Check out Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. Running would fall under Self-Actualization.
Check out Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. Running would fall under Self-Actualization.
Let's be honest, distance running is most appealing to nerdy kids in America. Those types of kids tend to come from middle class to upper middle class suburban backgrounds. It also helps that these areas tend to be relatively safe for training too. Good luck running a cross country program in the hood.
Plus there's little incentive compared to a sport like basketball where you can make boatloads of money if you end up being one of the 0.0001% of people who can go pro in the sport. Pro runners make peanuts compared to pros in the team sports. If you're poor why waste your time on a sport where you can still be poor when you're one of the best in the world? Why not go for the NBA dream and blow through tens of millions on strippers and mansions?
American distance running has become a upper middle class sport and that is why U.S. male distance running is no longer able to keep up with the African's. Young U.S. men who come from the upper middle class have too much white privilege and their expectation of entitlement has made them "soft". This group simply does not have the work ethic, strength of character that it takes to be the very best. Your lucky to get 80% effort out of any of these guys at anything they do.
Have you noticed how much more expensive your neighborhood 5k, and basically every other race, has become in the past 10 years? The same inflation applies to running shoes.
Market concentration/PE firms entering, marketing achievement (finishers medals for everyone!), probably some litigation, and a lot of white women getting into the mix turns a simple sport into an image. The same thing happened to Yoga. Distance running is a white collar sport now.
NEEEERRRRRRRDDDDSSSS!!!! wrote:
Let's be honest, distance running is most appealing to nerdy kids in America. Those types of kids tend to come from middle class to upper middle class suburban backgrounds. It also helps that these areas tend to be relatively safe for training too. Good luck running a cross country program in the hood.
Plus there's little incentive compared to a sport like basketball where you can make boatloads of money if you end up being one of the 0.0001% of people who can go pro in the sport. Pro runners make peanuts compared to pros in the team sports. If you're poor why waste your time on a sport where you can still be poor when you're one of the best in the world? Why not go for the NBA dream and blow through tens of millions on strippers and mansions?
That is exactly what wejo and rojo do in their "Ivy LifeStyle."
The best athletes play basketball and football.
The leftover losers do 'track and field' because they sucked at the real sports.
Does track and field have "Female Cheerleaders in skimpy outfits" like football and basketball???
No.
Does track and field bring in MILLIONS of DOLLARS into the University???
No.
The fastest runners in track and field do the 100m event.
For example:
1) Usain Bolt gets lots of money and lots of FANS.
Slower runners have to move up to longer events like the 400m.
Really slow runners have to move up to middle distance races like the 800m or 1500m.
The really, really slow middle distance runners then have to move up and become long distance runners in the 5000m or 10000m events.
The really, really, really slow distance runners then have to move up to the Marathon Event of 42.195km…and become Marathon Runners.
The really, really, really, really slow Marathon runners then have to move up…and become "ULTRAMARATHON RUNNERS".
In conclusion:
1) ULTRAMARATHON RUNNERS ARE THE SLOWEST and MOST PATHETIC GROUP OF RUNNERS ON THIS PLANET AT THE PRESENT TIME.
ULTRAMARATHON runners do not get any fans…or cheerleaders…or money…because they are really slow…and boring.
oh yeah baby
B__|Ku wrote:
The big exception to this is Cas Loxsom. Dude is from the hood - pistol wavin new haven
No, he is not from the hood. I guarantee he is not from one of the really rough parts of New Haven where the murders take place. The only white people you find there are passing through in their cars.
His high school, while probably majority black, is in the nicest neighborhood in the city. It's completely gentrified, full of professors, grad students, young professionals, young families. I lived a couple blocks from the high school, did my workouts on the track and daily runs on the beautiful trails around the school. It's a great place to live. Definitely not the hood.
Inflation wrote:
Have you noticed how much more expensive your neighborhood 5k, and basically every other race, has become in the past 10 years? The same inflation applies to running shoes.
Market concentration/PE firms entering, marketing achievement (finishers medals for everyone!), probably some litigation, and a lot of white women getting into the mix turns a simple sport into an image. The same thing happened to Yoga. Distance running is a white collar sport now.
In conclusion:
1) ULTRAMARATHON RUNNERS are always really SLOW.
2) ULTRAMARATHON RUNNERS are always WHITE PEOPLE.
A real American wrote:
Red Pill Giver wrote:And a safe neighborhood, and work ethic.
Poor people do not have these.
I can guarantee you that most poor people have a much stronger work ethic than the pampered children of the upper middle class and above.
