MSNBC article about "running" a marathon...funny

I have towels strategically placed beneath the bike to collect the buckets of sweat that pour off me.

I generally wear padded bike shorts, but that only does so much. And it does nothing to battle the rash that inevitably develops in my saddle section.

I got my weeks confused and instead of swimming this past Sunday, I did a two-hour run.

...Sure sounds like she is on her way to victory.

I predict the following:

She'll finish. In over 24 hours.

She'll either sleep a while in a hotel along the route or in a RV that follows her. I'm not kidding.

She'll "finish" in over 24 hours, praise herself about what an Ironman she really is, people will cry and she'll be a heroine.

Last week, I swam over 3 miles, biked a little over 100 miles and ran 40 miles. Looks like I'm already an Ironman.

Can't you just leave her alone?

Stacie wrote:

Can't you just leave her alone?

She's the one putting it out there, so I'm going to comment.

Well, if you're so motivated and badass, get a journalism degree, come up with an idea for a compelling story, convince your boss to let you write it and sponsor you in your endeavors. This may be her most impressive accomplishment, is that she has convinced msnbc to fund her while she writes a story about an unathletic person's quest to complete an ironman. Maybe her problems with motivation and bad races and poor performance are something people can relate to. Maybe that's why it's a good article for MSNBC. I don't know, I'm not an editor. But it's funny listening to all you people bash her for trying. Her story is a lot more interesting to me than many of yours.

So you run a sub-3 marathon? You love running! Have you read her articles? She hates running. And she does it anyway because she has a bigger goal, of completing an Ironman. And doing something you hate, in order to get somewhere you dream of going, is something to be admired. It shows character. And she's out there doing it every week. Maybe she sucks. Maybe she makes stupid mistakes. But she persists.

What you should do is find something you suck at, and go do it over and over again, week after week. And have people laugh at you and tell you you suck, but keep doing it. You wouldn't last a month.

That's why MSNBC isn't paying you to train and race. Because you're not interesting. You're just another boring runner.

I read on the RW forum that the author DNF'd in a 1/2 IM this past weekend.

So wait, you think getting publicity and paid good money to do something any mediocre fat American heffer can do is worthwhile?

She did a HALF Iron Man last week - Actually she dropped out during the SWIM. She never made it out of the water.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8404893

In her newest article she writes:

"You see, over the past few weeks, I figured out that Ironman distances aren’t my cup of tea. In my training, I realized that I don't like being on a bike for 5 hours, and for Ironman it would be more like 7-8 hours. It’s boring, it hurts and it’s not fun. Two, three hours, no worries. That’s enjoyable. Not 7.

Stomach issues aside, I hated the marathon and really don’t want to do 26 miles again. The past few weeks of training have been long, lonely and I haven’t enjoyed it. Work demands and some recent health issues have forced me to push my training sessions to later hours, which is not optimal since I have to be up at 4 a.m. for work. The workouts were beginning to feel more like an obligation rather than something I really wanted to do."

She goes on to say she may do it next year, or the year after or never.

Essentially, she just concluded it was too hard.

Well so much for her persisting. haha. Was she getting "good" money? If so, it was for her journalism, not for her athleticism, so I don't have a problem with that. She was getting publicity? Only the publicity that her regular column provided for her in the first place. Again, I think that's fine. If a journalist has earned a column, they've earned it. If they want to try to run and write about it, more power to them, as long as their editor thinks it's worthwhile. She earned that because of her journalism skills, so quit whining about it. Like I said, if you had the skills, then you could do the same thing. But you suck at writing and aren't interesting enough. That's why she has what you don't.

knowItAll wrote:

So you run a sub-3 marathon? You love running! Have you read her articles? She hates running. And she does it anyway because she has a bigger goal, of completing an Ironman. And doing something you hate, in order to get somewhere you dream of going, is something to be admired. It shows character. And she's out there doing it every week. Maybe she sucks. Maybe she makes stupid mistakes. But she persists.

What you should do is find something you suck at, and go do it over and over again, week after week. And have people laugh at you and tell you you suck, but keep doing it. You wouldn't last a month.

