Did the Penguin ruin the sport of running?

gamecock wrote:

I think part of the problem is that we just don't have the vocabulary to correctly describe the many, many activities currently lumped together as "running." A parallel example--years ago I taught in an inner-city school. Now I teach in an elite private school. In both, my job title was "US History Teacher," but the actual job descriptions were very different. What Bingham does, what Bekele does, what I just came back from doing (a few easy 7:45 miles), and what my brother-in-law did this morning (26 miles at 9:30-ish while training for an ultra) are so very different as to be worlds apart. But we call them all "running."

Subcultures thrive by drawing lines and making distinctions, in line with Freud's "narcissism of minor difference."

Difference is in the eye of the beholder. I suspect that if the Asteroid to end all Asteroids was incoming and you had an hour left to live, you'd be saying your final prayers and you'd decide that it probably wasn't worth making the sort of distinctions you're invested in making here. Life's too short, etc.

I mean really: 7:45s and 9:30s are "worlds apart"? Which world is that?

And yet I DO know what you're talking about. I do know a few runners who think that way.

I also know some people from Brooklyn who think people from the Bronx talk funny.

I didn't say it affected me to see them. It's the negative side-effects on the sport that I don't appreciate.

ilgore wrote:

“I have had people say that I’ve ruined the sport of running”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/23/sports/23marathon.html?em=&pagewanted=print

The problem ultimately lies within some minor details. Track and Field is a sport. Cross Country is a sport. Road racing is a sport. His description of running as a sport is what causes people to flip out. He can't see the difference between plodding along and being competitive. Participation is different from competition.

Personally, I don't think any of the above mentioned sports or the act of running has been ruined by anyone ever. I still love it and I suspect a majority of the people on this board do as well.

All of the problems that anyone seems to have regarding the Penguin and his ilk are seem to stem from a fear of being grouped in with them. It mostly involves worrying about what people think about you more than anything else.

Ultimately, who cares? Sometimes his articles are funny. Mostly they're cliche and predictable. Either way, none of us are forced to read them and it doesn't change a thing about the way I feel about racing.

Dave Wottle once won a gold medal wearing a hat as did Joan Samuelson. I bet both of them have run faster than you have.

Jeremy Wariner wears sunglasses at night at track meets.

How does what someone else wears affect YOU? The answer is: it does not.

I have harbored some innate guilt all these years because I think I am somewhat responsible for the Penquin...

Back in the mid-90's I got bored at work and wrote a letter to Runnersworld suggesting that I should do a humorous last page-like column that poked fun at running. I suggested a series of topics my running buddies and I kicked around during a couple morning runs and even supplied 2-3 draft articles.

To my amazement, Amby himself called me and said they were thinking about having some kind of personality type column added to the magazine. He seemed to like what I did but said it was maybe a little to edgy and if I could tone it down some he thought it would be a good fit. He mentioned they were looking also at an "everyman" kind of idea as well and that my running skills and experience were well beyond that (albiet I am former and very modest Div III runner).

I never followed up with him and about 5 mths later the penquin was there...

I'd like to remember it as I didn't go forward because I wouldn't "tone down" artistic integrity, but I think I just never really got around to it...

Of course if I did do that maybe I would have been the first person to lose to the penquin and that would have been bad...

I'll admit to wearing sunglasses at the (just) after sunset 5k a few days ago. Course that's because I wore them on the 6 mile progression run to get to the race, when the sun was really bright right on the horizon, and I didn't have anywhere to store them. I took them off for the last mile split to see the 5:40* roll by.

* No, it's not fast -- though it is at 5400 feet, and hopefully not too embarrassing for an old guy.

What the hell is wrong with sunglasses? Try running in bright place like southwest. They aren't gear they are protection for your eyes. I agree with you about the GU belts etc. but sunglasses come on.

"Plodders Have a Place, but Is It in a Marathon? "

“I always ask those people, ‘What was your time?’ If it’s six hours or more, I say, ‘Oh great, that’s fine, but you didn’t really run it,’ ” said Given, who finished the Baltimore race in 4:05:52. “The mystique of the marathon still exists. It’s the mystique of the fast marathon.”

What are the parameters for "running a marathon race?" The mens race would be over by 2 hours and the womens race would be over by 1.5 hours before Givens finished. Did she run the race" or go for a jog with a shirt and medal? Did any male that finished over 2:30 race or go for a jog for a shirt and medal? What about a female that ran slower than 3:00?

Thoughts?

[quote]wedpeople wrote:

Do you wear them while you sleep? No.

i'm guessing he doesn't wear them while he sleeps because his eyes are closed.

