What's Up at Runner's World?


Main message board: for the discussion of topical track & field items only.

What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby Guest » Thu Oct 16, 2003 7:15 am

Marty Post and several other long-time staffers are getting the boot. Anybody know what's going on?
Guest
 

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby Guest » Thu Oct 16, 2003 7:48 am

Corporate America strikes again!
Guest
 

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby Zat0pek » Fri Oct 17, 2003 7:01 pm

Did the Penguin get promoted to editor and fire everyone that could ran faster than him?
Zat0pek
 
Posts: 1324
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: KC metro area

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby Guest » Sat Oct 18, 2003 6:17 am

I noticed that the rag had a new editor, and that it was a better read over the last two issues than had been the case for quite a long time. For example, Kenny Moore wrote about Oslo's stadium in the last issue -- a writer and a topic that appeal to a more "hard-core" audience. There's still fluff, but there's a wider variety of articles than had been the norm.

I think our complaints were heard.
Guest
 

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby Guest » Sat Oct 18, 2003 6:43 am

Who, specifically, left?
Guest
 

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby Guest » Sat Oct 18, 2003 12:11 pm

I think Runner's World should be fired
Guest
 

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby Guest » Sat Oct 18, 2003 6:53 pm

I have found Runner's world a rather dull read in the last few years. Too many stories about average joes and the latest running shoes. Why can't they cover more of the elite scene.

The problem with Track and Field News is that you cannot find it anywhere.
Guest
 

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby Guest » Sun Oct 19, 2003 8:56 am

Buzz on the street says that anybody who has any connection with real track (as opposed to jogging) is going to be cashiered.
Guest
 

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby Guest » Mon Oct 20, 2003 9:54 am

I read an article a few years ago in Runners World that advised marathon runners to take cameras with during the race and to stop and take pictures of noteworthy sites.

The article emphasized that you should STOP running while taking pictures to ensure that the photos are not blurry.

I resolved that I would never again read a single word of a single article in Runners World.
Guest
 

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby MJD » Mon Oct 20, 2003 10:03 am

>I resolved that I would never again
>read a single word of a single article in Runners
>World.

There is a picture of the girl who won the Toronto Marathon in the local rag today(actually in a time that would impress a bunch of people that I was arguing with on another thread). But here's the thing. She has various and sundry audio
visual equipment on her head.
MJD
 
Posts: 13402
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby Guest » Wed Oct 22, 2003 5:57 am

As limited as the print magazine's coverage of the elite end of the sport was , the RW online website is a real contribution to the sport. I hope it continues at the same level. Marty Post deserves our thanks for it.
Guest
 

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby 6 5.5hjsteve » Wed Oct 22, 2003 6:23 am

what's their website address ?
6 5.5hjsteve
 
Posts: 436
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby Guest » Wed Oct 22, 2003 6:35 am

that's a toughie: runnersworld.com
Guest
 

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby 6 5.5hjsteve » Wed Oct 22, 2003 6:39 am

thank you. I was too lazy to "find" it myself !
6 5.5hjsteve
 
Posts: 436
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby Guest » Fri Oct 24, 2003 9:02 am

runners world needs help , It mainly advertising for shoes and beginner joggers. It really doesn't help the
sport
Guest
 

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby Guest » Fri Oct 24, 2003 9:25 am

"runners world needs help , It mainly advertising for shoes and beginner joggers. It really doesn't help the
sport"


Somewhat true - if the magazine decides that it wants to devote itself to jogging and running shoes, that is okay.

But if that is the case it should re-name itself; possibly Joggers World or something like that.

Big difference between runners and joggers.
Guest
 

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby 6 5.5hjsteve » Fri Oct 24, 2003 10:13 am

No Name, you certainly do not antagonize me, but be careful in talking about "joggers vs. walkers."

Those millions( well, multi thousands )of recreational runners out there, many of whom are seriously busting their rear ends 5 days a week, are not joggers. They are serious recreational runners that just do not happen to have the ability and/or the youth to run 32 minute 10k's. But there are humping it to run their 6, 6:30, 7 minute, or even slowerpaces. Cut 'em some slack and give them some respect. They ARE "runners."
6 5.5hjsteve
 
Posts: 436
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby MJD » Fri Oct 24, 2003 10:49 am

or even
>slowerpaces. Cut 'em some slack and give them
>some respect. They ARE "runners."


