Marathon status but what is an achiement?

clubcard

I have never seen so many people out running in the last year.
I know it's a recession sport as the last time running had close to the numbers participtating in races was the 80's(last recession)

While the standards have declined at the top level the numbers continue to increase with people running a marathon for the first time.
Speaking to alot of club runners they have a mixed opinion on the great increases as people will brag about running a marathon and shout about it as if it's a great achievement.

I think anyone can run a marathon but at what pace is the achievement.
Ok everyone has differen't abilites but the greater majority of people now think ''getting around'' is such a big deal.

There is a certain staus that goes with running a marathon but what will people be doing in 5 years time???Most likely ultra marathons as every Tom Dick and harry will have run a marathon so no longer will it have the wow factor.

rom

clubcard wrote: »

I have never seen so many people out running in the last year.
I know it's a recession sport as the last time running had close to the numbers participtating in races was the 80's(last recession)

While the standards have declined at the top level the numbers continue to increase with people running a marathon for the first time.
Speaking to alot of club runners they have a mixed opinion on the great increases as people will brag about running a marathon and shout about it as if it's a great achievement.

I think anyone can run a marathon but at what pace is the achievement.
Ok everyone has differen't abilites but the greater majority of people now think ''getting around'' is such a big deal.

There is a certain staus that goes with running a marathon but what will people be doing in 5 years time???Most likely ultra marathons as every Tom Dick and harry will have run a marathon so no longer will it have the wow factor.

Why care. If you are annoyed that people are dong "slow" marathons and you only do it to brag like them you are doing it for the wrong reasons. There are marathons in the US where people stop for lunch half way. More people running and getting healthy should be encouraged. It makes for a more healthy positive society. Its better than people going on about how many appartments they own. Look at it in a good way. The more people that run the more places there will be to run, the more races choice etc. the more places to buy stuff, the more clubs etc. Its all good. yes it may be the case that the standard is not as high but as someone who only started it recently also it means that funding for the elite will increase as the interest is there also. You are always are gonna get people talking up their achievements no matter what number are involved. Take Keith Duffy writing on twitter that he is an Ironman after doing a 1/2 IM for example.

earlyevening

This subject comes up every October, like clockwork.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=62679339

ger664

clubcard wrote: »

There is a certain staus that goes with running a marathon but what will people be doing in 5 years time???Most likely ultra marathons as every Tom Dick and harry will have run a marathon so no longer will it have the wow factor.

Why do you think that distance is the wow factor. I have more respect for someone who spews their guts up after leaving everything on the road in a 5K race.

911sc

clubcard wrote: »

as people will brag about running a marathon and shout about it as if it's a great achievement.

Yes, it is a great achievement but only if you can run it in 3:57:35:)

liamog

Is it more of an achievement for somebody who has been training for 8 years to run it in under 3 hours, or somebody who has never ran before who sticks to a training plan and completes their first marathon.

Don't get me wrong I'm not taking away from those who run brilliant times and put it in the massive amounts of effort, but as running a marathon is not something you can fake easily then I don't think we should take away from peoples achievements.

thirtyfoot

On the point of more recreational runners means more funding at elite, not true. Maybe in a small way if there are increases in club membership or that clubs hosting races get larger numbers but I remain unconvinced that there is any correlation between this running boom and improvements at elite level, not that there needs to be.

robinph

thirtyfoot wrote: »

On the point of more recreational runners means more funding at elite, not true. Maybe in a small way if there are increases in club membership or that clubs hosting races get larger numbers but I remain unconvinced that there is any correlation between this running boom and improvements at elite level, not that there needs to be.

There are many different routes for the cash to get from the "slow" person at the back of the field to help fund the fast guy up the front. More people running, means more people buying running kit, means more manufacturers fighting with each other over who they sponsor and give their latest fluorescent kit to and that they will probably increase how many people they sponsor at the same time.

The cash doesn't just have to come from the sports governing body.

thirtyfoot

robinph wrote: »

There are many different routes for the cash to get from the "slow" person at the back of the field to help fund the fast guy up the front. More people running, means more people buying running kit, means more manufacturers fighting with each other over who they sponsor and give their latest fluorescent kit to and that they will probably increase how many people they sponsor at the same time.