People give the guy way too much credit, so "no", he did not ruin anything. Nor do I think he is making people go slower than they otherwise might. Simply, the sport has opened it's arms too incredibly non-competitive runners for the money. His articles are trash but it is hard to debate that participation at any level would seem to promote health in general, so that's not bad.

Competitive runners are a hard working bunch, and we want to get credit for whatever level we have attained:"Elite",sub-3, "Age-grouper", etc. But at the water cooler, it's all hard to distinguish from a 5 hour finisher in a sound byte. I believe this is at the heart of the matter, along with the hassles these extra, slower masses bring to competitive races: they clog starts, take your hotel rooms or even your potential slot in a lottery race...seems inherently unfair because you are racing, they are not.

Race directors/governing bodies should establish standards and accomodations for runners based on performances so that the competitive are not denied entry or amenities at good races and others are incented to get there, eg: Bosoton.

No, I don't think he ruined it, it's not ruined, so no one could have ruined it. I look at it like I look at TV shows. I view what's available then decide if I like it or not. I read some of the Penguin's articles early on, decided they were from a mindset I did not share and was not interested in, at least as it related to running, and then stopped reading his column. I just skip it each month. Turn the page and move on, nothing to see here.... I urge some of the posters here to try that. Just skip it. Let those who enjoy it do so.

The Penguin is not nearly powerful enough to ruin the sport. He couldn't wreck it even if he wanted to. I doubt anyone has heard of him or cares about his thoughts at all at the higher levels of the sport. He's got his niche and some of those Penguin readers may be helping to keep the circulation of Runner's World high enough that it remains viable. And, say what you will about Runner's World, it is still best that we have numerous running publications to cover all the various types of runners out there. Without the casual runners and weekend warriors, a lot of money and a lot of viewers/fans disappear for our sport. And that would be a very negative development.

Running is impossible to ruin. If you actually love running, the act of running not all the other stuff that goes with it, the only thing that can ruin it is a career ending injury, and that only ruins it for one person.

Here is an interesting (at least to me) story that relates to this conversation. When I was a struggling post-collegiate athlete I worked at a running store. This was a great job for me at the time and allowed my to train and race like no job I had ever worked before. I used to laugh after conversations where I had to explain why I didn't have a preference for hydration belts (but what do you do for long runs, like 10 miles??? was an actual question I had to field). Anyway, these people kept me in work while I was training, I would not have had that job if it only catered to "real runners".

So, in a large part, penguins funded my post collegiate career, at least a portion of it. And I was on a much higher level than most achieve. Yet having also been on this level, and having never run or raced a marathon, the marathon scares me. Not the completion of one, (i've done enough 20 milers to know that running 26.2 isn't the issue, it how fast), but the racing of one. So I understand both, but as others have said, live and let live you know.

How about we put some blame to--nobody will expect this--Fred Lebow? The day they held the first NYC 5-boro race in 1976 was the day the slide into mediocrity started. When big numbers took over, when big races with big fields meaning filling hotel rooms and putting asses in restaurant seats in Little Italy and meant big cities benefitting from the associated $$ of having 1,800 or 10,000 or 22, or 43,000 come to their city....that's what "ruined" the running that everyone here is b*tching about.

The dumbing down of our sport started way before the Penguin put on his first pair of jogging sneakers.

I wear sunglasses quite often when the sun isn't out for a couple reasons:

1) the glare from the sunlight hitting the clouds, sidewalks and roads actually makes it very bright and irritating to my eyes, despite the fact there isn't "direct sunlight in my eyes"

2) the sun never sets on a badass

Marathon wrote:

"Plodders Have a Place, but Is It in a Marathon? "

“I always ask those people, ‘What was your time?’ If it’s six hours or more, I say, ‘Oh great, that’s fine, but you didn’t really run it,’ ” said Given, who finished the Baltimore race in 4:05:52. “The mystique of the marathon still exists. It’s the mystique of the fast marathon.”

What are the parameters for "running a marathon race?" The mens race would be over by 2 hours and the womens race would be over by 1.5 hours before Givens finished. Did she run the race" or go for a jog with a shirt and medal? Did any male that finished over 2:30 race or go for a jog for a shirt and medal? What about a female that ran slower than 3:00?

Thoughts?

I read the article Friday and I did find this part humorous. A 4:05 marathoner ripping 6 hr marathoners. I suppose there are 6 hour marathoners who rip on 8 hr marathoners.