Do you draw the line anywhere Steve? My line is somewhere left of 6 hours for the marathon- whatever that is per mile.
MJD
 
Posts: 13402
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby tafnut » Fri Oct 24, 2003 10:59 am

My official dividing line is 8 minute pace (let's say a 3-mile run) for joggers vs. runners. When I go out for a run and can't break 24, I really do feel like I'm jogging, not running.
tafnut
 
Posts: 26684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Lost at C (-minus)

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby 6 5.5hjsteve » Fri Oct 24, 2003 11:12 am

MJD and TAFNUT, I draw the line between the 2 at an ever-slower pace, amazingly paralleling a pace slightly slower than what I am able to do. It used by 7's, now it's 9's !!!

But really,there is no definitive dividing line. All those people killing themselves to prepare for 10k's, 1/2 M's, or the full boat, at whatever pace below 10's, do not consider themselves joggers so I say give them the respect their efforts deserve. Spoken by someone that has not run a yard in 6 months so I am not talking about myself here.
6 5.5hjsteve
 
Posts: 436
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby MJD » Fri Oct 24, 2003 11:18 am

>My official dividing line is 8 minute pace (let's
>say a 3-mile run) for joggers vs. runners. When I
>go out for a run and can't break 24, I really do
>feel like I'm jogging, not running.

Mine's kind of a complicated calculation based on MVO2 max and what % of both your current and potential measurement is you are propelling your self forward at. A world class miler could be jogging at a 3 hour marathon pace but someone else could be running their ass off at a 6 hour pace. I find the latter kind of hard to believe but it is possible.
MJD
 
Posts: 13402
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby Guest » Fri Oct 24, 2003 11:28 am

Steve:

My classification of runners and joggers is not based on time at all. If you look at my post, I said absolutely nothing about time.

A runner is anyone who takes the sport seriously, busts his ass and does everything he can with the tools he's been given.

To me, it does not matter if the person is a 4, 8 or 12 minute miler (although I'd venture a guess that someone who takes the sport seriously can break 12 :) ).

I ran at a DIII school and there was a miler on my team who could barely break six minutes -- obviously not a great time for any level of college, high school or even middle school competitive running. But he worked as hard as he could every single day and did the best with the limited ability he was given.

To me, he was as much of a runner as El G and Geb are.

Time is not relevant to my definition of a real runner.
Guest
 

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby 6 5.5hjsteve » Fri Oct 24, 2003 12:38 pm

No Name, very well stated. I'm with you 100%.
6 5.5hjsteve
 
Posts: 436
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby Guest » Fri Oct 24, 2003 12:45 pm

My rule of thumb for what constitutes a runner or a jogger was this hypothetical: "If you could win an Olympic gold medal, but the price you would have to pay is that you could never run or race for pleasure again, would you take the deal? You could run while playing tennis, soccer, or any other sport, but you could never again 'just go for a run', let alone race. Would you do it?" Invariably, the people who considered themselves competitive runners (regardless of how good) would say yes, and the joggers would say no.
Guest
 

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby Guest » Fri Oct 24, 2003 12:57 pm

<My rule of thumb for what constitutes a runner or a jogger was this hypothetical: "If you could win an Olympic gold medal, but the price you would have to pay is that you could never run or race for pleasure again, would you take the deal? You could run while playing tennis, soccer, or any other sport, but you could never again 'just go for a run', let alone race. Would you do it?" Invariably, the people who considered themselves competitive runners (regardless of how good) would say yes, and the joggers would say no.>

I used to believe this, until I had to make a decision on whether to have major surgury to my pelvis and never race again, or risk permanent injury and continue to race. I was competitive (4:11, 14:50, sub 2:30 marathon) as hell, but when the decision is real and not hypothetical it's a tougher call. I opted for the surgury in 2000 and have not broken 20 minutes in a 5k since, but I can still do those 15 milers Sunday mornings with my friends, so what the hell. Don't regret the decision. I miss the racing, but I can't tell you how much I missed running while injured even more. I susupect many competitive runners are so good not because they are competitive, but because they LOVE running so much (and do it so much) that they can't help but get fast - doesn't mean they would give it up for a medal.
Guest
 

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby MJD » Fri Oct 24, 2003 1:03 pm

>No Name, very well stated. I'm with you
>100%.

