Irish race events with race categories?

gigtown

Saw there was a 5K in Waterford which had weight classes for prize categories at the weekend.

The Brickey Run:

http://www.westwaterfordathletics.org/index.php?option=com_jcalpro&Itemid=73&extmode=view&extid=798442

Anyone know of any other Irish events with this kind of set up?

Weight categories for men with prizes awarded to the top 3 plus weight categories as follows: under 60kg, under 70kg, under 80kg, under 90 kg, under 100kg and over 100kg. The women are not weighed and prizes are awarded for the top 6 women.

Am intrigued...

RayCun

why should races have separate categories for overweight people?
Everyone gets older, no-one has to weigh over 100kg.

gigtown

RayCun wrote: »

why should races have separate categories for overweight people?
Everyone gets older, no-one has to weigh over 100kg.

*Searches for the 'Throws eyes up to heaven' emoticon.*

village runner

RayCun wrote: »

why should races have separate categories for overweight people?
Everyone gets older, no-one has to weigh over 100kg.

I won one of the cats a few years ago.....I was a bit of fun too in Thr muck ans dirt...

RayCun

gigtown wrote: »

*Searches for the 'Throws eyes up to heaven' emoticon.*

You could answer the question?
If you think there should be more prizes for slow people, you could look for races that have spot prizes through the field. The BHAA races have grading and mini-leagues, so lots of people are competing for prizes without competing to win the race. I'm sure there are similar graded events around the place.
But why weight categories?

gigtown

RayCun wrote: »

You could answer the question?

SO COULD YOU!

RayCun

I don't know of other races with these categories.
In the US, yeah, there are 'Clydesdale' categories for overweight participants

drquirky

RayCun wrote: »

I don't know of other races with these categories.
In the US, yeah, there are 'Clydesdale' categories for overweight participants

Might be wrong but I'm pretty sure TRR won a "Clydesdale" category race but not sure if it was in Ireland? :D:D

I'd also like to point out that the World Record holder in the Clydesdale category for the Beer Mile is a poster on boards....Also in order to show our commitment to equality the Irish Beer Mile Championships would like to announce we will be hosting s "fat ass" category next year. Information will be forthcoming as it becomes available.

Kurt Godel

drquirky wrote: »

Also in order to show our commitment to equality the Irish Beer Mile Championships would like to announce we will be hosting s "fat ass" category next year. Information will be forthcoming as it becomes available.

Love it Dr. Q!

The origin of the "Clydesdale" (and "Athena" for fat chicks) came from the cycling (and then later Tri) scene in the States, when it was legitimately postulated that guys with a big frame were at a biological disadvantage lugging all that extra weight around on a lumpy bike course, so weight categories appeared, on the same "racing like-for-like" basis as AG categories. This then morphed into running races, and soon what was meant to be a leveler for 6'4" bikers at a biological disadvantage lugging excess bone mass up hills, became a category to reward lazy fat runners who couldn't lay off the Dunkin Donuts and KFC, and still had money left over to cover race entry fees. Having seen many candidates for Clydesdale and Athena waddling round the DM at the 5 hour mark, I would encourage all right-thinking runners with a modicum of dignity to rail against the lunacy of such running "categories" becoming the norm in Ireland- there are some sights that once squished and levered into into bursting-point lycra, can never be unseen.

dna_leri

West Waterford AC should know better

pconn062

That is a truly bizarre way to award prizes. So someone could get a prize if they are the only 100kg + person there? Weird.

RayCun

Kurt Godel wrote: »

The origin of the "Clydesdale" (and "Athena" for fat chicks) came from the cycling (and then later Tri) scene in the States, when it was legitimately postulated that guys with a big frame were at a biological disadvantage lugging all that extra weight around on a lumpy bike course, so weight categories appeared, on the same "racing like-for-like" basis as AG categories.

Cyclists are capable of losing weight just as much as runners. If large-boned cyclists don't like hilly courses they should stick to flat racing rather than look for special prizes.

mr.wiggle

Ah come on guys, seriously?
I am the worst culprit when it comes to slagging off portly individuals..its a fault in me...but so what if a race organiser decides to give prizes out by weight category rather than age? They obviously are trying to encourage people to get running and get competitive..surely thats a good thing?
But I dont understand why it was just a male category..Im sure we've all seen some beefy females slogging their way around the local races..seems we should be complaining about the race being sexist !!
Mr.W ~

TFBubendorfer

I really don't think rewarding obesity is a good thing and to say that you have to give prizes to overweight people to encourage them to exercise is just plain wrong.

