What happened to the road running scene of old?

smd wrote:

DSB15 wrote:

I would not encourage a kid coming out college to compete post-collegiately (sp). It is simply not worth it.

Not worth it how? If it's important to them and they like it, why would you discourage people from competing at whatever level they want? If not being able to occasionally win $75 is a deal breaker, they'll give up soon enough anyway.

Some of the arguments here are contradictory:

Things were great back in the day. You'd run 15:10 and finish 32nd. That didn't matter, because everyone was a bad ass in it for the love of the sport.

Things suck now because you can win most 5Ks in 15:10 but then you don't get good prizes.

Sub elites don't get the respect from anyone they once did (and zero resources). 15:10 will win many 5k's by 2 minutes now.

DSB15 wrote:

smd wrote:

Not worth it how? If it's important to them and they like it, why would you discourage people from competing at whatever level they want? If not being able to occasionally win $75 is a deal breaker, they'll give up soon enough anyway.

Some of the arguments here are contradictory:

Things were great back in the day. You'd run 15:10 and finish 32nd. That didn't matter, because everyone was a bad ass in it for the love of the sport.

Things suck now because you can win most 5Ks in 15:10 but then you don't get good prizes.

Sub elites don't get the respect from anyone they once did (and zero resources). 15:10 will win many 5k's by 2 minutes now.

So what?! Why should this universal lack of respect (which is not true, by the way) matter to the 15:10 guy if he's doing what he wants to do?

And what resources does a 15:10 guy need that are unavailable to him? I say this as a former 15:10 guy who ran because I wanted to run--why did I deserve comped entries or shoes or whatever more than a 16:10 guy or anyone else?

smd wrote:

So what?! Why should this universal lack of respect (which is not true, by the way) matter to the 15:10 guy if he's doing what he wants to do?

And what resources does a 15:10 guy need that are unavailable to him? I say this as a former 15:10 guy who ran because I wanted to run--why did I deserve comped entries or shoes or whatever more than a 16:10 guy or anyone else?

Agreed. The now largely-extinct "hardcore amateurs" of yore -people who trained hard with goals in mind and laid it all on the line in races, now matter their talent levels- ran for the love of it, and race fields were incredibly fast and deep by today's standards.

In the mid-80s I used to compete in a regular Friday night 5k "training race" series in New York's Flushing Meadow Park. These events had a clock over the finish line, but no official results were given, nor were swag, t-shirts, trophies or medals, so there was no monetary or material incentive to do well. Nonetheless, these races were routinely won with times in the mid-14s, and if you did 15:30 you'd be lucky to crack the top dozen. Nobility of effort was a point of pride -and its own reward- with the runners of that era, and nobody walked during a race unless they were injured and getting themselves off the course.

There's been a huge shift away from that in the collective mindset.

Hey, free idea here for all you RD's. You say that it's all about social medial and buzz now? Great. I'm happy to be part of it, so make it easy for me.

Make it easy for me to figure out who's going to be in the race.

I don't care all that much about who's going to win the HM in 1:04. I won't see that guy after the first 30 seconds. But if I can see a local rival is signed up, or a fast guy in the M45-49 category is coming in from out of town, maybe I'll want to lock horns. Instead of turning everything over to Active and forgetting about it, find out who your runners are. Find out some recent times. Create some peer pressure (in the form of people around my time and/or in my age group) for me to show up on race day. Maybe two people have a realistic shot at winning, and 5 people at most are competing for podium spots, out of the 200 or 800 people signed up. Make it easy for the rest of us to find out - on your own race site - what the competition will be like. Make it easy for people with plain-vanilla free Strava accounts to show we're going to run. Make it easy to create a buzz, instead of letting Active or Facebook or someone else do it, if it happens at all.

