Coebra wrote:
these guys ... wrote:Speaking personally ...
1. It's illogical.
The way everything else works, is we give credit for hard work, or talent, or luck. We do not give credit for showing up semi-prepared on game day and struggling. Why should running work differently than every other thing?
2. It's dishonest.
Why act like someone did something amazing, when they did not in fact do something amazing? Why do that?
3. It's bad.
Do you think it's good, to tell adults they're awesome, for not being awesome? Is this better for everyone?
4. It's silly.
It really is. It's just silly. One adult telling another adult 'OMG ROCK STAR!!!' for a 55 minute shuffle ... I mean, what is that? What are we doing?
5. It deprives people of the unique, hard-to-articulate-joys and triumphs of Actually Running.
I'm pretty slow. But I got lucky, because some early running mentors were very much not 'Hug First'ers. They took running seriously and saw no reason I shouldn't either. This made me faster than other people, but who cares. What matters it I got a profound and deeply meaningful experience that I would not have gotten if I'd bought into "As long as you finish!". They say that the great is the enemy of the good. Well, the mediocre is the enemy of the good too, and that happens a lot more often.
I particularly despise the work of Jeff Galloway. "When the going gets tough, walk!" He's done more for running than just about anyone. Unfortunately very little of it is good.
Oh, my early running mentors were later shamed within their run club on social media, for being 'too serious', so they now more or less run in disgrace and no one talks to them at the clubs (many) social events. That pisses me off too.
These are my reasons. Other people might have different reasons.
I agree with all of this. Only thing that I will add:
Runners world and their ilk are frustrating because they effectively lie to people by saying the effort it took them to complete a distance of 5 kilometers is equivalent to the effort to run, say, sub 15 (as a general figure). They tell the hobby jogger, who is largely innocent in the matter, that their struggle is as honorable and noble as the struggle of the marathoner/ sub elite who works a part time job while doing some serious training in an attempt to take themselves to the absolute edge of their personal human capabilities.
Runners World gives the impression of saying that the tough mudder-er is as virtuous as the man or woman who works a sh!t job in order to train their hearts out, running a hundred goddamn miles a week, and barely existing in the world of serious running.
Runners World, and their ilk, give the Impression to people like Gladys (fvcking Gladys) that their mediocrity is in fact, admirable and should be celebrated with a parade and a matching band.
This used to bother me a lot. Now, I just don't give a sh!t. But that doesn't mean that it doesn't bother other people. Honestly, its so hypocritical that other posters rag on people that, "it shouldnt bother you man," when such a demeanor is only accomplished by a handful of lucky people. Whoever here that isn't affected by what society thinks and says of them can cast the first stone.
But then again, its "cool" to be a troll/@sshole, so never mind.
This post is brought to you by "Blue Moon".
Care to post examples from RW for each of your points?