RayCun

mr.wiggle wrote: »

Ah come on guys, seriously?
I am the worst culprit when it comes to slagging off portly individuals..its a fault in me...but so what if a race organiser decides to give prizes out by weight category rather than age? They obviously are trying to encourage people to get running and get competitive..surely thats a good thing?
But I dont understand why it was just a male category..Im sure we've all seen some beefy females slogging their way around the local races..seems we should be complaining about the race being sexist !!
Mr.W ~

They could have spot prizes through the field?
Or prizes for the biggest improvement since the previous WWAC race?

dna_leri

mr.wiggle wrote: »

Ah come on guys, seriously?
I am the worst culprit when it comes to slagging off portly individuals..its a fault in me...but so what if a race organiser decides to give prizes out by weight category rather than age? They obviously are trying to encourage people to get running and get competitive..surely thats a good thing?
~

Let's say my weight is in the range 79-81 Kg (it was when I started running), does this race encourage me to get to a healthier low 70s? No, the message is 80 Kg is ok, in fact if I stay at 80+ I will be rewarded.

You might say it's not the job of a race to encourage me to loose weight, but it should not reward me for being overweight either.

Peterx

A basic understanding of your power to weight ratio will encourage you to lose weight if you serious about your sport and consider yourself an "athlete"

However, very very few people being their sporting activities thinking they are serious athletes and the more routes their are into sport the better. A broad base and all that.

If quirky Cyldesdale categories encourage sedentary overweight folk into sport then it's all good. If staying in the sport encouraging them to lose weight toget faster then that's all good as well.

Putting up barriers to entry by saying you have to look good in lycra before you can play is simply not a good option in an ever fatter society.

RayCun

Peterx wrote: »

Putting up barriers to entry by saying you have to look good in lycra before you can play is simply not a good option in an ever fatter society.

But it's not a barrier to entry.
It's a barrier to winning a prize.

(and I don't have a problem with giving out goody bags and medals to slower runners, or having prizes for 'most improved' or 'fastest runner in costume'.)

Peterx

RayCun wrote: »

But it's not a barrier to entry.
It's a barrier to winning a prize.

(and I don't have a problem with giving out goody bags and medals to slower runners, or having prizes for 'most improved' or 'fastest runner in costume'.)

OK so, it's still a barrier. down with barriers:)

Kurt Godel

Peterx wrote: »

Putting up barriers to entry by saying you have to look good in lycra before you can play is simply not a good option in an ever fatter society.

Some of the grossly overweight people I saw running the DM shouldn't be doing so. Its a ridiculous stress on an untrained obese body (joints, bones, and organs)- they would be better off training to 5km, losing weight, and then tackling the marathon. But the marathon has become this arbiter of fitness, so if you can tick that box- no matter what the time- you can pretend to have joined the ranks of the fit and healthy.

Unfortunately there is a part of society that sees obesity as an illness, to be endured, rather than a lifestyle choice that should be tackled. My own opinion (IMO, caveat emptor, FWIW) is that exercise should be part of a program to replace obesity, and get the subject healthy. Giving out prizes because they are still fat... is just reinforcing the view that you can ignore your obesity and live a pretend "healthy" life.

On the eye's burning... that's like African-Americans using the "N" word. As a chunky triathlete often in a revealing onesie, that's my right man.

average_runner

Were the prizes from pork pies?

Do they weight you after the race to ensure your still in the category?

What about cheaters, a few bags of sand up their tops:eek:

gigtown

“no-one has to weigh over 100kg”
“’fat ass’ category”
“lazy fat runners”
“should know better”
“rewarding obesity”

81% of running in Ireland is taking place outside of the club community.

And there's an attitude pervading this thread that I think has a role to play.

RayCun

In my club we have lots of new runners, I'm sure many of them joined to lose weight.
They're all welcome, they're all encouraged, they're not slagged for being overweight.
At our club awards we have prizes for best novices, and our internal club races are handicapped, so they're as likely to be won by new runners, or overweight runners, as experienced or skinny runners.
What we will not do is have weight categories for prizes.

gigtown

RayCun wrote: »

In my club we have lots of new runners, I'm sure many of them joined to lose weight.
They're all welcome, they're all encouraged, they're not slagged for being overweight.
At our club awards we have prizes for best novices, and our internal club races are handicapped, so they're as likely to be won by new runners, or overweight runners, as experienced or skinny runners.
What we will not do is have weight categories for prizes.

I don't think specific weight categories would do much for athlete recruitment anyway. Started this thread as a general topic on race categories but was particularly intrigued on the initial post as I hadn't heard of it before.

Was really dismayed with the result. And the attitude.

morceli

RayCun wrote: »

They could have spot prizes through the field?
Or prizes for the biggest improvement since the previous WWAC race?

I remember reading somewhere that where these categories are used people tend to leave the weight call very quickly ie keeps the training etc. But would agree that the biggest improvment since the last race is a better way to go.
One thing I love about running is that all are equal, you can be on a start line with a world record holder even if your 50 kg over weight.
The whole age group and weight is just a side show to the main event.

