I think that the term "real runners" has a broader definition than many bravado filled lets runners will state.
This thread does beg a question that I have had in my head for awhile.
Would you rather have been a person who burns out after performing at a very high level or would you have liked to have a lower peak level of success in exchange for a greater level of longevity.
I look at myself and my brother. I was a very good in high school, did well enough running on a good JC team, and then was last man on the traveling team at a large university. I ran decent but not super times throughout university and then progressed to being an OK local level club runner. I won a few small local races, in larger races I did ok but no where near the top. But, I still love running to this day. I still race 5 to 12 times a year, I ran 64 miles last week and will do about 65 this week, I wake up every day looking forward to my run. I truely love running and I make room for it in my life, sometimes at great length, at all times. I have run in 100 degree heat and in -40 with snow.
My brother was a stud in university, in a different sport, and went to the NCAA championships for a division one school in it. He tried to go pro (the sport is much bigger in Europe) and ended up with a chronic hip problem. He no longer competes and only participates in his old sport only recreationally and very rarely. He has put on weight and no longer considers himself an athlete.
Near where he went to university people still recognize him from his participation in his sport and he is somewhat well known. Me, not so much. I certainly respect that he had a lot of success but I don't know if I would trade places with him. He does not work out anymore and does not have the lifetime love for his sport that I love for running.
So, I pose the question again, would you rather have a high level of success and then burnout or achieve less success but do it for a much longer period of time?