Overkill or smart? San Fran marathoners will have to wear masks for the 6.7 miles that go through National Park Service land

I just ran this...literally NO ONE wore a mask. There wasn't even proper signage at the places where you were supposed to wear a mask...so no one could know anyways. So either everyone got DQed or the national park service is going to have a field day with fines. Or just life as usual.

You were supposed to wear a mask at water stations too, but I mean, that's physically impossible.

They tried to tell everyone to "social distance" at the starting line by saying they'll let people go in waves of 5, but everyone just went and it was the same as any other race. People were crowded into corrals anyways.

aznspeedstar wrote:

I just ran this...literally NO ONE wore a mask. There wasn't even proper signage at the places where you were supposed to wear a mask...so no one could know anyways. So either everyone got DQed or the national park service is going to have a field day with fines. Or just life as usual.

You were supposed to wear a mask at water stations too, but I mean, that's physically impossible.

They tried to tell everyone to "social distance" at the starting line by saying they'll let people go in waves of 5, but everyone just went and it was the same as any other race. People were crowded into corrals anyways.

LOL but at least we had 5 pages of moral posturing :)

A few of the posters were out there today. It was a beautiful morning in a beautiful city. Everybody was in a good mood. It was a nice set of races. No need for masks and nobody wore them. If there was enforcement, I didn’t see it, and frankly it didn’t exist. There was no virtue signaling and no liberalism or conservatism, just a lot of runners. For those that hate SF or think it’s the symbol of something you want to hate, get a life. I genuinely feel sorry for you. Live where you want, visit where you want, but if you ran today along the Bay front and up into the Presidio, I think you would have enjoyed it.

Wise Old Man wrote:

A few of the posters were out there today. It was a beautiful morning in a beautiful city. Everybody was in a good mood. It was a nice set of races. No need for masks and nobody wore them. If there was enforcement, I didn’t see it, and frankly it didn’t exist. There was no virtue signaling and no liberalism or conservatism, just a lot of runners. For those that hate SF or think it’s the symbol of something you want to hate, get a life. I genuinely feel sorry for you. Live where you want, visit where you want, but if you ran today along the Bay front and up into the Presidio, I think you would have enjoyed it.

It’s a beautiful course and city. I’d love to run it someday.

2600 bro wrote:

Wise Old Man wrote:

A few of the posters were out there today. It was a beautiful morning in a beautiful city. Everybody was in a good mood. It was a nice set of races. No need for masks and nobody wore them. If there was enforcement, I didn’t see it, and frankly it didn’t exist. There was no virtue signaling and no liberalism or conservatism, just a lot of runners. For those that hate SF or think it’s the symbol of something you want to hate, get a life. I genuinely feel sorry for you. Live where you want, visit where you want, but if you ran today along the Bay front and up into the Presidio, I think you would have enjoyed it.

It’s a beautiful course and city. I’d love to run it someday.

^^^

Wise Old Man wrote:

Beautiful morning for running in SF. NOBODY wore a mask and NOBODY cared.

Precious Roy is gonna be mad

Someone had the right analysis earlier. It was just a cover your ass move by the race organizers to not step on the National Park toes. Both parties probably realized no one was going to comply but it would be bureaucratic mess to solve for so they just said it but looked the other way.

It was a very crowded race though, some of the moves by the organizers to uncrowd the event (merging the two half marathons to minimize bussing) seemed to have created big logjams especially in the last 2 miles. Runners from the half (and I think marathon too) were funneled into a crowded roadway where all the slower 10k/5k runners also happened to be at in the moment, really tough to finish hard as it was a traffic jam of people.

2600 bro wrote:

rojo wrote:

You are making a brilliant point. I think many things in society are actually like this but people don't realize it as the conclusions are so opposite.

No it's not a good point.

For the vaccine... it's just terrible risk analysis that is equating two small probabilities. This is a common human error, but frankly not that hard to understand and overcome.

The risk of the vaccines are <<< the risk of COVID infection for all age groups. The presence of a risk does not make it prudent to avoid something if the act of avoiding exposes you to far greater risk.

The masking decision falls on more equal probabilities. The cost of wearing a mask during a race (annoying), the risk of COVID transmission outdoors (very slow), and the benefit a mask during a race (unknown).

I don't disagree with anything that you just said. I understand and agree with your risk analysis. But my brilliant point stands 🧐.

Your position is we should always choose the least "risky" option, calculated according to the criteria that you choose. Using this method, you can always justify what you want to do according to some quantitative measurement.

But you do realize that characterizing things as "annoying" and "very low" are qualitative judgements?

I can do the same thing, using my qualitative biases as a foundation, and we can come up with different quantitative results.

I am fully aware, and have mentioned elsewhere in another thread, about how poorly people judge statistics. So I'm aware of those pitfalls, but I disagree that they are so easily overcome.

Not saying that you're wrong, but I think it would be helpful to the discussion to acknowledge the fact that non-zero is non-zero, and that the position you are advocating is based on your personal opinion about what is acceptable. It would also be nice if you acknowledged my right to do so as well. Then, if you are in a position of power, you can say to me "Because I said so!" and leave it up to me to acquiesce or face the consequences.

Cheers

Pretty good example of how bureaucracy and government is the worst thing for a population. I get it, the national park has a rule designed for X and bureaucrats are too lazy and stupid to make an exception for Y; which is absolutely irrelevant to X.