Too many hard cores on this messsage board that loooove to bash Runners World. You are all so condescending both to the magazine and the thousands upon thousands of healthy, running-interested people in this country, who buy millions of shoes ( the manufacturers of which support Track & Field in so many ways ) plus these many people just maybe are also T&FN afficionados to some degree but also are fathers/mothers to kids that emulate their parents and are athletics-interested themselves as a result.
Would all you " I'm better than they are " hard cores be happier if recreational running did not exist ??!!
The " Running Boom " in this country in the last 25 years certainly at a very minimum has not hurt Track & Field, and almost certainly has helped immeasurably.
So stop bashing RW. They are our friendly cousins, not the enemy.
I'm an old guy and I want you all to know that some day you'll all be in the same position as me. I consider myself a serious runner even though my age hampers me (46) The same people that you deride are the ones that you want to come and watch you compete. Yes Runner's World is tiresome repetitive dreck, but at least it answers all the faq's of newbies.
Once NIKE stops forcing little kids to make their shoes I will buy them. Do you really think PRE would approve of what NIKE is doing/has done? Don't any of these T&F athletes care about anything else but themselves?
>Once NIKE stops forcing little kids to make their
>shoes I will buy them. Do you really think PRE
>would approve of what NIKE is doing/has done?
>Don't any of these T&F athletes care about
>anything else but themselves?
Do you really think Pre would care? The impression I have of him is that his world revolved around one person: himself.
Would all you " I'm better than
>they are " hard cores be happier if recreational
>running did not exist ??!!
This defense of RW is flawed. To answer the question, no. I'm glad the recreational runners are in the sport. They increase road race participation, buy shoes, make themselves healthier, ect. All good things. The problem is not with them. The problem is with a magazine that prints blatant lies, and does so repeatedly. All that "don't train hard, take walking breaks, sniff cinnomon (yes, they really claimed that makes you faster), wear magic socks", ect ect. are all untrue. RW prints these and other falsehoods on a regular basis. So the issue is not with recreational runners (hey, about 99.99% of us are in that category), the problem is with a magazine that makes claims that are completely untrue.
The " Running
>Boom " in this country in the last 25 years
>certainly at a very minimum has not hurt Track &
>Field, and almost certainly has helped
Sorry, the jogging boom has not helped track and field. Go to any local 5K, and ask the finishers in the 20 minute and back area how many of them have EVER watched a track meet, or even considered it. I bet you the percentage will be no higher than in the general population.
There are quite a few magazines I don't like. I simply stopped puchasing them and reading them. This life long obsession you have with the hatred of this magazine, is the publisher your father or family member?You seem to go into quite a bit of detail on the last issue. How many times did you read the July issue. Just curious, are you the same poster on the Runners World forum that keeps complaining about Track and Field News?
Dimwit, haven't you heard? RW has a HUGE "I hate RW but I read it so I can bash it" market. They cater heavily to this audience by running the same articles repeatedly just to piss them off and keep them reading and bashing.
How can you defend RW? That's right...you can't. You just attack the people who bring up the magazine's suckiness. Well, don't kill the messenger. Runners World is downright pathetic. You know it, I know it, it's time for the American people to know it!
It's easy to say something sucks - but it's rather childish as well. Every month a RW bash thread comes up. Those who think they can do better should put their $$ where their mouth is a start their own magazine - hell I'll probably subscribe to it. But to simply whine about it?
>It's easy to say something sucks - but it's
>rather childish as well. Every month a RW bash
>thread comes up. Those who think they can do
>better should put their $$ where their mouth is a
>start their own magazine - hell I'll probably
>subscribe to it. But to simply whine about it?
What you're saying is that I'm not allowed to have an opinion on a publication unless I'm willing to leave my current career and get into publishing myself and start a new rag? Huh? I guess I can't have an opinion on a pro sports team unless I'm willing to buy that team and change things. I guess I can't have an opinion on the U.S. government unless I'm willing to run for President. Have you ever tried an athletic shoe you weren't crazy about? Well, you have to like it unless you are willing to go into the shoe business and make a new one! Is this what you're saying? That's ridiculous. RW blows, and I can have that opinion even if I have no intention of ever getting into the publishing business.
I am thinking of starting a Master sports newsletter covering Track and field, olympic weightlifting and powerlifting. It would be very inexpensive and feature interviews abd training tips from old dudes like Mel Larson. Now that would be interesting to hear from 70+ guys on how they train. Of course the hard-core T&F people would hate it.
>Dimwit, haven't you heard? RW has a HUGE "I
>hate RW but I read it so I can bash it" market.
>They cater heavily to this audience by running
>the same articles repeatedly just to piss them
>off and keep them reading and bashing.
You mean like those fundamentalist christians who go see blasphemous films and listen to blasphemous music so that they can protest and warn their flock about them?