TRR

drquirky wrote: »

Might be wrong but I'm pretty sure TRR won a "Clydesdale" category race but not sure if it was in Ireland? :D:D

I can confirm it was not in Ireland! Bastard Finished 4th overall as well though! I walked away with first prize in 25-29 category which is a horse$hit category. Also first dude over 190lbs, which is a super horse$hit category. I would like to point out I was at the end of my honeymoon and had a pretty inactive summer due to moving house, wedding, starting a new job and finishing college. I was the fastest fat man in Las Vegas that day

drquirky

gigtown wrote: »

I don't think specific weight categories would do much for athlete recruitment anyway. Started this thread as a general topic on race categories but was particularly intrigued on the initial post as I hadn't heard of it before.

Was really dismayed with the result. And the attitude.

I think you're taking fairly tongue and cheek comments a little too seriously. I am a fat ass myself deep down and before my latest running comeback (now lasting a couple years I was easily carrying an extra 30 pounds above what I am now)I had the waistline to prove it . Many of us on here have lost weight along the way- I don't really see anything wrong with using the term fat if someone is well overweight and does nothing about it! It can be a good motivator.

gigtown

drquirky wrote: »

I think you're taking fairly tongue and cheek comments a little too seriously. I am a fat ass myself deep down and before my latest running comeback (now lasting a couple years I was easily carrying an extra 30 pounds above what I am now)I had the waistline to prove it . Many of us on here have lost weight along the way- I don't really see anything wrong with using the term fat if someone is well overweight and does nothing about it! It can be a good motivator.

I think it's fair to say some of the comments were tongue in cheek. And I was a bit unfair to drag them into my argument.

But I think it's also fair to say some of them weren't. And are part of an overall attitude that has a role in beginner/improver runners preferring to remain outside club structures.

Now if you'll excuse me I have to go, erm, carbo load *waddles away while ignoring training schedule two weeks before a half marathon*

plodder

What about categories for smokers? 10 a day, 20 a day etc .. See where it leads.

couerdelion

“no-one has to weigh over 100kg”
“’fat ass’ category”
“lazy fat runners”
“should know better”
“rewarding obesity”


Of course, everyone who is over 100kg is obese... Imagine if any of the Irish Rugby front 8 retired through injury and tried to take up running - how would they be able for it at their weight?

drquirky

couerdelion wrote: »

Imagine if any of the Irish Rugby front 8 retired through injury and tried to take up running - how would they be able for it at their weight?

Simple. They'd be slow and probably lose some of that fat they carry for their "sport"

RayCun

couerdelion wrote: »

Of course, everyone who is over 100kg is obese... Imagine if any of the Irish Rugby front 8 retired through injury and tried to take up running - how would they be able for it at their weight?

Do they give special medals out in rugby for 'best hooker weighing under 70kg'?

Krusty_Clown

drquirky wrote: »

Simple. They'd be slow and probably lose some of that fat they carry for their "sport"

Ah now... Don't be dissing on the rugby. It's still a little too raw.

Besides....

Peterx

drquirky wrote: »

Simple. They'd be slow and probably lose some of that fat they carry for their "sport"

Black mark for you sir (or madam). As Krusty said, it's still too raw.

menoscemo

couerdelion wrote: »

Of course, everyone who is over 100kg is obese... Imagine if any of the Irish Rugby front 8 retired through injury and tried to take up running - how would they be able for it at their weight?

Shane Byrne regularly runs races around Dublin.He is quite slow and very 'round' these days....
It's one thing holding 100+KG while doing rugby training but this bulk would tend to turn to fat after retiring I would imagine. Even 100kg+ of muscle is not very condusive to running fast over long distances...

TFBubendorfer

couerdelion wrote: »

Imagine if any of the Irish Rugby front 8 retired through injury and tried to take up running - how would they be able for it at their weight?

Why imagine?

Matt Dawson, 77 caps for England and 7 Lions caps, retired from Rugby in 2006 and ran the 2007 London marathon in 4:35:39.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Dawson#Charitable_work

menoscemo

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

Why imagine?

Matt Dawson, 77 caps for England and 7 Lions caps, retired from Rugby in 2006 and ran the 2007 London marathon in 4:35:39.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Dawson#Charitable_work

Dawson was a scrum half not a front 8; he would never have weighed more than 75-80kg I would imagine...

Krusty_Clown

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

Why imagine?

Matt Dawson, 77 caps for England and 7 Lions caps, retired from Rugby in 2006 and ran the 2007 London marathon in 4:35:39.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Dawson#Charitable_work

Ya, whatever...

couerdelion

drquirky wrote: »

Simple. They'd be slow and probably lose some of that fat they carry for their "sport"

Really? Whilst some of the props might be carrying additional weight, the second rows and flankers hardly are. Devin Toner is around 125kg and there's hardly a pick on him. Sean O'Brien - 108kg.