That's possibly the most stupid thing I've read on here yet, and I've read some pretty awful things on Letsrun before. OF COURSE we run because we love running or love some aspect of running. If I truly hated running (not just felt like I hated it after a bad race), I would stop and find something that I loved doing. Persistance isn't a virtue if you're persisting in stupidity.

For most of us here running is an option and not our main income. If our pastimes aren't supposed to be an enjoyable part of life, what is? Persistance in something you hate can be admirable if it's all that's putting food on your table- but even with jobs, you always have the opportunity to be looking for something better.

I suck at swimming and I hate it. I think it would be awesome to do an Ironman. But I have a life full of things that I love doing and goals that center around those activities, some big goals and some small. So how does it show more character to pick a goal in an activity that I hate? Obviously I'm going to choose to pursue goals that I'm going to enjoy.

I didn't mean to make this such a long post. Basically, we all have a limited amount of things that we're naturally good at and enjoy, and we have a limited amount of time in which to do things. So why not spend that time doing one of the things you're good at and enjoy instead of busting your ass over something you hate?

The excuses she gives include that she has to be up at 4 AM

"Work demands and some recent health issues have forced me to push my training sessions to later hours, which is not optimal since I have to be up at 4 a.m. for work. The workouts were beginning to feel more like an obligation rather than something I really wanted to do."

But in her 1st article she says:

" My job is not a standard 9-to-5 gig, and I am frequently required to put in long hours, but not as often as when I worked in the sports department. In terms of time, I am an ideal candidate for Ironman."

That's the dumbest thing you've ever read? You're a friggin retard. Everyone has dreams. Sometimes we do things we don't enjoy to achieve those dreams. It's normal to sacrifice to achieve your dreams. Most dreams require sacrifice. If you want the dream badly enough, you'll sacrifice enough to make it come true.

sam w wrote:

She did a HALF Iron Man last week - Actually she dropped out during the SWIM. She never made it out of the water.

[

Ha ha. I predicted this would happen.

Maybe it was the bacon and scrambled eggs that she couldn't pass up that did her in again.

knowItAll wrote:

That's the dumbest thing you've ever read? You're a friggin retard. Everyone has dreams. Sometimes we do things we don't enjoy to achieve those dreams. It's normal to sacrifice to achieve your dreams. Most dreams require sacrifice. If you want the dream badly enough, you'll sacrifice enough to make it come true.

And it's normal to put in the necessary training to achieve those dreams.

Running a marathon while woefully undertrained is not something to boast about. It's not chasing a dream; it's stupidity.

I really expected her to take over 24 hours to "complete" her Ironman, all while sleeping in an RV along the way, then writing about what a great and wonderful feat she just accomplished. I have much more respect for her now that she's decided to build up to this gradually than put in less than minimal training and then boast about her accomplishment.

Train for something, have a bad day and push your way through, and I'll be the first to pay you on the back.

But, don't half-ass train for something, nearly die along the way, then expect me to stand in the chorus and sing your praise.

What's sad is there are too many people who feel that just finishing is an accomplishment. Whatever happened to putting forth your best effort and fighting through your comfort zone? I'l tell you waht happened- Runner's World glorifying being SLOW and Galloway telling people it's ok and even a part of training to walk.

What a novel insight. Nobody has ever made that point at this site before.

I'm not sure she was boasting about her accomplishments, but I would have to rescan the articles. Also, I don't recall exactly what her training was, but I think it included 3+ hour long runs on the weekend, which seems pretty standard for a novice, first-time marathoner. This lady is just plain slow and combined that with a bad experience on her first marathon. Screwing up your first marathon isn't uncommon even with proper training. Almost everyone I know runs a monstrously positive split in their first marathon.

Just curious, what's your opinion on PDiddy getting all the publicity for his marathon?

Part of her screwing up was a failure to be serious during the pre-race preparation. She credits partial failure in her first marathon to the greasy breakfast she couldn't turn away. In this past failed half-ironman she didn't drink enough water the day before because she didn't want to take a lot of bathroom breaks.

Her 3+ hour long runs were one day a week (every other week), this coming off less than an hour of total running the other 6 days.

Bit off more than she could chew.