Home Chat General Chat

Frickin Fun Runners

2

Comments

  • md6md6 Posts: 969
    I did post a reply which said pretty much the same as Zacnici but with one other point - and Jac please don't take this as having a go at you but...it is the attitude of just get to the front which is wrong. You should start where your ability dictates, and not 'at the front' if you want to run as fast as you can unless you are capable of winning the race. This attitude of starting at the front if you want to go fast is the whole reason that people get annoyed because it is also the 'fun runners' who do it, despite being dressed as a tree of something. DO not start at the front unless you expect to run a sub 35 min 10k (i.e have a chance of winning), start in the area you should for your ability. Fancy dress fun runners and walkers start at the back, those who are just 'get me round/walk mainly' next to them, then as you get faster go nearer the front. This means that everyone should start in a position to give them the chance to run to their potential (as they are with people of their own ability) and they can run PB's. That is the whole point of starting areas.
  • md6md6 Posts: 969
    Can't edit - the reply i posted didn't go because halfway through writing i got logged out...but it said pretty much the same as Zac - ah you get the idea
  • GHarvGHarv Posts: 456
    Ok York 10k today - another Jane Tomlinson run (my wife entered me for both).

    Started even further forward today but still surrounded by loads of the fun brigade - easy to spot all IPods, hand bottles and new trainers. One was even on the mobile and drinking iron bru as we started!

    Fortunately was better than Leeds in that once you got passed the first 500m you were into the race.

    Didn't quite manage a PB but 43.57 and 199th out of 3852.

    Abbey Dash in November is the PB race.

    G
  • Jack HughesJack Hughes Posts: 1,262
    I wondered if you were doing the Abbey Dash. It was great last year. 5000 started, but it was far better organised. I queued up in the 40 minute section of the funnel - I did the trick of entering through the front. People were reluctant to go the front, so we kept getting moved forward - ended up at the 37 minute section. But this wasn't too bad - a bit like a normal start, most going at the right speed, a few to get round. My chip time was only about 15 secs adrift from the gun time.

    It is a great PB course - there were around 300 sub-40. I died in the last 2K - ended up at 41:09 - 397 out of 5000.
  • GHarvGHarv Posts: 456
    Did my PB there last year 43.23.

    G
  • PC_67PC_67 Posts: 196
    Great time Jack - haven't you been injured too?

    Impressed.
  • Jack HughesJack Hughes Posts: 1,262
    Thanks PC67! That was my penultimate race before the knee went. This years will be the real test. Theoretically, I am allowed to run again on August 12th. First Tri a month later, possibly a Duathlon in October, then the Abbey Dash in November - which will be the real test: Can I get sub 40, or will I just break trying!

    Currently I just practicing extending the amount of distance it takes me drown in. I've got to get it up to 500m. Planning first outdoors bike ride this week.
  • John DJohn D Posts: 11
    Get a life. Anyway, I run a sub 38 and as far as I'm concerned your a fun runner and if your right at the front you will be slowing me down. Likewise if I went right to the front I would be slowing down the fast guys doing sub 35. But unless you are an elite you have to show a bit of give and take at mass participation events.
  • GHarvGHarv Posts: 456
    John,

    Sub 38 - great time for 10k. Should lead to some good tri times.

    Re your point - that is the point of this thread - i shouldn't be getting in your way and so on. Mass events should have the marshalls policing them a bit more so people start in the right place. Or people fun running should be more considerate - but if people don't tell them then....

    Read runners world it comes up time and time again.
  • So what about some solutions ?