The cash doesn't just have to come from the sports governing body.

True but very isolated, so here in Ireland maybe 2-3 athletes might get a better shoe deal because of a running boom. Very isolated, not going to change the face of the sport at elite level.

average_runner

Dont agreed with this thread.

Yeah anyone can run a marathon but can anyone train for the marathon??

Time has nothing to do with it, if you get out there, train for a marathon and run it no matter what your time well fair play.


Ultra marathons only got big as Americans were not good enough to compete at the top standard in the marathon.

Techincally at the top level, the ultra's are aimed at the people who cant compete in the marathon. Hence why you dont see any of top kenyan's running the ultra.


For all of us on this boards, the average joe soap, to run a marathon or even an ultra is an amazing achievement and fair play to them all.

The same applies to all distances.

ecoli

thirtyfoot wrote: »

On the point of more recreational runners means more funding at elite, not true. Maybe in a small way if there are increases in club membership or that clubs hosting races get larger numbers but I remain unconvinced that there is any correlation between this running boom and improvements at elite level, not that there needs to be.

I agree with you for the most part on this most of this money goes into RO pockets however there are a few cases in which it benefits:

Mission Marathon:
This has been one good step toward encouraging increasing standards at elite level marathon running which benefits from the success of DCM. The results are fairly evident as we had nearly as many new sub 2.20 marathon runners this year as we had last decade.Its only one minor step in the right direction but hopefully it can provide a blue print for more domestic sponsorship of the sport.

Club Run events
A decent form of fund raising for some clubs who put on mass participation. Some that come to mind here are Rathfarnham, Raheny and to some extent sportsworld

ecoli

average_runner wrote: »

Ultra marathons only got big as Americans were not good enough to compete at the top standard in the marathon.

Techincally at the top level, the ultra's are aimed at the people who cant compete in the marathon. Hence why you dont see any of top kenyan's running the ultra.

Ultra distance running has been going longer than the 80s? Remember Alberto Salazar who was the Marathon WR holder was also a Comrades marathon winner

One of the main reasons very few Kenyans run Ultra's is down to the simple reason : lack of $$$$ in them (Similar why you dont see them in masters races). Kenyan marathon running has boomed over the last decade simply because it has become the best earning distance and provides financial security. In an interview with the 2009 winner of DCM Feyisa Lilesa he mentioned the appeal to a marathon when saying he would have to run 13 min for the 5k just to pick up prize money of 500 in some low key races compared to low key marathons which you can pick up 20,000 for roughly the equivalent marathon time

donothoponpop

thirtyfoot wrote: »

On the point of more recreational runners means more funding at elite, not true. Maybe in a small way if there are increases in club membership or that clubs hosting races get larger numbers but I remain unconvinced that there is any correlation between this running boom and improvements at elite level, not that there needs to be.

If you ever fancied taking your fabled anorak to the top of a damp and misty mountain, you'd see the IMRA model providing quality races for mostly recreational runners, where nearly all profits go towards sending elites to World Champs, as well as funding the Junior section. Numbers at IMRA races are reflecting the running boom, participants in the main are hobby runners.

RoyMcC

Can't resist re-posting the famous Gabriel Sherman article

http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/2006/09/running_with_slowpokes.html

Sincerely

A Slowpoke

tunney

ecoli wrote: »

Ultra distance running has been going longer than the 80s? Remember Alberto Salazar who was the Marathon WR holder was also a Comrades marathon winner

One of the main reasons very few Kenyans run Ultra's is down to the simple reason : lack of $$$$ in them (Similar why you dont see them in masters races). Kenyan marathon running has boomed over the last decade simply because it has become the best earning distance and provides financial security. In an interview with the 2009 winner of DCM Feyisa Lilesa he mentioned the appeal to a marathon when saying he would have to run 13 min for the 5k just to pick up prize money of 500 in some low key races compared to low key marathons which you can pick up 20,000 for roughly the equivalent marathon time

I disagree. People who cannot go fast but want "respect" go longer. Look at deca-ironman.

ultraman1

average_runner wrote: »

ultra's are aimed at the people who cant compete in the marathon
.

feck,iv been found out:D

tunney

robinph wrote: »

There are many different routes for the cash to get from the "slow" person at the back of the field to help fund the fast guy up the front. More people running, means more people buying running kit, means more manufacturers fighting with each other over who they sponsor and give their latest fluorescent kit to and that they will probably increase how many people they sponsor at the same time.

