Runners World is terrible!!!!!!!!!!


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

Runners World is terrible!!!!!!!!!!

Postby Guest » Tue Apr 22, 2003 1:38 pm

I just noticed that this topic had yet to be broached on this board. Something seemed to be missing. There. It seems complete now.
Guest
 

Re: Runners World is terrible!!!!!!!!!!

Postby 1.97hjsteve » Tue Apr 22, 2003 1:51 pm

Don't be so hard core. There are thousands and thousands of "runners" out there that know little or nothing about " track and field". But would you rather they not be there at all ? They are healthy happy people and maybe their running interest will partially translate to track and field interest for themselves or their family members at some point. So to repeat, do not be so hard core and T&F elitist. They are people too. Suppose they were all bowlers ?
1.97hjsteve
 
Posts: 109
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: Runners World is terrible!!!!!!!!!!

Postby Guest » Tue Apr 22, 2003 1:54 pm

Ah, yes. The time-worn debate has begun here on TF&N website. As Mr. Burns would say, "Excellent!"
Guest
 

Re: Runners World is terrible!!!!!!!!!!

Postby trackstar » Tue Apr 22, 2003 2:40 pm

>Don't be so hard core. There are thousands and
>thousands of "runners" out there that know
>little or nothing about " track and field". But
>maybe their running
>interest will partially translate to track and
>field interest for themselves or their family
>members at some point.

Bingo. I started off reading The Runner (which was later absorbed by Runners World), and discovered track & field (including T&FN) through it. It nurtured my interest in distance running long enough for me to get into the wider sport. I no longer subscribe because I'm no longer a jogger, but thanks to that start I'm now a rabid t&f fan.
trackstar
 
Posts: 3093
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Austin, Texas

Re: Runners World is terrible!!!!!!!!!!

Postby Jefferson Buffalo » Tue Apr 22, 2003 2:40 pm

>do not be so hard core and T&F elitist. They are people too. Suppose they were all bowlers ?<

Well, then they wouldn't be people at all. They'd be hats.
Jefferson Buffalo
 
Posts: 416
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: Runners World is terrible!!!!!!!!!!

Postby Trackrat » Tue Apr 22, 2003 3:16 pm

Noooo! Let's not go there, even in jest. And while we're at it, wouldn't it be great if this site could be a T&F site without the foibles of others.

To name a few peeves:

comandeering of threads if not entire sites by self-proclaimed cults of personality;

popularity contests where every move of the favored are "whoo-hooed" by the masses;

endless personality wars between gurus--be they real or self-proclaimed;

puerile "___'s hot" threads;

It looks like the T&F crew has already no no'd baseless drug accusation postings and other subjects. Kudos to that.

We appreciate T&F News for it's purity. May we all strive to keep this board purely about track and field, its personalities, and perfomrance.
Trackrat
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: Runners World is terrible!!!!!!!!!!

Postby Halfmiler » Tue Apr 22, 2003 5:16 pm

But they make up for it with their website. The daily news section on it is excellent and a must read when it goes up at lunchtime on the east coast.
Halfmiler
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: Runners World is terrible!!!!!!!!!!

Postby Guest » Wed Apr 23, 2003 7:31 am

>But they make up for it with their website. The
>daily news section on it is excellent and a must
>read when it goes up at lunchtime on the east
>coast.


Maybe, but the mag is horrible. You can't deny that.
Guest
 

Re: Runners World is terrible!!!!!!!!!!

Postby jlanza » Wed Apr 23, 2003 12:48 pm

Oh, yes, I deny it. I would agree that the average article does me little or no good, but every once in a while, there is a real gem. I hate the cheesecake/beefcake covers, and the very superficial pieces about running savings people's lives, and the stories about the "yummy" smoothies, but there was an essay in the April issue that was excellent, and every once in a while a good shoe or other equipment review. Its no T&FN - if you want results you have to go to the source, but it does serve a different purpose and for the price, I can search for the good stuff.
jlanza
 
Posts: 75
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: Runners World is terrible!!!!!!!!!!

Postby Guest » Wed Apr 23, 2003 1:45 pm

>Oh, yes, I deny it. I would agree that the
>average article does me little or no good, but
>every once in a while, there is a real gem. I
>hate the cheesecake/beefcake covers, and the very
>superficial pieces about running savings people's
>lives, and the stories about the "yummy"
>smoothies, but there was an essay in the April
>issue that was excellent, and every once in a
>while a good shoe or other equipment review. Its
>no T&FN - if you want results you have to go to
>the source, but it does serve a different purpose
>and for the price, I can search for the good
>stuff.