My wife and I got into it when I talked with her about the article. She is about an 8-8:30 min mile marathoner and she thinks fast runners can simply be snobs. I have no problem with people running marathons at the best pace they are capable of. It does bother me somewhat that all these people never really follow the sport and don't appreciate our elite athletes (or even know who they are). If you went down to the local YMCA on a Saturday morning and there were a bunch of 40 year old guys playing in a men's league, I guarantee you they would know a lot about professional and collegiate basketball. I also point out to her that there is a difference between trying to run as fast as one can and just cruising along to finish. If a guy busts his ass to run a 3:30 marathon and is absolutely depleted at the finish I can respect that, even though he isn't very talented.

ilgore wrote:

John Bingham, a runner who is known as the Penguin, is often credited with starting the slow-running movement, in the 1990s. “I have had people say that I’ve ruined the sport of running, but what I’ve been trying to do is promote the activity of running to an entire generation of people,” he said. “What’s wrong with that?”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/23/sports/23marathon.html?em=&pagewanted=print

I'd prefer it to be set up so that the competitive runners paid less because they were on the course less.

If I'm going to be on a course for 8 hours, then I think its justifiable to pay the $50-150 entry fee, but if I'm only going to be on the course for around 2:25-3:00 I think I should be entitled to some of that money back.

They could also start giving out different medals for participants. So as to designate someone as a competitor vs a completer.

As for this whole, running attire arguments,(that are completely arbitrary) Does it really matter what the man next to you is wearing when he runs, unless he is a complete eyesore, it doesn't at all effect you in the least, many people wear sunglasses to act as a windshield rather than a sunblock. People use a garmin to accurately measure out their runs. People wear hats to keep their hair out of their eyes. People run the New York marathon in giant Dixie cups because its amusing for many people.

This whole argument is loosely based on the fact that you SLOWER runners don't have enough competition closer to your speed for you to beat, because everyone you run/train with is good enough to put you in your place every time. So you go out and call out the plodders who paid money to have the course kept open long enough for you to complete it as well as them.

Personally, if you aren't breaking 3 in the marathon, You aren't a competitive runner or you're a woman(and even then they're throwing down 2:30s)

I am glad when I see people drag themselves out of the house to exercise, that is something our obese society needs. I do however disagree that what they are doing is being a "runner." As their is a difference between running and jogging I believe there is a difference between someone who runs as a sport and someone who runs to run.

I play pick up football games with my buddies, but I am not a football player. Simply because I play some football doesn't make me a football player and simply because you jog doesn't make you a runner. I can't lie i do get a little mad when I hear people say that they are a runner when they don't race they just jog each morning.

I'd like to say I agree with the last 5 posts directly above me.

I never said I was angered by the massive amount of "gear" our community has come to acquire. I was irked. It troubles me by the focus of gear rather than performance that many people have shifted towards. I do apologize for my "sunglasses" comment as the context is to difficult to explain on LRC.

[/quote]

My wife and I got into it when I talked with her about the article. She is about an 8-8:30 min mile marathoner and she thinks fast runners can simply be snobs. I have no problem with people running marathons at the best pace they are capable of. It does bother me somewhat that all these people never really follow the sport and don't appreciate our elite athletes (or even know who they are). If you went down to the local YMCA on a Saturday morning and there were a bunch of 40 year old guys playing in a men's league, I guarantee you they would know a lot about professional and collegiate basketball. I also point out to her that there is a difference between trying to run as fast as one can and just cruising along to finish. If a guy busts his ass to run a 3:30 marathon and is absolutely depleted at the finish I can respect that, even though he isn't very talented.[/quote]

Thank you for making a good point, without joining in the pointless side-debate about sunglasses.

The problem is not how slow or fast people run, but the fact that the vast majority of participants in the activity of running are not fans of the sport. There is little support for elite ATHLETES in the SPORT of running.

In my opinion, much of the responsibility for the decline in support for elite athletes in running falls on the shoulders of race sponsors and race directors. Their priority is to attract the masses with better t-shirts, goody bags, and finisher medals. THAT'S where the prize money has gone. For instance -- next weekend in Chicago there is a 15K where every participant gets a hooded sweatshirt or jacket AND a hat AND a great goody bag. That stuff is not cheap. Shockingly, there is no prize money in this race.

The other movement that has hurt support for elite athletes in running is that races have become fundraisers for causes, such as Leukemia research or helping the homeless. While it's great to raise money for worthy causes, there is an attitude that giving prize money to race winners or even comping entries is wrong. If you dare ask for a comp entry, people look at you like you're a leper.