Re: marathon goal setting

Discussion in 'General Fitness' started by Lanceandrew, Oct 20, 2004.

  1. Lanceandrew

    Lanceandrew Guest

    I think that it is nuts to make a marathon a miserable experience,
    instead of a pleasant experience, for the sake of some 5-10 minutes
    that no one is going to really care about.

    i
    __

    you do shoot to "win" a marathon ig. your "win" or victory is in accomplishing
    your personal goal. you get to define it. one of the best indicators that
    you're having a great race is if you're feeling "miserable" at some point with
    great pain, fatigue & you consider how if you stopped you'd be free of all the
    pain and fatigue.

    that's the "edge" ig....we all have personal "envelopes" (in the aviation
    context)...and we all have points wherein we are "pushing the envelope" and
    hitting new personal terrain.

    and this "5-10 minutes that no one is going to really care about"? you're
    not a runner ig...you may jog now and then...but mentally no runner would ever
    say something like this.

    every year ig _thousands_ of people set out on a 6-9 month mission training to
    run a marathon and hit specific time goal..for the sake of qualifying for the
    Boston Marathon. every year ig people that made this commitment fail to
    realize this goal by 60 seconds or less.

    after all their work, all their effort, the marathon race itself.... they did
    not qualify and are not allowed in the Boston Marathon ig. it is incorrect to
    say "no one is going to really care" about 5-10 minutes. the person cares,
    other races care.

    last year ig i BQ'ed with only 132 seconds to spare. every second counts. i
    know people that missed BQ'ing by less than 10 seconds.
     
    Tags:


  2. [email protected] (Lanceandrew) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

    > (...) one of the best indicators that you're having a great race is if
    > you're feeling "miserable" at some point with great pain, fatigue & you
    > consider how if you stopped you'd be free of all the pain and fatigue.


    A great race doesn´t by definition have to include such
    miserable moments(1) and neither do such moments turn a
    race into a great one.

    (1) Well, it´s difficult to imagine a great 10K where one
    wouldn´t rather stop or at least slow down during a good
    third of the race or a great marathon where one wouldn´t
    at any point feel rather "miserable" - but I know I´ve
    ran a great HM without any such moment.

    Is is the *good* moments that make a race a great one. And
    it is in order to acquire those moments that we "time-fixed"
    runners have to run as if those 5-10mins are of utmost
    importance. The difference between running a race as if
    one´s gaze were fixed on the clock and running it 5-10mins
    slower is not only or mainly in the result, but in the
    inner experience: in the latter it is so much less rewarding,
    even empty. The PB or the sub-whatever will be just the
    icing on the cake.


    That said, I have no beef with the (predominantly female)
    runners who run marathoners "just to finish", slower than
    they could and who aren´t in the least interested to
    improve their times.

    Unless three or four of them are running side by side in
    front of me, that is:)



    Anders
     
  3. Lanceandrew

    Lanceandrew Guest

    >That said, I have no beef with the (predominantly female)
    runners who run marathoners "just to finish"
    ___

    conduct a study on this anders or are you a sexist stereotyping women?

    my simple observation is that i am seeing more female runners (routinely
    running in the course of a week at running paths, etc.) than male runners.

    i would bet "running" is marketed-promoted more to women than men due to it
    being constantly addressed in all these women's health and fashion magazines.
    the men's versions of these same magazines seem to stress weight lifting and
    getting your abs to a 6-pack, etc. (simple observation of the newstands).

    i don't know if in general, more women than men enter marathons with the goal
    of simply to finish as opposed to having a time goal. in general
    overall?...across the board?...i'd say women have more of a natural character
    of perseverence & "fight" (toward an objective/goal) in them then men do.

    i'm sure you anders know of a woman who's endured 8+ hours of labor and then
    birthed a child. if this were our task anders..(men)..methinks more than half
    of us would not even be here....
     