I'm putting words in No Name's mouth here but I agree with him too and yet you and I don't(or maybe we do). The most important part of No Name's post(to me) and how I look at it is this:

"does everything he can with the tools he's been given."

I don't think most of the 12 minute milers are. Some might be but very few IMHO.
MJD
 
Posts: 13402
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby MJD » Fri Oct 24, 2003 1:05 pm

>My rule of thumb for what constitutes a runner or
>a jogger was this hypothetical: "If you could
>win an Olympic gold medal, but the price you
>would have to pay is that you could never run or
>race for pleasure again, would you take the deal?
>You could run while playing tennis, soccer, or
>any other sport, but you could never again 'just
>go for a run', let alone race. Would you do
>it?" Invariably, the people who considered
>themselves competitive runners (regardless of
>how good) would say yes, and the joggers would
>say no.


By this definition I've always been a jogger then.
Possible I suppose.
MJD
 
Posts: 13402
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby stevehj197 » Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:12 am

somehow the word "competitive" has gotten slipped in here. We are not trying to differentiate between "competitive runners" and "joggers", but between "runners" and "joggers." Big difference.
stevehj197
 
Posts: 532
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby larwood » Sat Oct 25, 2003 7:12 am

Once in the early eighties in Boulder a group of us were doing repeat 800's on a residential street. A few of us were averaging 2:20 or so and Stan Mavis and Alan Sharsu were running under 2:10. During the middle of one a kid who had been sitting on the sidewalk, suddenly screams "you guys are the fastest joggers I have ever seen!".
larwood
 
Posts: 86
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby Guest » Sun Oct 26, 2003 4:31 am

This is reasonably funny:

"See, I cover athletes for a semi-living. And most of you people don't look anything like them."


http://www.torontostar.com/NASApp/cs/Co ... 0599109774
Guest
 

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby Guest » Sun Oct 26, 2003 4:48 am

Thank you for that link. What a wonderful column! (Yes, there are totally sedentary track nuts out there and I'm proud to be among them, but I normally keep my pride to myself because I know I'm going to be drowned out by the chorus of runners-joggers who want to either dis me or convert me.)

What I don't understand is why everyone, when learning of my interst in track, asks if I was ever a competitive runner. If I were an ice hockey fan, would people ask if I ever played hockey? I doubt it--where I grew up and still live, nobody plays hockey. NFL stadiums are filled every Sunday, mostly by people who've never donned a football helmet. So why do track fans have to be runners?

I'm afraid that the answer, by the way, is that to most people here in the US, track is so out of the mainstream that people cannot imagine any other reason why anyone should follow the sport. I confess that if I met someone who was an avid fan of a really minor sport like fencing, I'd just assume that they once fenced. Sad to think that this is the state of our sport.

At any rate, whether or not you are a runner/jogger, read the column linked above and know that she speaks for many of us.
Guest
 

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby tafnut » Sun Oct 26, 2003 6:05 am

The irony of this statement:

"See, I cover athletes for a semi-living. And most of you people don't look anything like them."

is that we look a whole lot more like athletes than the rotundities that deride us. Every gut I see hanging over a belt, every flabby arm and thigh, every love-handle, every butt dragging in the sand, convinces me more and more that I shall run till I die, and if that is to be in a Fixxian pool of sweat, so be it.
tafnut
 
Posts: 26684
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Lost at C (-minus)

Re: What's Up at Runner's World?

Postby Guest » Mon Nov 03, 2003 3:11 am

"This point was driven home to me last Sunday, when, about Mile 18 in the Marine Corps Marathon in Washington, I humped my aching bones past a woman who was yakking on her cellphone."

This is the friend referred to in the above article:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ ... Blatchford
Guest
 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: aaronk, Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], jazzcyclist and 9 guests