Races should only be for FAST people

call me jack wrote:

We're not getting it here.

I'm not taking a moralist or elitist stand on whether people should be allowed to race or not. That's obviously their choice and I'm not here to slash their free will.

Your thread title seems to contradict this statement. I think you're just trying to change your tone now that it has become clear that no one agrees with your initial argument.

Fifteen minutes for 5 km is still not fast no matter how many local races someone wins with that time. But if your criteria for racing is having a chance to win a race that you've entered, the answer is to find one slow enough for that to be possible. I've seen 5 kms won in over 20 minutes. You're saying that someone who can run 17:30, say, for 5 km should race if he lives in places where that time might win a race and not race in places where it won't win a race.

But if everyone who has no real chance of winning that race adopts your philiosphy perhaps no one would show up at races. Go to any road race and analyze the field. If a hundred people are entered there are probably fewer than five of each gender who have a realistic chance of winning. Realistically no one is going to put on a race for ten people.

Some people want to see what they're capable of doing when they make an all out effort to run a distance as fast as they can and find that competition stimulates them to push harder than they could do otherwise. Some just enjoy the feel of being part of a somewhat big event.

But that doesn't really matter. If you think there's no point to racing if you have no chance of winning then you shouldn't race. Why would you care what others do? My wife belongs to a tennis club. There are all sorts of competitions that are arranged by that club. Most of the people who play in them will never win one or really get close to doing so. But they ENJOY it anyway.

If you're asking people to explain why they enjoy something that you don't in hopes that you'll be able to understand it you're going to be disappointed. I can't understand why anyone likes golf or watching NASCAR. I've tried to understand for decades but I don't. So what?

If you're reached a point where your performances have deteriorated and therefore racing is no longer enjoyable then you should stop. And you should resign yourself to the fact that you may never be able to understand people in your situation who don't stop. If you keep this thread going until you get an answer that satisfies you it's going to be a very long thread.

jack, your tone makes it quite clear you're not simply looking for information. You're challenging someone to justify why he'd bother, or at least attempt to in the face of your contempt and probability that you'll attack anyone's reasons.Nobody owes you nothin' let alone a justification for why the hell they choose to race. Still, I'll try to explain, as if your question were more sincere.

Explain to me how you get a thrill of outkicking someone for 16th place in a local road race.

I'm not sure how to approach this. Should I speak of a chemical-based enjoyment: adrenaline surges, neurotransmitter balances, and such? The satisfaction of placing 16th and not 18th or 23rd? The joy in giving a 99.8% effort and really striving for that last .2%, regardless of ability level?

I will say that outkicking someone for 16th at a big race has been a lot more satisfying than winning a smaller, far less competitive orace outright, second place far enough back to pose no threat.

I just ran the USATF club xc meet in Kentucky. I ran (and won) a 5k the week before in 15:30. However, I was back in the 150s at the national meet. Should I have not run the national meet?

Your friend who has a 15 year winning streak doesn't impress me. All it tells me is that he doesn't seek out the best competiton. I could do a handful of races around my hometown every year and win them all by a healthy margin, but what's the point?

Winning is defined differently by each person who enters the race. Maybe it is a local race and they have friends and family are running/watching. Maybe they’ve been running to get into shape and now they want to challenge themselves. Maybe they might never have a chance to win, but they still are competitive with themselves and with others around him. Maybe they get a sense of accomplishment from racing/setting a PR. Maybe they brag to friends about their times. Maybe it’s just for the T-shirt.

These are all valid reasons to race. I think if you are disappointed that you can’t do what you used to do, then you need to define what your version of winning is for you. But don’t try to take away from what other people are doing.

PS: Running snobs: 99.5% of the world would love to be able to run 15:00 for a 5K. Sorry that doesn’t live up to everybody’s expectations, but that wasn’t even the question. So what if you can beat the person in a race, it doesn’t answer the question.

sounds like you've got a chip on your shoulder because you can't maintain your own fast times. you miss running fast.

running fast (or even just faster than usual, which could be a 8/min pace for some folks) feels great. and folks almost always run faster in race scenarios then in tempo runs or isolated time trials. so that's why hobbyjoggers race.

and then there's the social aspect behind it. it's like you're asking "why would a band play a show unless they knew they would get a record contract." because playing shows are fun, your friends come out and watch, you get loaded and have a blast. "why not just play music in your basement forever?"

Here's a thought: What about women in local races? They run the same race at the same time as the men, but few would ever have a chance of actually crossing the line first. Should they never race?