  4. Doug Freese

    Doug Freese Guest

    "Lanceandrew" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > my simple observation is that i am seeing more female runners
    > (routinely
    > running in the course of a week at running paths, etc.) than male
    > runners.
    >
    > i would bet "running" is marketed-promoted more to women than men due
    > to it
    > being constantly addressed in all these women's health and fashion
    > magazines.


    I don't think it's much of a marketing issue. Women in general have
    always been more cognizant of their health. Women have been going to the
    doctor at least once a year for Gynecological exams since early teens.
    They are very comfortable with preventive medicine to include the yearly
    weight, BP and reminders about general health. Men typically do nothing
    unless sick or get to 50 when they're obese with high blood pressure or
    have a heart attack.


    > the men's versions of these same magazines seem to stress weight
    > lifting and
    > getting your abs to a 6-pack, etc. (simple observation of the
    > newstands).


    I don't know what men are reading these rags. It surely isn't reflected
    in the general population. I send most of my vacations on the beach and
    the only six packs I see are in a cooler.


    > i don't know if in general, more women than men enter marathons with
    > the goal
    > of simply to finish as opposed to having a time goal. in general


    In my 20 years of experience most are just interested in finishing.

    > overall?...across the board?...i'd say women have more of a natural
    > character
    > of perseverance & "fight" (toward an objective/goal) in them then men
    > do.


    I agree. There are more and more women showing up on the ultra circuit.

    >
    > I'm sure you enders know of a woman who's endured 8+ hours of labor
    > and then
    > birthed a child. if this were our task enders..(men)..methinks more
    > than half
    > of us would not even be here....


    I'd give up sex unless wearing a full body condom or wet suit sans any
    openings!

    -DF
     
  5. On 2004-10-21, Lanceandrew <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>That said, I have no beef with the (predominantly female)
    >> runners who run marathoners "just to finish"

    > ___
    >
    > conduct a study on this anders or are you a sexist stereotyping women?
    >
    > my simple observation is that i am seeing more female runners (routinely
    > running in the course of a week at running paths, etc.) than male runners.


    That's an interesting point -- I've noticed that there are higher numbers of
    competitive male runners. But among recreational runners, maybe the numbers
    are reversed.

    When someone writes "I want to do some running but I don't want to look
    like a runner", can you guess their gender ? (never mind that it's kind of
    like saying "I want to play basketball, I don't want to grow to 6 foot 8".)

    So maybe men are more likely to choose other activities to get into shape (or
    maybe as Doug suggests they'll simply ignore their health for the most part)

    > i don't know if in general, more women than men enter marathons with the goal
    > of simply to finish as opposed to having a time goal. in general


    I'd say that the vast majority of marathon runners, male and female, are
    basically in it to finish. Just look at the finishing times. Last year, about
    20% of the field ran a sub 4hr marathon in New York.

    The runners who are racing against the clock are the exception, not the rule.

    > overall?...across the board?...i'd say women have more of a natural character
    > of perseverence & "fight" (toward an objective/goal) in them then men do.


    It comes down to motivation. When you see a lady in the gym playing with the
    pink dumbells, and lifting ridiculously light weights, they're not wimping
    out because they have low pain tolerance. They're wimping out because they're
    not motivated to try to push heavy weights (because of the "bulking up" myths,
    or whatever). The same people will push themselves pretty hard in setting where
    they're more motivated (e.g. an aerobics class)

    A recreational runner is not necessarily motivated to push themselves to the
    limits -- someone who is motivated by health or general enjoyment might not see
    a need for high intensity exercise. Sometimes when I'm over a hard series of
    races, I also find it helpful to take it easy and just enjoy running, as
    opposed to trying to turn every workout into some kind of battle against the
    clock.

    > i'm sure you anders know of a woman who's endured 8+ hours of labor and then
    > birthed a child.


    One of our womens open competitors runs 70 miles a week pushing a baby
    stroller.

    Cheers,
    --
    Donovan Rebbechi
    http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/
     
  6. steve common

    steve common Guest

    [email protected] (Lanceandrew) wrote:

    >conduct a study on this anders or are you a sexist stereotyping women?


