Mary Wittenberg Steps Down as President of New York Road Runners to Head Virgin Sport

This is not a running boom. As someone posted earlier, the recent trend has been for people to check things off their list. I would consider it a running boom if you saw most runners continue to participate, but most are just jumping in a marathon once or twice to say they did it. This is not just happening to road running btw, it's tris, ultras and cycling also. It's about commoditizing the sport. Either you are a real sucker or an amazing troll.

Notevenclose wrote:

This is not a running boom. As someone posted earlier, the recent trend has been for people to check things off their list. I would consider it a running boom if you saw most runners continue to participate, but most are just jumping in a marathon once or twice to say they did it. This is not just happening to road running btw, it's tris, ultras and cycling also. It's about commoditizing the sport. Either you are a real sucker or an amazing troll.

so...it's a running boom... just without the *right* kind of runners

got it.

you people are old school grouches

this is interesting psychologically tho

And of course the sources you quote are biased for obvious reasons. Would they ever say the sport is hurting if it was? Btw - you singled yourself out as an elitist who is willing to throw money at something which is perceived as cool without either understanding what's driving it or having any real notion of how the average joe may be impacted.

Notevenclose wrote:

And of course the sources you quote are biased for obvious reasons. Would they ever say the sport is hurting if it was? Btw - you singled yourself out as an elitist who is willing to throw money at something which is perceived as cool without either understanding what's driving it or having any real notion of how the average joe may be impacted.

do you really think that there isn't a running boom going on? seriously? the source doesn't matter - that is not really debatable. It's not the same boom as the 70s - the quality is lower - but the numbers are amazing.

as for me - I don't do marathons, I don't do tris, I don't do obstacle races. I do 5k-HM and have been doing that for 30 years. Racing. As fast as I can. On a team.

My steady diet of racing is bad for the average joe? I am really struggling to understand. You mean because I pay the $25 per race for NYRR events? That's bad for the sport? I should be doing what else? You're making it so hard for me.

People are much more aware of fitness and diet today than they ever have been so many more people do some kind of working out than ever before. Thinking that this only involves running is myopia at its best. The massive booms going on today are not in running (even though running numbers are at all-time highs). Yoga is a $27 BILLION industry with 20 million practitioners:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/16/how-the-yoga-industry-los_n_4441767.html

In 2000, CrossFit didn't exist. In 2014, CrossFit had 209,585 people participate just in its world championship qualification competition and now has 10,000 gyms:

http://games.crossfit.com/article/209585-rise-open

SoulCycle went from nothing in 2006 to 50,000 paying riders a week (and what they pay makes NYRR fees look like chump change)

So, yeah, sure more people are running today but there are more people today. The exponential growth is NOT in running. It's in other areas of fitness and that's why I would not call today a running boom. There's a CrossFit boom, there's a SoulCycle boom, there's a Mudder boom and there's a yoga boom but there isn't a running boom in my eyes.

At least we established that the perfect NYRR regime works for you personally. Next step - do some simple math and use to basic logic to figure out the NYRR's #1 priority is turning a good profit. It's really not that hard, you can do it. Support them all you want, but you're going to have an extremely difficult time convincing anyone here that the NYRR is looking out for the local running community.

The source doesn't matter??? That's a good one. Like RW ever is going to go on record and say that running is dying out. The numbers really aren't amazing. The numbers in other fitness sports are what is amazing. If running really were in a boom, then Millrose at the Garden wouldn't have gone under. When running really was popular, it sold out. By the end, just a few 1000 showed up. As the other poster noted, running the marathon is all about the bucket list.

BTW, you aren't that fast because, if you were, you would have President's Circle and not be coughing up $18 a race. So you can get off your high horse about how fast you are and your team.

you're not wrong that other fitness areas are also booming, but why does that mean there is no running boom? Why does someone who runs 70% of the time matter less than someone who runs 100% of the time?

Bottom line:

"By many measures, running has seen astounding growth. According to Running USA, a nonprofit organization that promotes the sport, the number of marathoners is setting new records every year. In 1976, there were around 25,000 marathon finishers. By 2000, that figure had broken 350,000, and it hit an all-time high in 2011, at 518,000."

Spot on. I would also add that any talk of this so called "running boom" being some sort of grass roots movement is just plain bananas.

