Steve Jones on running today

Sensitive much? wrote:

I disagree with the criticism of Jones.

Then you are not understanding what he is saying.

He said they are not marathoners. Umm...by definition, if you run a marathon, then you are a marathoner. I could perhaps agree that to be called that in the present you actually have to still be planning to do them, so it would be appropriate then to call Steve Jones a "former marathoner" unless he is running marathons that I am not aware of.

So, he is going beyond a distinction here. The distinction is "fast" vs. "slow". It isn't "marathoner" or not. Actually though in either case, where is the cutoff? If someone runs 2:18, does that make him a "marathoner"? It is far from world class, but a person doesn't just roll out of bed and run 2:18. Does it have to do with effort? I know a guy who was very overweight and smoked for 20 years before he decided to turn his life around. He "ran" his first marathon in his late 30s in 4:30 or something like that, and for him at the time it was HARD. He eventually got under 3 hours.

What about age? If you are 70 and run a marathon in 3:58, would that qualify you as a "marathoner"?

See, it's all ridiculous. If you RUN a marathon, you are a marathoner.

You might be a fast one or a slow one or somewhere in between, and even those labels will provide differing opinions.

Why not just go with "Elite" marathoner? Or "professional" marathoner? Or even better yet, decide you don't give a crap about such labels. I mean really, why in the world have an issue with a person who runs 4:03 being a "marathoner"?

If you expand the list you still have only one name there who ran faster than Jones did and we have no idea what he ate or drank and it doesn't matter what any of them ate or drank because it's running that makes the difference.

Yes, running is running. But not all running is racing and there is a difference between entering a race just to finish and entering one to run as fast as you can and finish ahead of as many other runners as possible. But as someone else pointed out, Jones isn't asking to ban slow runners or even non-racers from events. He's just pointing out that they're doing something different from what really competitive runners are doing. Even Joe Henderson has made a similar point. Whether you call a 6 hour marathon finisher the same thing as you call a 2 1/2 hour one is kind of your own business.

One of my favorite videos and set to Rocky Theme Music.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZ-_3Ug3wqU

Reminds me of that Iggy Pop song, "Blah Blah Blah".

Let's put Jones in charge of the sport and get all the morons off the streets and trails. Yeah!

Green Goblin wrote:

... how he ran on pure guts and courage.

As if anyone else who runs that fast doesn't run on guts and courage. Name someone who doesn't.

"Mars bars and Diet Coke"

Love that guy ... and I am glad he is still tough enough to tell Competitor how it is.

Jones was talking about road racing, a sport. You are talkin about golf, a game where men fence off the most beautiful land in America to keep other citizens from gaining access, then walk around for a few hours with other men just like them pretending they are athletes.

Jones is right, but he might acknowledge that whatever income he had in his hayday was directly or indirectly the result of others wanting to finish 26.2 miles and cross it off their bucket list.

Go Long wrote:

One of my favorite videos and set to Rocky Theme Music.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZ-_3Ug3wqU

"Jones looking for trouble and the trouble is there!!"

You guys are way too sensitive. Run hard be tough is the point of what he is saying

newname wrote:

Go Long wrote:

One of my favorite videos and set to Rocky Theme Music.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZ-_3Ug3wqU

"Jones looking for trouble and the trouble is there!!"

I've watched this video dozens of times, and I still love to hear that line.

Avocado's Number wrote:

newname wrote:

"Jones looking for trouble and the trouble is there!!"

I've watched this video dozens of times, and I still love to hear that line.

Actually, it's this video:

HRE wrote:

Everything I've seen about sports drinks says they are no better than chocolate milk, juice, beer, and junk food as replacement drinks but that's not the point. Sure, you want to recover better for your next run but you should be able to tell if you've recovered. If sports drinks, massage and the like really are important why were guys like Jones, Hill, Rodgers, Foster, etc., able to run faster than without them than almost anyone now who uses them can? Shoes are a different matter, mostly one of personal comfort. I can run in shorts and t-shirt comfortably in weather that most people need a sweatsuit. But again, there's nothing wrong with sports drinks, massages, altitude tents and so on. There is something wrong with a mindset that thinks these sorts of things are necessary to run at your best.

Thanks for talking sense. Some of us know what you mean.