This absolutely plays a role. I graduated nearly 2 years ago, was a decent d3 runner (all-american) nothing spectacular sub 15 guy (once). Myself and my fiancé are currently the only ones from a 2-3 year span still training similarly to when we were in college. I have improved my 8k by 15 seconds, still loving it while my friends get fat.

I won a hilly half in 1:22:x. Got 100$ to lululemon. It got me one tank top.

Moral of the story is. Don’t shop lululemon

Two years ago I saw that the Harwich Half Marathon on Cape Cod was going to have decent prize money. I could be wrong, but it seemed like they posted that notification awfully late and close to race day. When I saw the results...I was thinking that there's a lot of talent and depth here in New England.

http://coolrunning.com/results/16/ma/Oct2_Harwic_3_set1.shtml

That same day there were ~20 other races in the area with plenty of solid winning times (14:47 5k, for instance). If there were only one race that entire weekend, the depth would look more impressive.

There is plenty of depth, and sometimes there is good prize money.

I have to agree that there are too many races. I live north of boston and theres too many races to even count on the weekends. However, when everyone gets together like at the new England prix series races, where there is a strong team presence, the depth at those races seems to rival the old days. The 10k last year had 80 plus people under 35 mins. The half marathon typically has 120 or more under 6 mins pace.

http://www.coolrunning.com/results/16/ma/Sep25_TenthA_set1.shtml

The price issue or lack of prize money doesn't stop me from doing a race if I want to race. Times change and it just what it is now. However I tend to stick to the grand prix races because I like the depth. I don't need an ego boost by crushing a charity field by 3 mins.

My issue is that race fees doubled but none of the courses are accurate. We have one race company in our area that has the monopoly on races, holding over 200 races every year. Not a single race is certified. I didn't mind it as much when I was paying $12 for a 5K because it was a good way to get in a workout with a very competitive crowd. Now all of the 5Ks are $30-$45+ and not even a single dollar has gone towards certifying the course.

booker wrote:

My issue is that race fees doubled but none of the courses are accurate. We have one race company in our area that has the monopoly on races, holding over 200 races every year. Not a single race is certified. I didn't mind it as much when I was paying $12 for a 5K because it was a good way to get in a workout with a very competitive crowd. Now all of the 5Ks are $30-$45+ and not even a single dollar has gone towards certifying the course.

An accomplished sub elite won't find frequent quality races IN HIS AREA. He will train hard and win races easily by 2 minutes. He may find frequent quality races if he lives in Houston, or Atlanta or SoCal or NYRR, but what about Oregon?

Name one quality road race in Oregon other than Cascade Run Off? Hell, even Eugene's signature race Butte to Butte is a mere shadow of it's former self.

I wonder how much of the original poster's experience is a product of big city vs. suburb road running cultures.

City running cultures seem pretty strong. Here is a link to a fairly hilly 5K race in NYC last year with 20 runners breaking 16:

https://results.nyrr.org/event/PS5-17/finishers

The above race was just 1 of 11 races in the local teams' Grand Prix.

I'd be surprised if NYC's local runners were faster 30-40 years ago. It's possible, but I'd need to seem some data to believe it. If someone has results from a 5K or similar event on a certified course that show significantly faster times (and is not a national/regional championship) from that era, please share.

A more interesting (and revealing) question may be: why have SOME local competitive running scenes weakened while others have remained strong or strengthened?

Sub elites don't get the respect from anyone they once did (and zero resources). 15:10 will win many 5k's by 2 minutes now.

I agree with this- I've noticed that most hobby joggers don't "get" that these guys are running that fast.

My club puts on weekly "workouts"- track meets with 400, 800, Mile, 2 mile.

If a guy runs 4:4something people think he's God.

When I was 20 (40 years ago) we would have heats of guys running from 4:15-5:00- Maybe up to 30 guys.

High school kids who wanted to break 5:00 could show up and know they'd have a bunch of guys to follow.

Sub elites need to create a new culture that is accessible to relative beginners and avoids the cost of throwing a big event.

Something like the Fight Club.