The cash doesn't just have to come from the sports governing body.

Ask your average runner to name *any* elite Irish runners.

The average plodder, just like the average triathlete, cares little about the elite side of things.

average_runner

ultraman1 wrote: »

feck,iv been found out:D

Didnt mean to offend anyone, but i was talking about elite

Not saying your not an elite runner either:D

robinph

tunney wrote: »

Ask your average runner to name *any* elite Irish runners.

The average plodder, just like the average triathlete, cares little about the elite side of things.

Get a few lookers on the books of Adidas/ Nike/ Lucozade Sport and that will soon change. Sure plenty of people would recognise Jessica Ennis. :P

shels4ever

robinph wrote: »

Get a few lookers on the books of Adidas/ Nike/ Lucozade Sport and that will soon change. Sure plenty of people would recognise Jessica ALBA. :P

Think more would know the above.

average_runner

ecoli wrote: »

Ultra distance running has been going longer than the 80s? Remember Alberto Salazar who was the Marathon WR holder was also a Comrades marathon winner

One of the main reasons very few Kenyans run Ultra's is down to the simple reason : lack of $$$$ in them (Similar why you dont see them in masters races). Kenyan marathon running has boomed over the last decade simply because it has become the best earning distance and provides financial security. In an interview with the 2009 winner of DCM Feyisa Lilesa he mentioned the appeal to a marathon when saying he would have to run 13 min for the 5k just to pick up prize money of 500 in some low key races compared to low key marathons which you can pick up 20,000 for roughly the equivalent marathon time

I agree it's be going on longer than since the 80's but has only hit the amazing heights of popularity since the americans struggled in the marathon.

It's be going on before 1900's according to a book i read Why we Run (i think)

average_runner

tunney wrote: »

Ask your average runner to name *any* elite Irish runners.

The average plodder, just like the average triathlete, cares little about the elite side of things.

Actually used to know more about Irish Runners before i started running. Now i dont have time to check them out since i am running:rolleyes:

ultraman1

average_runner wrote: »

Didnt mean to offend anyone, but i was talking about elite

Not saying your not an elite runner either:D

uv just made my day:o

robinph

shels4ever wrote: »

Think more would know the above.

No problem with either myself.

But there will be very few who know who that chap with the mullet is, other than someone to laugh at.

elvis jones

I'll be doing my 1st marathon later in the month and once i finish i'll be happy. Its not the race i'll be proud of, its all the training.

I ain't built for speed so going long with my thinking and i do hope to do an ultra next year.

tHE vAGGABOND

Im running my first marathon for myself and for my chosen charity, I rock, and I could not give a flying fcuk what anyone else thinks

elvis jones

tHE vAGGABOND wrote: »

Im running my first marathon for myself and for my chosen charity, I rock, and I could not give a flying fcuk what anyone else thinks

+1

n-dawg

For a while I've thought that marathons should introduce different achievement levels and award different medals for each level (I think it has even been discussed here). For example I would have a gold standard of sub 2:30, silver of sub 3 and bronze of sub 3:30 (for men). This could encourage runners who really want to achieve something to train hard and push themselves to there limit in a race. As demonstrated in the 80s, the average running time for a man running marathon should be about 3:30 so these times while quite fast by today's standard they are achievable with good training and preparation.

I have done an ultra race and while it was cool because of the low numbers of runners at the end I found myself asking whats the point? Do I now have to try run longer and longer ultras? Since then I decided that a much better achievement for me would be to put down some fast times for shorter distances... This year I have managed 15:50 in a 5km and 33:07 in a 10km. The sense of achievement I got when I saw I had ran sub 16 was much greater then anything I felt during the ultra races. I'm still a bit off my target of sub 15 for 5km and sub 32 for 10km but personally I feel my new targets are more sustainable with my limited training time rather then trying to constantly run further and further.

shels4ever

Maybe there should be a single marathon brand with a logo, then all propper marathon runners can just get a tatoo of the logo. Easy way to solve, the mini marathon runners can get a mini version of this.