I have been following this thread and I agree with alot of what you say, to imply there isn't a running boom is flat out incorrect. The numbers prove it out. If you feel they are not true runners, won't hang around past their one marathon or are in it for some other reason, it is nevertheless a boom. It is different than the boom of the 70s, of course.This boom has been going on for a good number of years. Let's see where the Crossfitters, mudders Soulcyclers are in 10 years. Except for the demand in IMs, the shorter tris has seen a dropoff from 10-15 years ago.People try it, cross it off their list on move on, whether it is to another sport or cooking, it is bound to happen.

UnhappyCustomer wrote:

Spot on. I would also add that any talk of this so called "running boom" being some sort of grass roots movement is just plain bananas.

how do you define 'grass roots'?

this by itself is not even close to being considered evidence of a running boom. People are doing a lot of activities other than running for lifestyle/health improvement reasons. As I mentioned before, marathoning is a fad right now. Don't confuse a fad with a boom.

I should be asking you that question since you brought it up in the first place. Grass roots means a bottoms up movement, something happening organically. That is quite different than what's happening in the marathoning scene today. Most non-runners today read about it on a blog or article or through a friend, figure out how to sign up (learn about the 9+1) and embark on very basic training to be able to finish one. The number of out of shape and overweight participants is unreal, but that's why we see them out there, to check it off the bucket list. If it was a grass roots movement as you mentioned in a previous post, we'd be seeing the masses jump on running in general (not marathoning specifically) for the sake of being fit and enjoyment. The marathons and more competitive results would follow as a result. You are not seeing a massive spike in the regular road races (ny is an anomaly due to the forced 9+1) and certainly the masses are not getting off the couch to run to be fit.

One question. Do you wear compression socks, a water belt, or listen to music when racing?

UnhappyCustomer wrote:

You are not seeing a massive spike in the regular road races (ny is an anomaly due to the forced 9+1) and certainly the masses are not getting off the couch to run to be fit.

these stats would seem to prove this theory wrong. It shows a (rough) DOUBLING of road race participation between 2005 and 2013

that counts marathons, but I just have to reject your shrugging off these numbers.

I have no real view on the grass roots issue - people are racing in vastly larger numbers than before - call it whatever you want - boom, fad, whatever. It's big and it's here and I don't really understand why you are so eager to shrug it off.

no, no, and no

I've been running since the early '80s, gents. I am not a faddish jumper in.

I do find it comical that, after saying sources don't matter, you went ahead and quoted a source whose stated mission is to promote running. I don't question their numbers but it nonetheless is funny.

350,000 to 518,000 in 11 years is nice growth but it's not exactly a hockey stick like you see with other sports. 0 to 209,000 in 14 years is A LOT more impressive and vertical than 168,000 more in 11 years when the base is 350,000. Moreover, that's just marathon finishers and we acknowledge that many people are doing marathons for bucket list reasons. You (the self-professed non-marathoner) of all people should know that running isn't just marathons. Yes, there are more people entering non-marathon running races than 15 or 20 years ago but it's not exponentially more like you see in other sports.

In the 70s, if you were really cutting edge and understood that working out was beneficial to your health, what were your options in NYC? There were a few Rocky-style gyms, some roller rinks, a few grungy pools and a run-down Central Park for running. It was very easy for people to pick up running in the 70s and into the 80s as there was virtually no competition. Then aerobics popped up in the 80s and the fitness craze was on. The fitness options in NYC today are nearly limitless with fancy gyms all over the place that offer class after class. SoulCycle, Bikram, CrossFit, Barry's Boot camp, cycling, pilates, etc all are drawing in people who, in the 70s, would have gravitated to running for no other reason than it was the only option. I know you live in your own myopic world but it might be beneficial to open your eyes up and see what is going on around you. You actually might learn something.

"Virgin Sport"??? Who will they sponsor other than Lolo and Dane Rauschenberg?

NYCRUNS Better wrote:

The fitness options in NYC today are nearly limitless with fancy gyms all over the place that offer class after class. SoulCycle, Bikram, CrossFit,

What does Spinning or yoga have to do with fitness?

Ever seen a BUFF yoga athlete? A soulcyclist with a nice V-shaped PHYSIQUE that women lust after? No?

Guess why!

Answer: only resistance training will give you results that show.

As for Marry W. She looks like she has never seen a gym from inside.