The Death of the Marathon

I think that's completely understandable. It takes a lot more training and effort to run 26.2 miles than it does 1 - no matter your speed.

False. You've obviously never trained to run a competitive mile, otherwise you would know that training to race a mile (or 1,500) can be equally, if not more, work.

I don't have any problems with people getting into shape and attaining a 5+ hour goal, or even just meeting the objective of finishing. The problem is the stigma that this attitude brings to the table. It's not such a simple matter of faster runners scorning slower runners. Honestly, it's more complex than that. Few people are that obnoxious for that to be the actual reason that to desire pushing slower people out of the race.

You have to think of it in terms of other sporting events for it to make sense, I think. Imagine NBA players having to compete with high school basketball players. The NBA players really take no pleasure in easily beating the high schoolers- it's not even a challenge. Furthermore, the high level of competition that takes place when it's just professionals is detracted by all the high schoolers that are just there out of interest of trying the game out, and perhaps not having put a whole lot of effort into it.

Honestly, don't kid yourself that either side of this argument are groups of people being jerks. It's deeper than that. Remember that a lot of people, including myself, want the marathon to be thought of as a competitive sport, not a weight loss expo. Soccer players wouldn't want this either.

Just my opinion, though.

waddle on wrote:

I think that's completely understandable. It takes a lot more training and effort to run 26.2 miles than it does 1 - no matter your speed.

It takes more endurance to run a marathon and depletes you more - there's a reason they run rounds in the 1500 but not the marathon - so that much is true.

But to reach your potential as a miler takes no less training or effort than to reach your potential as a marathoner even if the training isn't the same.

It seems that runners who fancy themselves pretty fast are mad at other runners who don't take the marathon as seriously, or don't run it for the same reasons. They don't like that their sport has been co-opted by slower and less training-oriented people simply for bragging rights, or a feeling of self-satisfaction.

I would ask anyone who thinks like that how the lack of seriousness in the others hurts anything but your pride or vanity. The marathon doesn't have feelings; it's a distance.

It's like a painting: the viewer gets out of it what is according to his nature. If you study art, then you will appreciate the subtleties more, but you can't say that another person is looking at the painting in the wrong way, or for the wrong reasons. Have runners become that pretentious, stereotypical artsy guy, staring down the nose at commoners, saying "they just don't get it"?

So what if they don't get it?! What, honestly, is it to you?

I agree with the OP.

The NYC "experience" has become a joke.

Come to Honolulu in December and watch

these clowns do 27:00+ minutes per mile pace.

Starting in the darkness at 5:00am, some are

still out there past 5:00pm in the afternoon.

I can mosey a mile in 20 minutes.

So what takes these back of the pack Bozos so long?

They stop to eat food, smoke cigarettes and shop

at the Kahala Mall.

I prefer marathons with quality fields (sub 3:00)

or 4:00 or 5:00 hour cutoffs which save them

thousands because they can re-open the streets and have the cops, ambulance EMT's and firefighters return to regular duty.

Would anyone want to watch (in person or on TV) the ball sport equivalents to 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 hour marathoners?

Would you want to watch someone with no athleticism play tennis, basketball, baseball, football?

If it weren't for the millions of penguins out there to "finish" or "survive" or "conquer" a marathon - as opposed to racing it - we'd all have to answer the question "So Boston is the hardest marathon because it's the longest, right?" a lot more often.

Nothing at all against recreational joggers entering marathons. The only thing I dislike is the collective bargaining by the likes of TNT which makes races and hotels more expensive for everyone else and fills up the fields 9 months out.

vox cursor wrote:

It seems that runners who fancy themselves pretty fast are mad at other runners who don't take the marathon as seriously, or don't run it for the same reasons. They don't like that their sport has been co-opted by slower and less training-oriented people simply for bragging rights, or a feeling of self-satisfaction.

I'm fine with run/walkers and 6 hour marathoners. I just think there should be more emphasis on ordinary people trying to run shorter distances faster vs. trying to survive a marathon.

People with no real knowledge of running get fixated on surviving the marathon distance when they could get as much or more out of training to run shorter distances faster.

"you would know that training to race a mile (or 1,500) can be equally, if not more, work."