    This is always going to be an issue unless a form of crowd control is brought in, note this is not for marshalls to arrange on the day, for 11,000 people how is anyone going to do that ?
    I think that a general rule should gradually be filtered into running races like in the cycle stage of a triathlon, the slower you are , the more left you try and stay .. the problem in races like the JP Morgan run, was not that people were walking, rather that they were walking in any part of the road and so runners were just left zig zagging and causing even more overall delay. if all walkers for starters kept to the left .. it would leave a lane in the middle for joggers and runners, and if people could try and be aware of the far right side being for faster or overtaking runners, i think it would be a very different race. Maybe not perfect but as a rule of thumb it should help, and at least it gives you something to shout out at people who are having a chat and a stroll whilst strafed across the middle of the running lane .. it's no good saying 'keep to the side' if there is no rule to dictate what side they should be on as then they'll just block other runners using that side. I suggest we petition to the next big race to trial some speed lanes .. not marked ones but just general knowledge of where to place yourself.

    apart from some rough categories, i don't think it's really possible to strictly give a start position .. for a 10k I'd have a well signed section for fast/elite runners, runners (give a rough time), joggers (who know they can do the distance), and everyone else. That along with the lanes would make for a good race.
    Marshalls with mega phones could keep reminding people as they move forward to each stage of the staring grid .. "remember, if you don't think you can run the whole way, stay back from this point" etc..

    the key to this is informing people beforehand in the race information, as well as the marshalls ..

    perhaps a race should be picked and something like this trialled ?
  • nivaghnivagh Posts: 595
    You could have pacesetters behind each section with electric cattle prods - somebody starts in the 35 minute area and runs more than 14 minutes for the first 4k?
    Bzzzzzt!
  • md6md6 Posts: 969
    nivagh wrote:
    You could have pacesetters behind each section with electric cattle prods - somebody starts in the 35 minute area and runs more than 14 minutes for the first 4k?
    Bzzzzzt!
    Lol, love it!
  • JessterJesster Posts: 482
    Oooooohhhhhhh boys I am loving this thread....

    The forum is alive once more. With ranting! Wahey!
  • Jack HughesJack Hughes Posts: 1,262
    John D wrote:
    Get a life. Anyway, I run a sub 38 and as far as I'm concerned your a fun runner and if your right at the front you will be slowing me down. Likewise if I went right to the front I would be slowing down the fast guys doing sub 35. But unless you are an elite you have to show a bit of give and take at mass participation events.
    Oohhh.. I started too quick (sub 3:30 for the first K). So you would still have been slowing _me_ down. Until you ran over my dead body a few Ks down the road. But that would have just been cushioning.

    What about wearing spikes! I still have some great long Cinder track ones somewhere. Back in the day you never got out of the start of a busy cross country without a few flesh wounds.

    Anyone old enough to remember Death Race 2000 or Rollerball?
  • GHarvGHarv Posts: 456
    Well my last 10k of the season.

    Started up towards the sub 35 min pen and worked perfectly not really overtaken and didn't get in anyone elses way. A couple of the fun brigade made it up there but made a huge difference.

    Managed to PB in 42.56.

    Fate it would seem was not without a sense of irony when i was overtaken by a tomatoe with 500m to go!
  • shadowone1shadowone1 Posts: 1,408
    Oh my bloody god... the forum is alive... GHarv what an outstanding rant..
  • BritspinBritspin Posts: 1,655
    Did the Birmingham half marathon, how many folks did I have to weave thru to get going? too bleeding many...& to the guy who stopped dead infront of me in the last hard uphill K..thanks....but if you want to look for your running buddies get out of the ****ing road.
  • nivaghnivagh Posts: 595
    I've come to the conclusion that you just have to have the gall to walk through the pack to start near the front. If somebody objects, tell them your anticipated finish time.
    And use your elbows in the start... It's just like an OW swim!
  • ZacniciZacnici Posts: 1,385
    At the Sheffield 10K the organisers had asked on registration what your anticipated time would be and allocated a colour coded bib. I started in the sub 44 pack the fastest wave after the elites as I had put a lot of effort in, my previous PB was 44:29 and I thought I might just squeeze it. There was no f###g way half the jaspers there would do sub 55. For the fisrt Km I was shouting at people who were walking, running across the road to wave and chat with friends and at the first incline a great mass simply stopped.