    It's not sexist to note that ladies don't seem to suffer from the
    ill-effects of testosterone overload quite as often as males. <troll>
    Especially males from NY :->
     
  7. steve common

    steve common Guest

    Donovan Rebbechi <[email protected]> wrote:

    >I'd say that the vast majority of marathon runners, male and female, are
    >basically in it to finish. Just look at the finishing times. Last year, about
    >20% of the field ran a sub 4hr marathon in New York.


    Maybe another culture-based thing fouling up the stats here.

    Paris 2004 - 29700 Finishers, 15996 in less than 4 hours = 54%
     
  8. Doug Freese

    Doug Freese Guest

    "steve common" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > [email protected] (Lanceandrew) wrote:
    >
    >>conduct a study on this anders or are you a sexist stereotyping women?

    >
    > It's not sexist to note that ladies don't seem to suffer from the
    > ill-effects of testosterone overload quite as often as males. <troll>
    > Especially males from NY :->


    Let's say NYC otherwise that broad sword gets me. :)

    -DF
     
  9. [email protected] (Lanceandrew) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

    > >That said, I have no beef with the (predominantly female)

    > runners who run marathoners "just to finish"


    > conduct a study on this anders or are you a sexist stereotyping women?


    No, I´ve only done a fair amount of personal observation
    which I´ve backed with some reading of ladies´ mags.

    However, what I had in mind were the runners who fulfill
    all three criteria: "run marathoner "just to finish", run
    slower than they could and aren´t in the least interested
    to improve their times".

    I do believe that in this group the males are a clear minority:
    men whose goal is to finish still tend to run as fast or faster
    than they can, to have some unstated time limit and/or to want
    to improve or at least to equal their times. (Or they become
    interested in the number of the marathons they run, while women
    tend to remain perfectly happy to do their one or two annual
    marathons.)


    Needless to say, I´m well aware of the many female runners
    who ran much for the same reasons and much in the same way
    as I do.



    > my simple observation is that i am seeing more female runners (routinely
    > running in the course of a week at running paths, etc.) than male runners.


    There are more and more female runners here, too. The percentage
    of female marathoners has increased steadily and strongly, and
    it is largest in the 20-30 group; IIRC there are more female
    marathoners in the 20-30 than in the 30-40 group, whereas there
    are twice as much men in the 30-40 than in the 20-30 group.

    (IMHO the males in the 20-30 fall into four categories:
    1. those who aren´t interested in physical exercise,
    2. those who are interested in their "body shape",
    3. those who are active in team or non-running sports, and
    4. those who run marathons.
    For females the equivalent categories 2-3 are certainly smaller
    (and categories 2 and 4 aren´t as mutually exclusive.) and
    category 1 quite probably is.)



    > i would bet "running" is marketed-promoted more to women than men due to it
    > being constantly addressed in all these women's health and fashion magazines.
    > the men's versions of these same magazines seem to stress weight lifting and
    > getting your abs to a 6-pack, etc. (simple observation of the newstands).


    It´s true that marathoning is (again) riding on top of a
    wave, but I have no idea which came first, the phenomenon
    or the marketing:) One can read about running and female
    marathoners in ordinary ladies´ magazines, newspapers
    feature shoe tests in their Sunday supplements etc here.

    FWIW in Finland more and more of the contents of the leading(1)
    running magazine has been aimed at the mass marathoner or the
    beginner and the cirulation has risen from 14.000 to 19.000.
    (1) It used to be the only one until two years afo when Runners´
    World jumped on the bandwagon with a Finnish edition. (OTOH
    when a "quality men´s magazine" was launched last year it
    featured a marathon training plan on the cover; the magazine
    folded after two issues...)



    > i'm sure you anders know of a woman who's endured 8+ hours of labor and then
    > birthed a child. if this were our task anders..(men)..methinks more than half
    > of us would not even be here....