Seriously : If you finish your marathon knowing you couldnt have done any more work in training or during the race then you have achieved something. If you look back and think I could have done x,y,z then maybe you havent.

RayCun

n-dawg wrote: »

For a while I've thought that marathons should introduce different achievement levels and award different medals for each level (I think it has even been discussed here). For example I would have a gold standard of sub 2:30, silver of sub 3 and bronze of sub 3:30 (for men).

I like the range of medals they give out in Comrades for the different time bands, but at the same time, do you really need a different coloured medal for this? Everyone knows that 2.30 is better than 3 is better than 3.30 is better than... You have your time, you have your age group position, everything else is just decorative.

n-dawg

To be honest I wouldn't care too much about the colour But its putting a carrot in front of people. I think with really good discipline and training 100+ miles per week for a number of years I could just about run sub 2:30 for a marathon but currently there is no incentive for me to do so. If however there was a target of; then you have run a "Gold" standard marathon, maybe I would give it a shot. No non runners get the difference in training, commitment and discipline required to run a fast marathon. So well publicised marathon standards might help, then again I guess most people still wouldn't care

shels4ever

n-dawg wrote: »

To be honest I wouldn't care too much about the colour But its putting a carrot in front of people. I think with really good discipline and training 100+ miles per week for a number of years I could just about run sub 2:30 for a marathon but currently there is no incentive for me to do so. If however there was a target of; then you have run a "Gold" standard marathon, maybe I would give it a shot. No non runners get the difference in training, commitment and discipline required to run a fast marathon. So well publicised marathon standards might help, then again I guess most people still wouldn't care

I think if your coudl run a sub 2:30 with 100 miles a week, there is a nice incentive already, remember there are nataional Marathon medals for the first 3 irish men home, get down to 2:25 and maybe you have a chance... Give me a national medal anyday over a "everyone gets one" finishers medal.

n-dawg

While I think I might just about be able to run 2:30... I dont think I could get near 2:25. I also think with the marathon mission there are several Irish runners who would be under the 2:20 mark.

The other side of that coin is that I dont have enough time to run 100+ miles per week:mad:

RayCun

I think if you run under 2.25 you get money (500 euro?) so you can buy your own medal.

To be honest, I find it hard to understand the idea that IF there was a special medal for running sub 2.30, you would be willing to put in the training required, but if there isn't... nah, too much work.
It would want to be a pretty spectacular medal

shels4ever

n-dawg wrote: »

While I think I might just about be able to run 2:30... I dont think I could get near 2:25. I also think with the marathon mission there are several Irish runners who would be under the 2:20 mark.

The other side of that coin is that I dont have enough time to run 100+ miles per week:mad:

Depend who is the on the day, If I had a sniff that I was capable of 2:30 i'd be banging out 100+ miles weeks to get me there. Medals rust and fade(or end up in a box in the shed) boasting about a 2:30 would last for ever.:)

average_runner

maybe the tshirt colour should represent the time you finish, as you always see people out in the their running tops

ecoli

average_runner wrote: »

maybe the tshirt colour should represent the time you finish, as you always see people out in the their running tops

You mean something like this?

http://www.xempo.co.uk/

elvis jones

average_runner wrote: »

maybe the tshirt colour should represent the time you finish, as you always see people out in the their running tops

But would you not have to be a runner to understand the meaning of the colours......a lot of people don't even know the distance of a marathon let alone understand the training needed to get a certain time.

average_runner

But who care's about non runners, non runners wont care about your medal either.

elvis jones

average_runner wrote: »

But who care's about non runners, non runners wont care about your medal either.

But its shiny and has a ribbon

I'm giving my son my number and medal. He is going to dress up as daddy for trick or treat later that evening:cool:

n-dawg

To be honest I can see the illogical reason in my argument but its the way I work.

In my club at the moment with the marathon runners there are the ones who just want to finish and the sub 3 hour gang. There doesn't seem to be any other big targets. Having run sub 3 before I don't see any incentive to really punish my body with years of training to run 2:30... I'll still just be part of the sub 3 gang in the eyes of the club. And just another person who has run a marathon in the eyes of the general public... I'm under no illusions, I feel 2:30 would be the absolute limit of my ability and that wouldn't ever be good enough to place in the Irish champs.

