles a week and less pizza and beer. That would be good.

That's great...wait til the self-righteous Flagstick Swilly sees this Wejo.

You will be in for a lecture about how this degrades women and how much he loves his wife.

whats wrong with tara rieds ta-ta's

You would have a lot of fun with this woman. Isn't that the crucial point?

pierced nipples, tats, what's not to like?

questoin wrote:

whats wrong with tara rieds ta-ta's

I think he is probably refering to the scaring in the recent photos associated with her recent enlargement surgery. I would much rather look at Tara's then this fat woman in NYC.

I like how the photographer didn't take just one photo, but three!!! He even zoomed in on the last one. What a guy.

wejo wrote:

Further proof that I don't remove most of the threads from this forum.

http://www.brightroom.com/view_user_event.asp?EVENTID=4044&PWD=&BIB=17574

Warning you will see a woman's breasts at the link above but from the ING NYC Marathon.

Um, did anyone ever say that you (and the other moderators) delete "most of the threads from this forum" ??? I don't recall reading anyone saying that. In fact I have OFTEN noted that LetsRun allows posts with all sorts of possibly objectionable content, such as: swear-laden posts (chock full of the F' word and such...do a search on that), sexist posts (there have been entire threads bashing women and calling certain women of this board like "16x" the C' word), racist posts (too many to mention), and defamatory posts (anonymous posters making sweeping drug accustations and all SORTS of personal attacks). I would say you allow 98% of that stuff (which if you are for absolute free speech on the board, I guess it should be 100%. On the other hand, if you want your site to be more mature or professional or running specific, I guess you should remove quite a bit of that stuff, but that is up to you).

What I DO recall people (like me) saying was this:

LetsRun OFTEN would remove political threads (with occasional exceptions, like immediately pre and post election, and certain other times), especially when these threads had an anti- Bush angle. In fact, your very own thread with the subject of "TO OTHER MODERATORS, DON'T REMOVE ANTI-BUSH THREADS" got deleted when it took an anti-Bush turn!! How is THAT for ironic?? Such actions occur time and time again, and in no way it is a conspiracy theory. Obviously, you support Bush, your Dad is great friends with him (and works for him), and you do not want your very own site to be an instrument for attacking a man you support(and who employs your Dad). But you could have at least admitted that fact (well you admitted your love of George Bush and connections to him, just not the part about you deleting anti-Bush threads). But instead you played dumb (like Bush himself did during the Swift Boat attacks), and said: "we don't delete those anti-Bush threads, its your IMAGINATION."

Whatever. But you are just playing dumb again with this comment, knocking down the straw man argument that you remove "most of threads from this forum." No one (or very few people at least) accused you of THAT exact charge. And OF COURSE this post of mine is again going to be deleted within moments.

I'd like fluff the pillows of the streaker.

If you think the streaker is fat, you need to stop whacking it to pictures of Milena and Regina.

http://www.fast-women.com/photos/newhaven02/nh08.jpg

http://www.fast-women.com/photos/adidasindoor02/adidas23.jpg

Do you think she is fat too?

http://www.letsrun.com/2004/carlsbad5/thumbnails/tnDavis_Sue-Carlsbad5k04.JPG

Stop wrote:

Do you think she is fat too?

http://www.letsrun.com/2004/carlsbad5/thumbnails/tnDavis_Sue-Carlsbad5k04.JPG

DAMN

of all the photos posted, i would take the fat chick. a little curve is nice. if a gal is too thin to menstrate she is too thin to do it with. use that as your rule of thumb.

I'd take the fat hedgehog over Milena 99 times out of 99. You know Milena is just a dusty dry hole. At least the root exposing her cans has a personality.