    In this instance a form of filtering had been attempted but had been thwarted by people simply guessing or selfishly plonking themselves at the front.

    As Saltbar said it would be an idea if the marshalls and the 'celebs' would bang on with megaphone to keep to the left and overtake on the right and for this to continually shouted at the numb f###rs during the course of the race - and I do stress race.

    I will be doing the Lincoln Santa Fun run and I don't mind people walking with their kids, dogs, prams etc. it is a fun run
  • jacjac Posts: 452
    G Harv seems to have got the point.
    If you, being more experienced than most, know what happens the answer is to get to the front.
    Then, simply, you have no reason to grumble.
  • Did the Bedfont Lakes Parkrun one Saturday, 21:28. Thought ok, but had to run around the fun runners, dog walkers etc in the beginning. Next Sat, though sod this I am going to Start from the front. I use this 5km as a benchmark for my running. The next Sat came and as we lined up i stood on the start line. People stood in front of me expecting me to move back. I stood my ground, they caught the hint and stood behind me. End result 7th place overall and a Bedfont and personel 5km PM of of 20:24. Now if only i could get this tactic to work at Bushy Park!
  • md6md6 Posts: 969
    Bradster, not to sound like i'm being argumentative but your attitude is the reason for the trouble. Lets face it 20min 5k is good but i wouldn't expect that to win (or top 10 in most races) so you shouldn't be at the front. The problem is where does it stop? do you get 30 min 5k runners getting to the front row? what about 25? I would expect people running sub 20 to be at the front. I think the main problem is that people think they 'have' to be at the front, and that is because of their own and other people's selfishness and lack of awareness that causes it. Obviously your time is better than most and as you say you were 7th in your race - so should be starting near the front, but the attitude of i should start near the front so i get a good time is to blame - particularly for people whose ability isn't going to win/top 10 etc.
  • md6,

    i think we have crossed wires here. Bedfont 5km has only a avg 0f 65 runners per week. I have never finished lower than 15 and have been in the top 10 the last three occasions i have run there. I start at the front cause i know that winning times vary from 16:50 to 20:13, and because on the first few occasions of running their i spent so much time weaving through others. At the same time at Bedfont most folk are at either Richmond or Bushy park. I would never dream of starting at the front of a pack like at Bushy, i know my limitations! My 'reflection' of how starting at the front meant a PB was mearly to share my thought and grips about how people,kids, dog walkers etc really muck up something that you are hoping to gain valuable feedback from.
    I would hate to think that i am one of those people who slow others down! Infact i start at the back for the swim legs, as i dont want to mix it up with others who are half decent!
    I can honestly say that at both venues I have always had to weave my way through and past people, and i have never held anyone up unless there was somebody in front of me.
    I would really like to see stricter control of seeding in races. I did the Marlow half a few weeks ago, where the start is in a narrow lane, well we know how that rant's going to start...

    Bradster
  • md6md6 Posts: 969
    bradster, yep crossed wires ... reading your post again, see what you mean and agree
  • Brass Monkey Half: 1.37.09
    Blackpool Marathon: 4.29
    Cleveland Sprint: 1.11 (400m 15m 5k)
    Conehead Training Day:
    Cleveland Olympic: 2:32
    Leeds 10K: 45.42
    Cleveland Steelman - Half Iron: 5.49.50
    Votwo Box End 3.8k swim: 1:18:15
    York 10KGHarv