Start with small events...maybe only 10 guys. Who needs permits, cops, water stations, t shirts, or any of the other bloat in a road race? Do you get a permit to run on the side of the road when you go running with a group of guys? Somebody makes up a course. You could do it on the spot. It could be as simple as (using UW area as an example) "We're starting at Husky Stadium, running down the Burke until Freemont Bridge, turn and come back to the stadium".

Everyone pitches in $10. Have a $50, $20, $15, $10, $5 prize structure. Perhaps you need a simple handicap system so the slower guys have a chance.

Maybe even have shorter races (mile or less) and you could face off multiple times in one day (like an interval workout with prizes). Anything to bring competition back.

Does the course need to be accurately measured? With GPS and Google maps, the measurement would be more accurate than the road races I ran in the 80s. Who really cares? It's about the competition.

Once you have an underground scene, something that the pros wouldn't waste time with, the highly trained and talented amateurs have a place to fight it out. Then it gets some buzz, the "somewhat fit" guys with egos start showing up thinking they can earn an easy $50, and it grows from there. Eventually it gets big and you need cops, T-shirts, water stations, pro timing, etc and it gets expensive and the competition dies off again and you have to start another Fight Club to get back to the competition.

Bringing back the competition in Massachusetts, $1,000 for the win and new CR!

http://marshfieldstpatricksday5k.com/

Our race is completely volunteer run for a non-profit, I agree that there are just too many races put on by people or organizations that are collecting a director fee, some by those that aren't even runners. It's only our 8th year, but after our successful year one, there were 3 copy cat St. Patrick's Day races within a couple of towns by those looking to cash in. Hoping to keep raising funds, while attracting top level competition. It can be done, just has to be done right.

Skazdead wrote:

A more interesting (and revealing) question may be: why have SOME local competitive running scenes weakened while others have remained strong or strengthened?

It has to do with economics. Running is an activity for those than have too much money to burn. It used to be blue collar and alternative. No its wealthly, trendy, and elitist. So if your local area is not doing as well economically as it was back in the day, then your local scene will suffer.

First road race I ever entered just closed up shop.

http://www.oakapplerun.org/pages/OARHome.asp

Nice cheap, basic, and well run race bites the dust. Another local favorite race a few years ago got shutdown too.

Looks like over saturation may be settling in....

http://wardnicholson.com/invasion-of-the-hobby-joggers-part-2/

There are about 700k people in my city and I'd estimate there are about 40 guys who can run sub-15:00/31:00 at their peak shape of the year. The problem is that

* There are only a couple certified flat races. Who wants to run a course that is not measured correctly or is super hilly? Basically, you're paying to do a solo workout.

* 2 of these races fall on the same weekend as XC/track races in the area

* 30 of these guys are collegiate runners who have a packed race schedule already

* The weather here is miserable Nov - April

booker wrote:

My issue is that race fees doubled but none of the courses are accurate. We have one race company in our area that has the monopoly on races, holding over 200 races every year. Not a single race is certified. I didn't mind it as much when I was paying $12 for a 5K because it was a good way to get in a workout with a very competitive crowd. Now all of the 5Ks are $30-$45+ and not even a single dollar has gone towards certifying the course.

I did a 6.11 mile "10k" yesterday (someone else on Strava said his Garmin registered 6.08 miles) , AND the 5k started 10 minutes after the 10k, so you shared the last 600 yards to the finish with 9:00/mi 5k folks.

There doesn't seem to be much racing going on in road racing anymore. They seem to be more community events to be seen at and items on peoples bucket lists. Back in the 80's if you ran a 4 hour marathon you'd be way in the back of the pack and the timing guys were packing up as you crossed the finish line. Now a 4 hour marathon is considered a good time and would put you in the top 25% at the Chicago Marathon. Then the swag they give now is just stupid, a medal for a 5K, are you kidding me. The whole sport has been monetized.