RayCun wrote: »

Do they give special medals out in rugby for 'best hooker weighing under 70kg'?

I aren't saying I think that running should be done in weight categories but the "health by numbers" attitude on here where if you are over a certain weight you must be fat and obese bemuses me.

plodder

couerdelion wrote: »

Devin Toner...

For pig-iron, I just put his stats into this calculator:

So, at 127kg and 6' 11" makes him over weight, but not quite obese. However, these calculators are tuned for the general population, rather than exceptions like professional sports people. I think Toner used to be very skinny. So, the extra weight is probably nearly all muscle.

Chivito550

couerdelion wrote: »

I aren't saying I think that running should be done in weight categories but the "health by numbers" attitude on here where if you are over a certain weight you must be fat and obese bemuses me.

How many people with a BMI over 30 are so because they have heaps of muscle? Maybe 0.5% and that's being generous. It's far easier for people to latch onto any excuse (BMI is not reliable) than it is to look in the mirror and accept the truth.

Body fat percentage would separate the heavy athletes from the obese. 99% of those who show up obese on BMI would show up obese on Body Fat % also!

Amazes me how people look at the exception of people like Brian O'Driscoll to dismiss the general accuracy of the BMI test!

RayCun

couerdelion wrote: »

I aren't saying I think that running should be done in weight categories but the "health by numbers" attitude on here where if you are over a certain weight you must be fat and obese bemuses me.

Very few people are professional rugby players (or professional athletes of any sport that requires bulk).
Most people weighing over 100kg are simply overweight.

couerdelion

Chivito550 wrote: »

How many people with a BMI over 30 are so because they have heaps of muscle? Maybe 0.5% and that's being generous. It's far easier for people to latch onto any excuse (BMI is not reliable) than it is to look in the mirror and accept the truth.

Body fat percentage would separate the heavy athletes from the obese. 99% of those who show up obese on BMI would show up obese on Body Fat % also!

Amazes me how people look at the exception of people like Brian O'Driscoll to dismiss the general accuracy of the BMI test!

In a survey by imperial college eesearchers looked at the BMI and body fat of more than 6,000 U.S. adults. When BMIs were compared with body fat percentages, a surprising number of people who were normal-weight according to BMI were actually obese judging by body fat levels. As many as 30 million Americans may fall into this normal-weight but obese category, according to a 2009 study in the European Heart Journal - an awful lot of Brian O'Driscolls....

I wasn't wanting to get into a discussion about BMI though.

All I was doing was making a point that people look at a number and not at anything else. If you didn't know who Devin Toner was and someone told you he weighed 127kg you would have an image of a sumo wrestler. Sure he will never be a great runner no matter how much weight he loses but is splitting races into age categories much different from splitting into weight categories?

menoscemo

couerdelion wrote: »

In a survey by imperial college eesearchers looked at the BMI and body fat of more than 6,000 U.S. adults. When BMIs were compared with body fat percentages, a surprising number of people who were normal-weight according to BMI were actually obese judging by body fat levels. As many as 30 million Americans may fall into this normal-weight but obese category, according to a 2009 study in the European Heart Journal - an awful lot of Brian O'Driscolls....

No that's not "an awful lot of Brian O'Driscolls", quite the opposite in fact :rolleyes: and a completely different problem.

Some people who are a 'normal weight' are over fat; however most people who are overweight (or obese) are overfat. Would you not agree?

Anyway for the purpose of this forum; guys over 100kg are generally going to be pretty crap runners whether their bulk is made up of muscle or fat.

couerdelion

menoscemo wrote: »

No that's not "an awful lot of Brian O'Driscolls", quite the opposite in fact :rolleyes: and a completely different problem.

It's an awful lot of people who BMI would be wrong for as per Brian O'Driscoll which was my interpretation as opposed to assuming BOD's a muscular fellow who is classed as overweight/obese and is not which I wouldn't know.

menoscemo wrote: »

Some people who are a 'normal weight' are over fat; however most people who are overweight (or obese) are overfat. Would you not agree?

I would agree with that. But you need to know more than just a kg figure to class someone as overweight/obese which was my original point.

menoscemo wrote: »

Anyway for the purpose of this forum; guys over 100kg are generally going to be pretty crap runners whether their bulk is made up of muscle or fat.

True.

SnappyDresser

My Dad who was involved for years as a coach and athlete used the old chestnut of 100lbs plus 4 pound for every inch over 5 foot for middle and long distance runners. So a 5 10 athlete should be in and around 140lb. Seems a very good rule of thumb but sadly I am 5 10 and around 180lb but don't want to stop doing heavy weight training which keeps my bodyweight higher than I need but dislike the skinny body look and if my times suffer then so be it.

boodiebhoy

The weight categories in the Brickey run are all in good humour and came about as a result of a joke made a few years back. There are also prizes to the first 3 finishers in the race.