Incorrect.

xnet.com wrote:

"you would know that training to race a mile (or 1,500) can be equally, if not more, work."

Incorrect.

I think the quote is correct. I completed the transition from middle distance runner to marathon runner last year (with stops at 10k and half marathon) and did so for one reason. Training for the marathon is easier. It takes longer to get ready for the distance and the time running is greater, but the intensity is so much less and the recovery times are so much shorter. I still have some learning to do about racing the event as like many first timers I hit the wall pretty hard, from pretty far out, and of course I can improve the training the second time through, but I think the changes are more tinkering with things than they are starting all over again. To give background of where I am coming from, I was just over 4:00 for 1500 in college, had a goal of sub 2:30 for the marathon, and was happy to break 2:40 when I crossed the line. Solid in both regards, but not outstanding in either. I would absolutely say that the technical aspects of 1500m training made it harder for me to train for that event than to train for the marathon. I welcome agreement and disagreement.

You're right: your n=1 experience is proof!

And I wouldn't call my 1 data point bias-free either, which is why I welcomed people to agree and disagree. But it is my experience, which at least offers some rationale to justify the opinion.

But the argument that training for the marathon is harder than training for the mile is akin to the common argument that training for the mile is harder than training for the 100m, which I would also disagree with. If the goal is to be as good as possible at any of these events, they are all really hard. With my skill set (my n=1), marathon training is easier than anything else I have tried.

Try a hundo and get back to us.

Here's something to think about: Can you name me another world class sporting event (elite level athletes) that you can compete in by simply paying an entry fee?

jad83 wrote:

Here's something to think about: Can you name me another world class sporting event (elite level athletes) that you can compete in by simply paying an entry fee?

Bowling

But the argument that training for the marathon is harder than training for the mile is akin to the common argument that training for the mile is harder than training for the 100m, which I would also disagree with. If the goal is to be as good as possible at any of these events, they are all really hard. With my skill set (my n=1), marathon training is easier than anything else I have tried.

______________________________________________________

I'd agree with that. I'm not a particularly accomplished runner...never ran in HS or college. But with work, family, and other commitments, it's easier for me to get in longer runs at lower intensity. I often just don't have the energy to crank out a tough workout. Yeah, I know it's not ideal training, but it's what I can fit in at this point in my life. And it's been enough to get me to sub-3:00 without much of a running background, so I'm satisfied.

As far as fast vs. slow runners in the marathon...my biggest complaint would be the rash of heat-related cancelations. The explanation from the race director is always something to the effect that they, "have to keep the race safe for everyone". I'm not running at the front of the race, but I'm still fast enough where I can slow down a bit and easily finish a marathon in hot weather. It's disappointing that with regards to heat, marathons now seem to only take into consideration the back-of-the-pack runner.

You "fast" guys who go to work the next day bragging about how you beat 2,000 other runners when you finished 100th out of 2,100 need to remember that without us behind you, your accomplishment wouldn't look so grand. For example, you'd have to tell everyone that you finished 100th out of 102 runners.

And without us you would be the slow pokes that people faster than you bitch about.

agreed, but the problem is a large portion of the people who do marathons for fun ARE out of shape! 4,5,6, hours+ for some of these lardos to "run" a marathon, all while carrying around an extra 50-100+ pounds is not living a healthy lifestyle or being in shape. it's just something they survive/endure so they can post about it on FB and Twitter. there are no changes their habits.

another 2 cents wrote: I would rather have people running marathons than being totally sedate and out of shape.

I would be happy to finish 100th out of 102 finishers,

but to see these 200 lb. fat slobs walking around with a marathon finisher shirt is an embarrasment to the sport.

You used to have to work to earn it because you "ran" a marathon. Today it's just load up the fanny pack and walk 6 to 8 hours and I can call myself a marathoner.

hematopoesis wrote:

agreed, but the problem is a large portion of the people who do marathons for fun ARE out of shape! 4,5,6, hours+ for some of these lardos to "run" a marathon, all while carrying around an extra 50-100+ pounds is not living a healthy lifestyle or being in shape. it's just something they survive/endure so they can post about it on FB and Twitter. there are no changes their habits.

another 2 cents wrote: I would rather have people running marathons than being totally sedate and out of shape.

WTF? You can't be "out of shape" and complete a marathon.