unpopular opinion: Barkley Marathons is gimmicky and cheesy

dsafsdfasdfd wrote:

Laz lives wrote:

Exactly. The windfall from 40 runners paying the $1.60 entry fee has corrupted them.

Selling out occurs with non-monetary rewards as well. Laz sought fame and he got it.

Exactly. He started it 33 years ago with the long-term plan that in 30 years someone will make a movie about it and he'll be famous among hundreds, perhaps even thousands of people.

And we all remember watching it on MTV in 1986.

Conniving and greedy he is.

Well obviously it is an overrated running event (just like the Boston marathon is). But if people find it a good challenge to tackle and want to try and complete it then good on ‘em. Live and let live

It never ceases to amaze me that for a group of people who profess to despise ultra marathons, every major ultra has multiple dedicated threads ON THE HOME PAGE. Additionally, if your going to hate on some one have the courtesy to use their real name.

asdfasfsdfd wrote:

the whole thing is kind of gimmicky and cheesy. The fact that media is falling over themselves trying to find some random yellow gate in the middle of woods where they'll stand around with nothing to do for close to 60 hours is amusing, but the whole thing is overrated.

I put this in the non-running main category because it's more of a hiking event.

The paces may be similar, but it's no worse than your local hobby jogger 5K.

Dude, you need to get laid. Can't you just enjoy something a little off the beaten path?

pete hadley wrote:

Dude, you need to get laid. Can't you just enjoy something a little off the beaten path?

That'd be scary.

pete hadley wrote:

Dude, you need to get laid. Can't you just enjoy something a little off the beaten path?

That's just it. They want you to think it is off the beaten path. It's on Netflix, covered by Runners World, and my local news station had a story about it. It's the beaten path.

saasdfasfasdfsd wrote:

pete hadley wrote:

Dude, you need to get laid. Can't you just enjoy something a little off the beaten path?

That's just it. They want you to think it is off the beaten path. It's on Netflix, covered by Runners World, and my local news station had a story about it. It's the beaten path.

Did it start off I tending to be mainstream? No. Is it mainstream? Does your mom know about it? No? Then it ain't the beaten path. Unlike what your holding in your hand.

Most of the people who are let in to do it are serious attention whores who know the odds are stacked against them to actually finish but know it will gain them further attention. The media hype drives their egos and further gives them heads the size of watermelons. Don't pay this s*** any attention.

I can't feel my pace wrote:

I lost interest in the whole thing back in 2001, when they arbitrarily DQed Blake Wood.

Are you sure about that? I think Laz considers Blake a finisher. I thought it just some whacko trying to discredit Blake on the ultra list serve?

Yes, I'm sure

Here's one link

http://www.mattmahoney.net/barkley/

" ... In 2001, after several failed attempts, Blake Wood, 42, NM, and David Horton, 50, VA, finished together in 58:21, only to be disqualified for inadvertently leaving the course to follow a parallel route for about 200 yards. ..."

Also, you can check Blake Wood running page

http://microserf.lanl.gov/bpw/running.html

" ...3/31 Barkley races, near Oak Ridge, TN. Finished 5 loops (100 miles) with David Horton in 58:21. 2nd time in 16 years that someone has finished 5 loops. DQed for a minor route-finding error. ..."

To DQ Blake Wood for "leaving the course" for 200 yards was not fair. But nobody is looking for fairness in that group event

Thank you.

The gospel of Barkley has spread far and wide because its participants and fans are highly educated and articulate folk who do a tremendous job of promoting the race and perpetuating the mystery that surrounds the race. It’s a niche event in a niche sport which probably gets a disproportionate amount of media attention in relation to the running scene in general. And to be honest, I can understand why a casual runner or just a random person might be more intrigued by something like Barkley versus some East African running 58 and change at the Barcelona half. Either way, we’re all entitled to test our boundaries whether we’re a poor African running road races or a computer engineer trying to complete a 100 mile death march in the Tennessee mountains.

If you don't like the Barkley, you could always do the Last Annual Vol State run or Big's Backyard Ultra. They need a little more publicity.

I actually think this event is pretty unique and interesting. I like how the race organizer actually does something original and has a good sense of humor, as opposed to the smash-and-grab profit taking feel that I get from a lot of races.

But I feel like ultra-endurance events are mostly for white people with spare cash and leisure time trying to carve out a sporting niche, because in sports that actually require athleticism rather than a strong sense of masochism, they have no chance.

vivalarepublica wrote:

carve out a sporting niche, because in sports that actually require athleticism

Like a 120 lb male running in a straight line for 2 hours and five minutes?

Ok I'm from the south and drove by that location weekly in the 90s.

It makes me laugh that after a silly documentary ...a bunch of rich white privileged people want to run it makes me laugh.

I've even over heard people say "I've always wanted to run that race"... always? Really...

Rich white privelege is awesome.

This skill is useful only if you want to be an outlaw or a guerrilla fighter hiding out in the hills. Otherwise the custom in travel is to go around.

It can't be the worst terrain in the nation, and the 40 starters limit is also a limit on how popular it can be - why don't someone start a competing event that can take 500 starters?