    Posts: 362
    Joined: Thu May 15, 2008 2:30 am
    Private messageWebsite

    I'm sorry but these are fun runner times, at 12 years old i ran the Barnsley Marathon in 4.01 and the World best for a 12 year old at the time was sub 3 hours, current World best for an 11 year old is 2.47. Runners World reported a 10 year old doing 3.02 a few years ago, get real... over 9min miling for the Marathon is jogging/walking/fun runner, 45.42 for 10km, my 11 year old son run's faster than that, don't tell me your one of these guy's who thinks they are going to dehydrate when going for a training run so much that you take a water bottle with you coz you read too many articles in magazines that need to fill space. The same article get's printed again but reformated a few month's later. 30 years ago no-one carried water bottles...it's all propoganda coz someone somewhere is making money from making you believe.
    30 years ago Runners World was aimed at the racer coz that was the only person that bought it, as years went past it became aparent that the racer was dissapearing in the west and the jogger fun runner was taking over as the majority. So in order to survive the Runners World magazine had to change it's format more towards the fun runner jogger in order to survive, so that was the end of reading the training programme's of the elite and the marathon training programmes of the 3 hour plus marathon runners came to the fore. I ended up buying the magazine for the race fixtures but then stopped buying it over 10 years ago as i can get fixtures on-line.
  • ZacniciZacnici Posts: 1,385
    You have missed the point, it is not about what the times are - this is not a willy waving thread - but the conduct of the 'fun runners'. I don't care if you or your child do a marathon in a world record time, hoorah for you if that is so, similarly I do not care if it takes you all day, hoorah for trying. The thread is about peoples selfish conduct and how this impacts on others.

    As has been mentioned several times, if everyone started in the appropriate wave everyone would have an enjoyable race and have every prospect of getting a PB. I have started in the fastest wave in some events and near the back in others on the basis of as honest an assessment as possible of my anticipated time. If you believe you will post a faster time than me then get in the appropriate faster wave and crack on but I do not think it is in the spirit of this forum to disparage anyone elses times.
  • You are right and we all do it for our own reason's. I said i'd never go on a forum when had a drink but unfortunately...
  • jacjac Posts: 452
    Maybe Californiakid does have a point, though.
    We are ALL fun runners - unless we make a living out of running.
    We take it so seriously that if someone who wears a costume and raises a shed load of cash for charity gets in our way we moan that they stopped us getting a PB.
    I reiterate that if we, slightly more experienced runners, know what happens then why not give ourselves the best possible chance of a PB - by getting to the front.
    By striving for a PB you can't honestly claim you give two hoots about what time others are running. It's about YOU and your your PB.
    If your life really does depend on it look at running professionally.
  • MowfMowf Posts: 272
    I think we are too quick to congratulate people for mediocre achievements. Walking a 10k should be prasied for what it is, a good start on the road towards getting fit. Not lauded as a massive achievement in itself just because the person who did it could just as easily have sat on the couch eating doughnuts and watchin Noel.

    On the subject of starting positions, I ran the Royal Parks 1/2 marathon recently in 1:28 and I was overtaking joggers for the 1st 2 miles... If you are planning on running a 10k in less than 40 mins, just get to the front.

    Oh, and I think you should have to qualify for 1/2 ironman and Ironman events.
  • GHarvGHarv Posts: 456
    I'm sorry but these are fun runner times, at 12 years old i ran the Barnsley Marathon in 4.01 and the World best for a 12 year old at the time was sub 3 hours, current World best for an 11 year old is 2.47. Runners World reported a 10 year old doing 3.02 a few years ago, get real... over 9min miling for the Marathon is jogging/walking/fun runner, 45.42 for 10km, my 11 year old son run's faster than that, don't tell me your one of these guy's who thinks they are going to dehydrate when going for a training run so much that you take a water bottle
    Nice one.

    Mmmmmmmmmmmm.

    Never claimed i'm the fastest runner or triathlete out there but as Zac says it's about starting where appropriate - i should not be aiming to be next to you on the marathon line from the sounds of it.

    One a seperate note if i can pull a 4.30 on the 8/8/2010 at my Ironman then i must admit i'd have a stiffy the size of a house.

    At the Cleveland Sprint i was 33rd overall and the Leeds 10k was not flat but at the 45min mark came in, in the top 150 out of 8000 and did manage to improve my modest 10k times to 42.56 last week again coming in in the top 10%.


    Again not brilliant but improving...
Sign In or Register to comment.