Letters to the Editor
-
And competition is a good thing?
I'm open-minded so bear with me. Words like "excellence" keep climbing into the word "competition".
I don't honestly see where competition is helping anyone. I believe it to be in the worst interests of society, developing a hollow elitism. Better than, worse than.
The best marathon I ever ran was with one hand in the hand of my daughter and one hand in the hand of my brother. No one cared about time, about PB's about the Kenyans that ran twice as fast as we did.
Co-operation to me is the antithesis of competition. And we need far more co-operation in this sad and sorry world and far less competition (now escalating rapidly to wars for oil and water).
So Oprah ruined it for a few elitists. Oprah opened up the lives of a lot of people who would never, ever have envisioned themselves completing something so physical, so challenging, so exhilerating.
I believe the enhanced lives of all of these are worth far, far more than the grim skeletons kicking ass out there who never ever wear a smile or even nod at the specators applauding them. Give me the downtrodden rest of us, who cheer each other on and hold each other's hands and say "Yeah, we (not I) can do it!!!"
-
To Mamakpk
So you consider marathon running a 'useless and self-indulgent' activity?
Have you ever run a marathon?? I find that most people who sit in judgment towards those of us who are physically active to be not so active themselves. But I could be wrong in your case...
To answer your question as why we runners run marathons: the runner's high, the challenge, the ability to do something as physically taxing as a marathon, to stay fit, to finish something we started, to better ourselves.
Self indulgent? If you consider bettering yourself to be self indulgent. Useless? Only if taken to the extreme and one's health is ruined, which does happen to those that get addicted to running extreme distances.
Me, I run because I like the effect--being in shape and feeling active and far younger than my 46 years. I also like that I can finish something I started and train, for months at a time, towards a goal. As I said in earlier post, I'd still be doing marathons if my body would let me--but my injury after my 2nd marathon knocked me down to doing workouts in the gym (mainly weights and cardio now).
You call an investment in time and energy towards my physical, mental and emotional well-being a waste of time. I call it being a good example.
And the best sermon is a good example.
-
Oprah
The IMG NYC Marathon is a business. It exists to make money, and festoon 35,000 with an IMG logo. That wasn't always the case. Anyone who finished below 100th place is a loser, and ought to be viewed as such. The mediocrity and "everyone is a winner" sprit is nauseating.
-
I hope I never meet Mr. McLelland
I agree with Edward McLelland's article on one point, and one point only: Bingham's contempt for successful runners is a case of sour grapes. On the other hand, I at least understand where he is coming from. Although Bingham's attitude is unattractive, it's a human reaction.
I can't fathom Edward McLelland. Surely, if he can easily crack 20 minutes for a 5K run he doesn't need to feel superior to me, huffing and puffing at 26 minutes? My presence in a race need not ruin it; if you're better than me, you'll be ahead of me. Nor does my existence undermine the competitive spirit of racing: a truly competitive runner simply has to choose someone other than me as a benchmark.
The presence of Mr. McLelland in a race, however, loudly voicing his contempt for those slower than him, can ruin a race. Who would try their first race if they knew Mr. McLelland were waiting at the finish line to tell them how inadequate they were? And if no one tries that first race, how will they ever reach Mr. McLelland's exacting standards?
-
@namepeace, et al
No, I do not believe that a whole lot of recreational runners are properly trained for the marathon - they're simply trained enough to finish, period. I would never enter a marathon with the goal of simply finishing - not just because I would never put my body or my health in that kind of jeopardy, but because to me races are about competition and improvement - or used to be, before all the non-athletes starting whining about how much their feelings were being hurt by being excluded from the mythical "club". And what club is that, exactly? The club for people with discipline and commitment, or the club for people who want a medal for just showing up?
I could go out today and the spend the afternoon shuffling along for 26 miles and what have I accomplished? I've covered a distance. For some of us, the point is not just covering a distance. For others I suppose the point is covering a distance with a big crowd watching and a medal waiting for them at the end.
-
Thank you, anonymous
Now, if you ask me, THIS is elitism. It's like a lot of people think shorter races are beneath them. I mean, why not celebrate quitting smoking by getting your 5-K time under 19 minutes? I'll tell you why--because the people you work with won't be as impressed as they will be by that marathon you spent 6 hours getting through, although the real athletic feat is probably the former rather than the latter. At this point, though, when you announce you've done a marathon, people say, "Oh, that's great, my parents just did one to celebrate their 50th anniversary," so it looks like folks will have to find another more grueling event that will carry the cachet.
Some people might say, "But I'm never going to be good at any running event! It is about the achievement of finishing for me!" The point is not that you'll WIN those 5-Ks--it's that given the training time most folks have, if you focus your training and use discipline, you will be MUCH more competitive at a shorter event that you would be at a marathon. And despite most people's protestations that's it's about finishing and that competition is evil and so on, I think you'll have that little spark awakened in you. Who knows, you might end up enjoying it!
Amen. An 18-minute 5-K would impress me a heck of a lot more than a 5.5 hour marathon -- and probably would be a much better indicator of health and fitness.
Ugh. It's the same kind of attitude a heavy person gets in the more elitist health clubs/gyms, where the majority of folks is already slim and beautiful and act like you have some nerve screwing up the aesthetics of "their" place.
It's certainly not. Did you even read the rest of my post? I'm all for encouraging physical fitness, be it achieved through a gym or out on the park jogging path, but why this insane obsession with the marathon, and of all things, by starting one's fitness regime with a marathon as the short-term goal? It's just silly.