Interesting story for all those concerned with the elite v recreational runner

The point was that the ones who have died are usually the slower ones. So if we're comparing who is suffering more, this is one indication that the "joggers" are suffering quite a bit more. This is generally because they are involved with something that is extreme for their level of fitness. And a lot of posts here suggest that slower runners suffer more. If an elite is better able to tolerate pain, then I guess the "joggers" really are suffering more. Obviously when you're slower or out of shape, you're going to suffer when running a marathon. I'm not suggesting the elites don't race their brains out and go through all kinds of pain & suffering, but it's a different kind of pain. The pain you face when you're in shape is quite different from the out of shape pain.

When I go to the park and play a pick-up game of baseball, I don't go out the next day and compare myself to Barry Bonds or Alex Rodriguez. And I think that is what is so frustrating--that the slower runners think that just by completing the same race (playing the same game) that they are achieving at a level equal to elite runners. I read a quote once from a 5+ hour marathoner (paraphrased) that "today we lined up with the best and finished with the best." I couldn't believe that someone would actually think this way. Running is a weird sport in that even the slowest runners actually can compete in the same event as a world record holder...it therefore becomes tough to distinguish levels of achievement. I'm a decently fast runner (14:52 5K) and to explain to others who ask how good that is, I usually say that if I were a baseball player I'd be in the minor leagues, say class AA. They can usually grasp that very well. I don't know...it's frustrating to deal with. If you can think of a better way, let me know. Until then, keep improving, don't let this attitude get you down (use it as motivation), and try to run in races where people will understand your sacrifices.

wow. congratulations on taking a post that had nothing to do with you, and twisting it to fit your nuerotic though process.

I apoligize if it came off that way.

What I was basically trying to say was that other runners have experienced similar attitudes, and that it is very frustrating to deal with. Maybe I was blowing of a little steam, but running means a lot to me--as I know it does to most others here--and I can stand it when people cheapen the effort I put into something.

I used the baseball analogy to try to show the absurdity of the "jogger" attitude.

Who experiences more pain in a race?? Who really knows...pain is a very personal sensation that is impossible to compare. I do know that 16:38 has 30:00 beat in the sacrifice department, and that is probably the most painful process of all.

Have a great day.

ummm, as you can see i wasnt talking to you.

At considerable risk of damaging my considerable popularity and credibility... ;-)

I think the original poster and a number of others need to work on their self esteem and get a thicker skin.

Who cares WHAT the 30min 5k jogger lady says to you? You're going to run across all kinds of ignorant people in every aspect of your life. If you let every little criticism hurt you, you won't make it very far. Just let it slide. Take personal pride in your accomplishments, and worry about what you and your running peers think, not the slow lady. I'm sure most people in the crowd applauded your effort when you walked up front during the award ceremony. This one lady is NOT representative of the running community on the whole, at least not where I live.

For the record, I don't believe MOST 30min 5k runners aren't giving it their all. I generally like to watch most of the pack come across the line, and I rarely see anyone who doesn't look like they've pushed it, from the front of the pack to the back. This may be different for y'all down in the US...?

And, for the record, to reply to meggruns, just like the grocery lady, I too like to scarf back a bucket of timbits from timmys from time to time. In fact, I just might do that for my second breakfast this morning...

But to come back to my main point, let's just give the whining a bit of a rest, shall we?

Apologies (not really) if I've offended.

I wasn't hurt at all by what she said to me, just surprised by the rudeness of it. Her comment won't change the way I run or compete.

Brief update and philosophical question.

On my hour long commute to work this morning, I drove through Tim Hortons' for my daily extra large black coffee and followed through and bought myself a box of 20 chocolate timbits. I worked my way through maybe ten or twelve of them (after all, I had already had a huge bowl of cereal with about a litre of OJ - one man can only eat so much).

My question is this:

is my box of timbits now half empty or half full?

I believe your response to this question will be very telling in defining which side of this discussion you're on. Anyone...?