I think that last statement isn't true. Sure, there are plenty of so called pampered children who choke under pressure and don't have much of a work ethic. But in my experience, I see it differently. There are obviously plenty of exceptions, but generally speaking, in coaching running and teaching PE...the "richer" kids tend to have a stronger upbringing, more stability, and values the lend them self to distance running more so than less affluent kids.
Its cultural in some respects. And distance running is an intrinsically motivated sport, where as FB, BB, and sprinting draws more extrinsically motivated kids. Both can work hard, but in different ways.
Many of the "poor" kids are out of shape compared to the kids from stable homes, especially females. "Poor" kids tend to have parents that are poor b/c the parents don't have there act together. There poor for a reason. Again, lots of exceptions. The wealthy, upper middle class tends to have parents with a responsible, educated back ground...who may run themselves. Poor kids parents probably are not out running after work or during lunch...especially since they may have a blue collar job.
I know plenty of kids from well to do back grounds that are as tough as they come. And I also have had plenty of kids from blue collar/poor families that are tough as well. In summary, dont agree with the rich kids are not as tough as poor kids idea.
For an example of how growing up in a better environment (upper class vs poor) affects development of an athlete just take a look at the transformation of Purdue basketball player Caleb Swanigan. 400 pounds as an 8th grader living in poverty with his mom. Then he moves in with his rich sports agent guardian, gets better structure and discipline, gets in shape and is now a future NBA lottery pick.
Because this crap country likes to squeeze every cent out of the consumer whenever possible. Like running? These 200 dollar shoes will make you great.....until next week when the newer version comes out.....at 210 dollars. No wonder this rathole country is spiraling downhill faster than Caster's voice.
Kinda funny that runners that come from impoverished countries seem to effortlessly place above U,S, runners in 99% of all track events.
Pre Come wrote:
Because this crap country likes to squeeze every cent out of the consumer whenever possible. Like running? These 200 dollar shoes will make you great.....until next week when the newer version comes out.....at 210 dollars. No wonder this rathole country is spiraling downhill faster than Caster's voice.
Kinda funny that runners that come from impoverished countries seem to effortlessly place above U,S, runners in 99% of all track events.
I think you're kind of onto something. The sport has been made into something that you need to have a few bucks to do. I could never have afforded to race once or twice a month when I was in my 20s and 30s if race entry fees were what they are today. Two dollars was a big fee. That's about nine dollars in today's money. Races used to start between 11:00 AM and 2:00 PM. That meant you could go to races that were a few hours drive from your home on the morning of the race and be home that night. You didn't need a motel room which was useful because I couldn't have afforded that very often. So we've probably weeded out a lot of the non affluent.
I would argue that runners from only a very small number of specific impoverished countries place above US runners. You don't see a lot of Pakistanis or Venezuelans finishing ahead of US runners.
MurderDubs wrote:
As others have said, it's culture and sometimes culture perpetuates itself without much in the way of reason. While some of it is economic, I don't think poor kids are making their sporting decisions based off ruthless economic analysis, otherwise they'd all be trying to play baseball, which pays better than the NFL, has guaranteed contracts and international leagues if you can't make MLB, rather than football. Football can also cripple you for life, an added "bonus" that tends to impact long-term economic well-being.
Kids do what is culturally reinforced. I'm black. My dad was a sprinter; all the sprinters at my school were black. I wanted to be a sprinter. I also played on the basketball team. All the white kids played baseball, swam, ran X-C. When I proved too slow for the sprints, they put me in the 800. If I had had to go up any higher, I might've just quit track altogether. The high school brain works in pretty predictable and silly ways.
You are extremely correct about the high school brain. I did not have an excellent career as a distance runner because of a hearing disability. However the "high school" brain was also a problem for me. I did not want to be a 2 miler. I wanted to run the mile. Good post!
Red Pill Giver wrote:
Curiosito wrote:For distance running all you need is a pair of shoes.
And a safe neighborhood, and work ethic.
Poor people do not have these.
Be more blunt. American blacks tend to be of West African descent, hence few individuals suited for distance running. As for Hispanics in the US, most are more interested in soccer and baseball than in track and field, or you'd see a higher percentage of them as distance athletes, never mind in track and field in general. The OP is some kind of wishy washy SJW type.
Click me now Please. Thank you wrote:
NEEEERRRRRRRDDDDSSSS!!!! wrote:Let's be honest, distance running is most appealing to nerdy kids in America. Those types of kids tend to come from middle class to upper middle class suburban backgrounds. It also helps that these areas tend to be relatively safe for training too. Good luck running a cross country program in the hood.