There's nothing wrong with scientific advances. There IS something wrong when an extractive capitalist (yes, I used the word) economy leverages "scientific advances" to convince gullible Runner's World folk that only if they "hydrate" with certain "replenishing" drinks will they achieve "maximal results." What gets lost is the guts, heart, and soul: the inspired, spirit-driven discipline of running. Again: there is such a thing as scientific progress. But there's also such a thing as spiritual devolution.

Guy Debord, in SOCIETY OF THE SPECTACLE, said that the West is presently locked into a declension from being to having to appearing.

Translation into LR terms: At some point in the past of living memory, runners focused on how it felt to run and to train oneself into peak shape. Then that juice got sucked away by a "runner's world" that profited from convincing runners that success was all a matter of having (buying) the Right Stuff. In our own day, that world of commodified running has further devolved into a place where, when you've just purchased the lastest 19th generation brand-name shoes, or GU, you go on Facebook and share a photo of the Running Stuff that you've just bought. And then feel good about yourself.

From BEING to HAVING to APPEARING. From living it, to buying it, to "sharing" photos of it.

Tell me that's not what has happened. I suggest that that is precisely what has happened. Debord knows us. He knows how it's working. Not necessarily among competitive runners--but definitely with Lolo, Maggie, and a couple of guys who run the steeple and 800, respectively. It's about the pix shared online. It's no longer about the private feeling and then stepping up and delivering.

Altitude tents!! If only I had an altitude tent......

Not.

For those who want to read Debord:

https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/debord/society.htm

flagpole, you're blatantly wrong. I don't even care about supporting Jones or not, but he doesn't ever make a distinction between FAST & SLOW; rather, he makes a distinction between RACING & NOT-RACING. And, if you've run a marathon, there's a difference. I'm not trying to say the difference is a difference of good vs. bad, as Jones might, but the difference is still there. If you run a marathon to finish it, it's vastly different than running a marathon to race it, even if it's against yourself, even if it's for a 2:30 as opposed to a 2:04. I respect all people who try the distance. And I think it's a wonderful accomplishment to even simply be on your feet for 26.2 miles. But there is a vast difference between testing your body to see what it can complete vs. testing your body to see how fast it can complete such a thing.

And I also think that Jones doesn't have a problem with the 4:00 marathoner, but rather with the commercialization of such a thing. I think if a 4:00 marathoner came up to him and said "I want to get better. I want to see how fast my body can go," he would 100% be in support of that. He has issue with the way in which you can clickbait your way into a faster marathon rather than putting in the work he still believes in, however foolish you might think he is.

past efforts wrote:

Let's see. Jones ran 2:07:13 without massage, physical therapy, sports nutrition. etc. Brits and US runners today are running what with massage, physical therapy, sports nutrition. etc.?

If you think all that extra is good for more than a minute you're a fool. Jones was a hard worker but let's not kid ourselves. He won the genetic lottery and he is blasting people not so fortunate.

Yes, Steve is living in the '80s when there wasn't the kind of money in the marathon as there is now. Also, the mindset was completely different then. Even run of the mill runners were trying to race and go as fast as they possibly could given their talent level. I know, I was one of them. Marathoning is totally different now. There is big money for the elite runners and at the bottom of the pyramid it's a mass participation event. People run to finish, not race. Sub-elites have disappeared. That's fine. In the '80s entry fees were $20. Now they're hundreds. The mass participation runners make marathons big events. Big events draw corporate sponsors and big prize money. Big prize money draws elite runners. Small fish draw the big fish. It's 1%ers and 99%ers. That's the world we live in. Steve doesn't seem to get this.

Just a GD MInute wrote:

It's just selling magazines - or it caters to people who are running 4 hours for a marathon or 25 minutes for a 5k. And that's not running in my mind.

Last two sentences are gold.

Hey. Wait a minute. 25 minutes is my goal for a 5k for this 60 plus, former 16 minute runner who cannot train for more than 8 to 10 weeks without getting injured.

Yep- Agree. 4 hour 26.2mi or a 25 min 5K is competing for many.

Funny, but many on here running HS or college criticize it. Then, you have those same ppl years later who don't run anymore.

The rest of Jones' words, I 100% agree on. Just walking 26.2 mi doesn't make one a marathoner.