Well my response is that you've asked the wrong question. The real question is "Why would somebody who's already had a huge bowl of cereal and a liter of OJ bother to stop and consume half of a box of doughnut parts?" (Not being near a Tim Horton's, I'm assuming that "Timbits" are similar to "doughnut holes".) Yeesh!

Well,

part of my message was that runners can eat a whole lot more than non-runners without worrying about their girlish figure. Plus, I took meggruns' comment as a bit of a personal challenge, and I really DO like chocolate timbits, a lot. So it was really a win, win, win. A no-brainer, really, once I started thinking about it.

Thus, even though the box of timbits is now 0% full (co-workers are scavengers), it's still not empty, because I have the memories of that beautiful dining experience still with me.

Keep on smilin', folks!

Great question Pete, I think it is these kind of questions that have been haunting man since the dawn of donut holes, which I am assuming are what you call timbits.

You say 10 or 12, well which is it? This will help a lot in answering your question. If it is 12, any fool will say half full just based on a simple mathematical calculation. Now 10 is the tricky number in this situation. Did you pick out and eat all of the smaller timbits first, thus leaving the bigger ones and allowing the box to look maybe more then half full. If this was your motive it really is a cheap philosophical trick on your part. If so, do you really need to stupe that low to give yourself that optimistic start to the day. The other question is at what angle was the box resting in the car. I ask this because if the box was resting at such an angle so that the remaining 10 timbits (regardless of size) are resting at one end thus exposing the bottom of the other end of the box, giving that half empty feel. Maybe you left home this morning not feeling as cheery as you thought, and just gave that subtle shift of the box to give it the half empty feel.

Pete, after deconstructing this near manic behavior of yours the only advice I can give is don't let a box of timbits (no matter how tasty) be your guide through life. Get some help, please.

my box is usually half empty.

Bazza wrote:

21:37 down to 16:38 is cracking stuff.

I can only but agree

absolutely fantastic progression

If you started with 20 timbits and ate 10, the box is half empty. Half empty since you are in the act of emptying the box. Now, when the box started out as empty and you had the person behind the counter put in 20 and he paused after putting in 10, the box would be half full. Of course, by full we are referring to 20 timbits, not the volume of the box being filled by timbits.

On a side note, if you think that people running 30+ for 5k look like they are really pushing it, you have clearly never watched a 5k road race in Chicago. It's a pretty sad sight. Chicago seems to be turning into a Penguin stronghold. A couple weeks ago, I saw a poster for the Chicago Distance Classic 20k. On the poster they were advertising it as the Penguin Classic. Seeing that was almost enough for me to start vomiting profusely.

x,

as always, some truly deep thinking behind your seemingly offhand input.

But while I appreciate your exploration of my Tim Hortons philosophy, I feel you've stopped somewhat short of the true meaning of today's dialogue.

First we must really consider the meaning of "timbit." As some have posited, one could easily define a "timbit" as the equivalent of an american "donut hole." But that would be taking a far too narrow view. You see, the timbit in fact has a deep spiritual connection with the evasive "hoof whammie" (here I avoid the traditional masculine spelling and use the feminine form, which is the original, Canadian spelling), which is not just urban myth, but in fact an invention of the long-deceased Maple Leafs hockey player (ie Tim H) who is the grandfather of today's breakfast delicacy.

(That's right folks. While some may attempt to dispute it, Canadians invented not only hockey, basketball, baseball, insulin and 5% alcohol beer, we also dreamed up the hoof whammy, if I can beg your indulgence and use the coarser, american spelling.)

To answer one of your questions, my timbit selection process was much simpler than you've suggested - I did not seek out the larger or chocolatier timbits first - rather, I selected the one closest to my fingers at the top of the box when the time came to grab another one.

And further, I dispute your claim of significance in my uncertainty of the number I consumed. 10 or 12 eaten, the box remained either 40% or half full.

But if I can come back to my elusive point... damn, I can't remember what my point was. And it's lunchtime!

Happy running this weekend, folks.