Plus there's little incentive compared to a sport like basketball where you can make boatloads of money if you end up being one of the 0.0001% of people who can go pro in the sport. Pro runners make peanuts compared to pros in the team sports. If you're poor why waste your time on a sport where you can still be poor when you're one of the best in the world? Why not go for the NBA dream and blow through tens of millions on strippers and mansions?
That is exactly what wejo and rojo do in their "Ivy LifeStyle."
The best athletes play basketball and football.
The leftover losers do 'track and field' because they sucked at the real sports.
Does track and field have "Female Cheerleaders in skimpy outfits" like football and basketball???
No.
Does track and field bring in MILLIONS of DOLLARS into the University???
No.
The fastest runners in track and field do the 100m event.
For example:
1) Usain Bolt gets lots of money and lots of FANS.
Slower runners have to move up to longer events like the 400m.
Really slow runners have to move up to middle distance races like the 800m or 1500m.
The really, really slow middle distance runners then have to move up and become long distance runners in the 5000m or 10000m events.
The really, really, really slow distance runners then have to move up to the Marathon Event of 42.195km…and become Marathon Runners.
The really, really, really, really slow Marathon runners then have to move up…and become "ULTRAMARATHON RUNNERS".
In conclusion:
1) ULTRAMARATHON RUNNERS ARE THE SLOWEST and MOST PATHETIC GROUP OF RUNNERS ON THIS PLANET AT THE PRESENT TIME.
ULTRAMARATHON runners do not get any fans…or cheerleaders…or money…because they are really slow…and boring.
oh yeah baby
If you tell a girl you run 5K and I another guy tells her he runs a hundred miles she'll be more interested in the other guy, all else being equal.
Slowfoot wrote:
If you tell a girl you run 5K and I another guy tells her he runs a hundred miles she'll be more interested in the other guy, all else being equal.
BS. Or that may be right for at the hobby jogging level. But an elite track runner is FAR more attractive to most chicks than some hippie "elite" ultra slogger.
The data is very clear that the two most important factors to avoid poverty and the failures that come with poverty are:
1. Avoid growing up in a single mother household.
2. Get at least a high school education.
3. Have faith as an integral part of life.
A much greater percentage of kids from homes that follow the above rules are far more likely to have success in every aspect of life, regardless of race or ethnicity or income level.
Should have been....the 3 most important.....
MurderDubs wrote:
As others have said, it's culture and sometimes culture perpetuates itself without much in the way of reason. While some of it is economic, I don't think poor kids are making their sporting decisions based off ruthless economic analysis, otherwise they'd all be trying to play baseball, which pays better than the NFL, has guaranteed contracts and international leagues if you can't make MLB, rather than football. Football can also cripple you for life, an added "bonus" that tends to impact long-term economic well-being.
Kids do what is culturally reinforced. I'm black. My dad was a sprinter; all the sprinters at my school were black. I wanted to be a sprinter. I also played on the basketball team. All the white kids played baseball, swam, ran X-C. When I proved too slow for the sprints, they put me in the 800. If I had had to go up any higher, I might've just quit track altogether. The high school brain works in pretty predictable and silly ways.
Yes. I don't see a 13-year old making an Excel spreadsheet before deciding what sport to play. Kids play what their friends do, and that's your cultural influence.
yes, you're slow wrote:
Slowfoot wrote:If you tell a girl you run 5K and I another guy tells her he runs a hundred miles she'll be more interested in the other guy, all else being equal.
BS. Or that may be right for at the hobby jogging level. But an elite track runner is FAR more attractive to most chicks than some hippie "elite" ultra slogger.
But most chicks are at the hobby jogger level. You're right though that anorexic runner chicks would prefer some track guy.
Bjkdcjjhcxfjj wrote:
B__|Ku wrote:The big exception to this is Cas Loxsom. Dude is from the hood - pistol wavin new haven
No, he is not from the hood. I guarantee he is not from one of the really rough parts of New Haven where the murders take place. The only white people you find there are passing through in their cars.
His high school, while probably majority black, is in the nicest neighborhood in the city. It's completely gentrified, full of professors, grad students, young professionals, young families. I lived a couple blocks from the high school, did my workouts on the track and daily runs on the beautiful trails around the school. It's a great place to live. Definitely not the hood.
Why you trying to deny Cas' street cred? Out on the streets, my man Lox is a living legend. Brothers run inside when they see Cas go whizzin' by in his half-tights. Matter of fact, Lox is part of NH ghetto lore. Just call him White Chocolate!