That's a pretty weak defense. "Yeah, I know most of it sucks, but every once in a while there is something in it that's decent, so since it's cheap, I can look for the occasional good stuff." Wow, you could be their marketing director with an endorsement like that!
Guest
 

Re: Runners World is terrible!!!!!!!!!!

Postby Guest » Wed Apr 23, 2003 5:01 pm

I subscribe to both Runner's World and T&FN. And I have been an avid runner for 15 years, and a hard core track and field fan. I like both of them. Both magazines, while running magazines, serve different types of runners. RW serves the road racing community and recreational runners. T&FN serves track and field fans. Both have strengths and weaknesses.

RW:
Strengths: Bible of road racing; nutrition and speedwork articles; top of line shoe reviews.
Weaknesses: Some human interest pieces too sappy (i.e. Hash House Harriers).

T&N:
Strengths: Bible of Track; articles on track athletes; Olympic Prievews, end of year World Rankings top of line.
Weaknesses: Reading lists/results can be very confusing for average reader/runner.

Peace.
Guest
 

Re: Runners World is terrible!!!!!!!!!!

Postby Guest » Wed Apr 23, 2003 6:20 pm

Your 'weakness' for T&FN is its strength. No fluff, just facts!
Guest
 

Re: Runners World is terrible!!!!!!!!!!

Postby Guest » Wed Apr 23, 2003 8:31 pm

>>do not be so hard core and T&F elitist. They
>are people too. Suppose they were all bowlers ?

>Well, then they wouldn't be people at all.
>They'd be hats.

You guys are just as snobbish as the original poster. I love both bowling and track, and compete in both, with a 210 average and 1:59 / 4:40 PRs.

T&F and bowling share a commond bond: they're both bottom-feeders in terms of national popularity. The irony of your joke resonates.

Track fans and bowlers unite!
Guest
 

Re: Runners World is terrible!!!!!!!!!!

Postby Guest » Thu Apr 24, 2003 2:46 am

Trust me, Mr. huh? :) I love the lists. But there was a time years ago where it took even me a while to know all of the abbreviations and asterisks. Sometimes, T&FN would have those on some other page, confusing a reader big time.
Guest
 

Re: Runners World is terrible!!!!!!!!!!

Postby Guest » Thu Apr 24, 2003 2:54 am

The division/lack of love within the running community continues. No wonder why running/track doesn't get on TV much. Peace.
Guest
 

Re: Runners World is terrible!!!!!!!!!!

Postby MJD » Thu Apr 24, 2003 10:23 am

>That's a pretty
>weak defense. "Yeah, I know most of it sucks,
>but every once in a while there is something in
>it that's decent, so since it's cheap, I can look
>for the occasional good stuff." Wow, you could
>be their marketing director with an endorsement
>like that!

There is actually nothing wrong with that defence. You could make the same comment about books, movies, TV and music. Most of it is crap but some of it is high art.
MJD
 
Posts: 13402
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: Runners World is terrible!!!!!!!!!!

Postby Guest » Thu Apr 24, 2003 9:22 pm

Quoth DF:

>Trust me, Mr. huh? :) I love the lists. But
>there was a time years ago where it took even me
>a while to know all of the abbreviations and
>asterisks. Sometimes, T&FN would have those on
>some other page, confusing a reader big time.>

Well, I'd ** just DD like to XX say that MO<JK when my men at Fatnews do their RSE that any ##$ moron shoud be ## able to follow DEDD the $%%%%.

How can you fight that kind of logic?

ps--twas brillig, and all the slithy toves did gimble and gyre in the wabe; all mimsy were the borogroves, and the momeraths outrabe.

or something like that.
Guest
 

Re: Runners World is terrible!!!!!!!!!!

Postby Guest » Thu Apr 24, 2003 9:27 pm

Lewis, you old perve; still lusting after little Alice?
Guest
 

Re: Runners World is terrible!!!!!!!!!!

Postby jlanza » Fri Apr 25, 2003 4:58 am

I didn't realize that I had to justify my defense of Runner's World to you, "Generic Poster". Like many other things in life, you have to search a little to find the best amongst the ordinary (or worse).

Is there a particular reason you felt you had to add the sarcasm at the end of your post or do you just generally have an inability to disagree with people without being nasty?
jlanza
 
Posts: 75
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Re: Runners World is terrible!!!!!!!!!!

Postby Guest » Fri Apr 25, 2003 5:16 am

It's cool, man. I realize that I am far to generic for most people's taste.
Guest
 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Bruce Kritzler, Per Andersen and 9 guests