However with 10km there are the fun runners, the sub 50, the sub 40, the sub 35 and then the ones who are placing in local races... Its similar with 5km. I just feel it would be nice if a marathon had a similar set of achievements associated with it (I don't really need a medal or T shirt to prove it, but I wont say no to them).

foxyboxer

To those 'club runners' who feel that my running my first marathon somehow impinges on their self esteem, I apologise in advance.:pac:

Didn't they have to do a 'first' marathon themselves? :rolleyes:

It's that old shestnut of getting stopped at a club. Bouncer claims "Regulars only"
You're thinking "How the hell do I become a regular if you won't let me in?"

average_runner

Foxyboxer;

Your taking this up the wrong way. For every one to do a marathon no matter what the time is an achievement. People are just wondering is their an extra incentive to push yourself on.

I mean if someone was to run the marathon in 4:00:10 for example, would they push that bit extra for 3:59:59 for that different t-shirt?


Enjoy your first marathon, you will never forget it or forget the amazing experience and make sure you smile coming across the line and enjoy the day.

PS Welcome to the mad club of runners!!

sideswipe

I hate braggers, it reminds me of the time I benched 100 in the gym, a work mate then said he had told his trainer to put on more weights, only to be told there were no more.

elvis jones

sideswipe wrote: »

I hate braggers, it reminds me of the time I benched 100 in the gym, a work mate then said he had told his trainer to put on more weights, only to be told there were no more.

Thats a crap gym;)

foxyboxer

I've been following Non-runners marathon guide book and they recommend that the only goal for a first marathon is simply to finish. The authors claim that running a marathon is a peak experience.

Having gone through the training so far I do find myself having 'hare-like' thoughts thinking I could do this in well under 4 hours. This is dangerous though as I might go out too fast and bonk out subsequently feeling like a failure. Or alternatively setting a sub 4 hour goal and finishing in 4:05 and feeling like a failure too. So the only goal is to finish. Setting time targets can come for Cork next year :cool:

Gringo78

average_runner wrote: »

PS Welcome to the mad club of runners!!

So he's only allowed join the mad club of runners once he runs long and does a marathon? He may have raced shorter distances before which although much much less of an achievment, we should maybe not fully discount or ignore....

ThePiedPiper

An achievement, most importantly, is in the eyes of the person doing it and in those of the people around them who know what it took to acheive that goal. There's a lad I know who ran a marathon last year in around 5 hours. I ran one around the same time in 3.05. I can say, hand on heart, that his achievement was greater than mine.

If Moses Mosop runs a marathon in 2.10 in Chicago this weekend, he won't regard that as an achievement. He ran 2.03.xx in Boston for 2nd place on his debut marathon and is probably aiming for a 2.04.xx for the win and possibly a place on the Kenyan team for the Olympics. 2.10 to him will be a disaster.

I ran 3.05 in a race last year when I was targeting 2.59. I wouldn't call it a failure, but it wasn't a huge achievement for me.

The guy who ran the 5 hour marathon or a 67 year old lady I know who ran a 4.29 had much harder work to do than many club runners who can run a sub 3 on 40 miles a week. It doesn't make the achievement any less.

average_runner

Gringo78 wrote: »

So he's only allowed join the mad club of runners once he runs long and does a marathon? He may have raced shorter distances before which although much much less of an achievment, we should maybe not fully discount or ignore....

I didnt mean it that way, just ment welcome to the mad runners club.

People very sensitive:rolleyes:

average_runner

Gringo78 wrote: »

So he's only allowed join the mad club of runners once he runs long and does a marathon? He may have raced shorter distances before which although much much less of an achievment, we should maybe not fully discount or ignore....

I didnt mean it that way, just ment welcome to the mad runners club.

People very sensitive:rolleyes:

Also

average_runner

Gringo78 wrote: »

So he's only allowed join the mad club of runners once he runs long and does a marathon? He may have raced shorter distances before which although much much less of an achievment, we should maybe not fully discount or ignore....

I didnt mean it that way, just ment welcome to the mad runners club.

People very sensitive:rolleyes:

Also who said it was a he? Could be a she?