Point: The women are still enjoyably racing without ever winning overall.

call me jack wrote:

Speak for yourself Off the Grid,

I don't perceive anything "fun" about getting your ass whooped by a half a dozen anonymous road racers at my local Bunny 5K

Maybe you don't, but you're certainly in the minority. Racing is more of a challenge than trotting around the neighborhood, certainly more entertaining, and brings on some friendly rivalry among compatriots. Racing brings on some goals higher than "ran home from the Y 5 seconds faster than last week", and that goal helps you get out the door for the rest of the runs.

call me jack wrote:

Funny how everyone seems to be skirting around the question, as if to search for an answer that isn't readily available.

It's not a rhetorical question. I challenge anyone to come up with a coherent, intelligible answer.

A runner who doesn't race is not a failure. And she need not quit. The question remains - why race?

Here's a straight answer. Because they like the competition. Even if you cant win a race outright, you can still compete against other people. A guy I know in his 60s likes to get out there and race just to see how many people under 40 he can still pick off. This is not an unreasonable way to have fun.

there are races within races. when i raced at fun runs, i never expected to win. But there were always a half dozen individuals i graded myself against.

so, you might say, why not just get those 6 together on our own and do it? Well, the adrenalin and 'energy' of hundreds of other runners adds alot to the event.

If only those that had a chance to win raced, there would be very few races for them to race at.

The Local 10K is not going to exist for the 5-10 runners that show up and have a legitimate chance to win.

Please don't take this as me being the champion of the 6hr marathoner or 1:30 10K, I'm just saying...

i was a mid-packer; occasional age grp award. i admit, i trained and raced (in part) because i liked the structured lifestyle of a dedicated runner and the physical changes it induced. Never was talented, but i liked thinking of myself as an 'athlete'. It completely re-structured my life. You can call me pathetic, and say i was 'fantasizing', but so what? It was a harmless, maybe even constructive fantasy. The racing part was (as someone else noted here) an unpleasant, but still necessary part of the whole package. Frankly, i liked training better than racing.

As i read your original post, i think you were wondering what the motivations of ppl like me are. So, now you have a data point.

Look at it another way: recreational companies sell high performance goods (racing flats; high end skis; flyfishing equipmnt etc) to far more people than the numbers of top competitors in each of these fields. I suspect its delusional week end warriors such as myself who are buying it.

You're all over the place.

First, without the slow people contributing to the funding there would be no race.

Also, Someone could get 20th or 16th and use that as a measuring stick to improve and eventually win.

Now speaking as a former sub 15 guy who recently raced in the 17 minute area, running is boring without something to train for. It's fun to be in an event. The money is worth it and always goes to a good cause. So there is value there.

Now there was a gap of years without racing beacuse I didn't see the point of running slower than I used to.

I have won many races but it was always about the personal goal not where I placed.

I would rather PR and get 16th than win in 15 flat.

So go ahead and look for the slowest races that give you the best chance to contend for the win since you say you don't see the point in racing otherwise.

I like to crush the life out of young guys, and shame them into saying crap like "it was just a training run".

Running is really absurd, and remember Mark Wetmore commenting about this. If you think about it, nothing is more absurd than running around in a circle. We don't run to catch prey, we don't run to escape predators, etc. basically it gives meaning and purpose to the person doing the running. That is about it. Ultimately it is no different than fishing ...

For those of you who flunked vocabulary.

Absurd: inconsistent with reason or logic or common sense.

call me jack wrote:

15:00 is not fast?

That's funny because there's a guy in my town ( BTW we're one of the top 10 largest cities in the country) who runs those times and he's been undefeated the last 15 years. Go figure. Sorry dude, that IS fast around these parts. Let's not start comparing apples with oranges, I never said it was fast in comparison with the nation's best.

The problem is that "around these parts" is nowhere.

15:00 is not fast. Period. You are not fast. Period. The sooner you accept this, the sooner you will realize that you have effectively been a hypocrite every time you have raced

call me jack wrote:

kapal,

it may be weak competition but it's still my city's championship 5K race with a whole lot of local media coverage and public appraisal

LOL -- "city championship", now what is THAT?!? *rofl*

Hilarious -- glad I don't have to deal with you in real life!

Will tell my buddies, there is that guy so full of himself, used to win his local 5k and now on downhill slide so he does not compete anymore...

Question: Are you one of those frequently-injured driven-by-whatever-wrong-daddy-relationship who always wants to set a new personal best in each race?

Like it or not, if road races were only for fast people, we wouldn't have many road races. It's the slow majority that pay for the races. That is the way it is.

I haven't won a race since college, and there is no way I'll ever touch those PR's. However, I still race.

Why: The chance of setting a post college PR every time I race. Setting a good example for my kids to live a healthy life style. I love it.

The race is presented for those who want to race, a timetrialer, one in serious training...

The event unfolds for those who choose to run x,y or z distance in an social setting.

Your classification label is selfsticking.