    Fortunately I don´t personally know of 8+ hours, but let´s
    just say that I´m not all that keen on exaggerating any pain
    or discomfort I may endure during a marathon:)


    Anders
     
  10. A.P.

    A.P. Guest

    [email protected] (Anders Lustig) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > No, I´ve only done a fair amount of personal observation
    > which I´ve backed with some reading of ladies´ mags.


    Ah HEM! ????????? Normal athletes are doing the "one handed polka"
    with Hustler magazine, but this guy's on the crapper with "Womans
    world". I
    m not saying this questions his sexuality, but, well, yes I am.
     
  11. << Normal athletes are doing the "one handed polka"
    with Hustler magazine, but this guy's on the crapper with "Womans
    world". I
    m not saying this questions his sexuality, but, well, yes I am. >>

    why?
    a grrl's a grrl.

    _______
    Blog, or dog? Who knows. But if you see my lost pup, please ping me!
    <A
    HREF="http://journals.aol.com/virginiaz/DreamingofLeonardo">http://journal
    s.aol.com/virginiaz/DreamingofLeonardo</A>
     
  12. Mike Tennent

    Mike Tennent Guest

    Donovan Rebbechi <[email protected]> wrote:

    >
    >I'd say that the vast majority of marathon runners, male and female, are
    >basically in it to finish. Just look at the finishing times. Last year, about
    >20% of the field ran a sub 4hr marathon in New York.
    >
    >The runners who are racing against the clock are the exception, not the rule.
    >


    That's a common misconception of some good runners. Just because
    someone runs a 4+ hour marathon, do not assume they're not racing the
    clock to get their own personal PR or to achieve what they can from
    their own abilities.

    Enjoy your speed and ability, but don't assume that those much slower
    than you are "just finishing."

    Mike Tennent
    "IronPenguin"
     
  13. SwStudio

    SwStudio Guest

    "Mike Tennent" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > Donovan Rebbechi <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>I'd say that the vast majority of marathon runners, male and female, are
    >>basically in it to finish. Just look at the finishing times. Last year,
    >>about
    >>20% of the field ran a sub 4hr marathon in New York.
    >>
    >>The runners who are racing against the clock are the exception, not the
    >>rule.
    >>

    >
    > That's a common misconception of some good runners. Just because
    > someone runs a 4+ hour marathon, do not assume they're not racing the
    > clock to get their own personal PR or to achieve what they can from
    > their own abilities.
    >
    > Enjoy your speed and ability, but don't assume that those much slower
    > than you are "just finishing."


    Yes, my friend Linda has been running for years and is
    very competitive against the other women in our running
    club that are of her ability. I would know, as I have gone
    back many times at races I ran myself and ran in the last
    mile or two with her as part of my cool down.

    Every time, she (and many others around her) are gasping
    for air and doing everything they can to 'set a PR', or
    perhaps beat a competitor beside them to move up in
    the AG score. I've seen her almost puke with dry heaving
    at the end of a race. She's "got game".

    She runs 2:08 for the half marathon, and will probably try
    her first full marathon next year. It won't be sub-4, but she
    will fully be trying to get the fastest time she can. Within an
    hour of the end she'll be analyzing her performance to find
    out how she can improve next time.

    cheers,
    --
    David (in Hamilton ON)
    www.absolutelyaccurate.com
    www.allfalldown.org
     
  14. On 2004-10-25, Mike Tennent <[email protected]> wrote:
    > Donovan Rebbechi <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>
    >>I'd say that the vast majority of marathon runners, male and female, are
    >>basically in it to finish. Just look at the finishing times. Last year, about
    >>20% of the field ran a sub 4hr marathon in New York.
    >>
    >>The runners who are racing against the clock are the exception, not the rule.

    >
    > That's a common misconception of some good runners. Just because
    > someone runs a 4+ hour marathon, do not assume they're not racing the
    > clock to get their own personal PR or to achieve what they can from
    > their own abilities.


    Well, I agree that some people may just not have as much ability. Also,
    masters and female competitors will inevitably be slower.

    However, IMO if you're just doing what amounts to a 26 mile training run,
    then you're not really racing against the clock.

    Also, if you're setting up your training plan such that you're doing the
    minimum possible for the purpose of completeing the race (as opposed to
    training like someone who wants to race it), then in my book, you're not
    really racing the clock -- even if you do sprint to the finish and puke at
    the finish line.

    Cheers,
    --
    Donovan Rebbechi
    http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/
     
  15. The great guru has not even run a marathon yet, but you all listen to
    him like the second coming. give me a break.



    Donovan Rebbechi <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > On 2004-10-25, Mike Tennent <[email protected]> wrote:
    > > Donovan Rebbechi <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >>
    > >>I'd say that the vast majority of marathon runners, male and female, are
    > >>basically in it to finish. Just look at the finishing times. Last year, about
    > >>20% of the field ran a sub 4hr marathon in New York.
    > >>
    > >>The runners who are racing against the clock are the exception, not the rule.

    > >
    > > That's a common misconception of some good runners. Just because
    > > someone runs a 4+ hour marathon, do not assume they're not racing the
    > > clock to get their own personal PR or to achieve what they can from
    > > their own abilities.

    >
    > Well, I agree that some people may just not have as much ability. Also,
    > masters and female competitors will inevitably be slower.
    >
    > However, IMO if you're just doing what amounts to a 26 mile training run,
    > then you're not really racing against the clock.
    >
    > Also, if you're setting up your training plan such that you're doing the
    > minimum possible for the purpose of completeing the race (as opposed to
    > training like someone who wants to race it), then in my book, you're not
    > really racing the clock -- even if you do sprint to the finish and puke at
    > the finish line.
    >
    > Cheers,
     
  16. TenKBabe

    TenKBabe Guest

    The Buddy Guy wrote:
    > The great guru has not even run a marathon yet, but you all listen to
    > him like the second coming. give me a break.
    >


    And he better run a sub 2:45 in the NYCM. Just kidding Donovan. (-: I
    personally want to thank him for the amount of good information he's
    contributed to rec.running. So thankyou!

    tkb
     
  17. <<
    The Buddy Guy wrote:
    > The great guru has not even run a marathon yet, but you all listen to
    > him like the second coming. give me a break. >>


    Second cum?
    How come?
    Did I mess the first one?
    I confess, yes,
    I wander off...
    I do wonder, too.
    Now, what was the question?
    O yes, my confession.
    Well, you see, it all started...

    _______
    Blog, or dog? Who knows. But if you see my lost pup, please ping me!
    <A
    HREF="http://journals.aol.com/virginiaz/DreamingofLeonardo">http://journal
    s.aol.com/virginiaz/DreamingofLeonardo</A>
     
  18. <<
    The Buddy Guy wrote:
    > The great guru has not even run a marathon yet, but you all listen to
    > him like the second coming. give me a break.
    >


    And he better run a sub 2:45 in the NYCM. Just kidding Donovan. (-: I
    personally want to thank him for the amount of good information he's
    contributed to rec.running. So thankyou!

    tkb>>

    Fob! Are you making this stuff up?
    Shame....

    _______
    Blog, or dog? Who knows. But if you see my lost pup, please ping me!
    <A
    HREF="http://journals.aol.com/virginiaz/DreamingofLeonardo">http://journal
    s.aol.com/virginiaz/DreamingofLeonardo</A>
     
  19. << I do wonder, too.
    Now, what was the question?
    O yes, my confession.
    Well, you see, it all started... >>

    Whoops!
    It's all coming back to me...

    _______
    Blog, or dog? Who knows. But if you see my lost pup, please ping me!
    <A
    HREF="http://journals.aol.com/virginiaz/DreamingofLeonardo">http://journal
    s.aol.com/virginiaz/DreamingofLeonardo</A>
     
  20. On 2004-10-26, The Buddy Guy <[email protected]> wrote:
    > The great guru has not even run a marathon yet,
    > but you all listen to him like the second coming. give me a break.


    Maybe if you weren't such a dumbass, they'd listen to you too.

    --
    Donovan Rebbechi
    http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/
     
Loading...
Loading...