Fast Running Blog

This is a excellent plan and has the potential to do great things for the running/racing community.

A similar program exists in Chicago (albeit for profit) where races must comply with many rules to be an official "registered" race. It works great because races won't attract runners and grow if they are not "certified". This means that essentially every race I have run here was accurately measured, accutately tmed, had accurate mile splits, sufficient porta-a-potties, a safe course, etc. No more poorly run races put on by somebody looking to make a quick buck. Their guidelines are here http://www.cararuns.org/Racing/Race%20Directors/~/media/Files/CARA%20BEST%20PRACTICES%20GUIDELINES.ashx (http://www.cararuns.org/Racing/Race%20Directors/~/media/Files/CARA%20BEST%20PRACTICES%20GUIDELINES.ashx) I would suggest adding many of them to the list. I would love to see this turn in to a program that encourages an appropriately organized race in addition to encouraging support of the locally elite athletes.

 

Wow!  Looks very well thought out and put together! 

I still don't think race directors are concerned about runners eating a 10 cent banana and a 20 cent bagel and a 30 cent cup of gatorade.  I think it would be more of a hassle for them to make separate results and separate timing which could throw everything off, but I don't know how much a timing chip costs to rent.  The t-shirt is the big expense though ($2-$15 each).

If we volunteer, it's almost the same as if we paid for the race anyways, if not more, so they should give you the same things as everyone else.

I spent up to 5 hours helping someone organize a race once to get a $20 race entry fee waived.  Then it ended up making it so I couldn't warm up because they needed more help right before the race again, so I didn't run well and didn't win the prize that I was hoping could help me pay my bills.  I didn't expect that the job I volunteered for would be so involved, so really, at the end, they were making a profit off of me.  When I asked them if I could at least take home some of the left over refreshments, they were stingy and acted like I was some greedy person.  So I went home hungry.  I've learned from that.

I don't think asking a runner to volunteer for fee waiver is appropriate if they are competing for top 3 or 5 slots, because it jeopardizes their warm up and pre-race chee, just as Marianne found in her experience.  I'd rather pay the entrance fee than volunteer, but the best is to get a free entrance and not have to volunteer  ;D 

Not that I will ever be an elite runner - but I have helped at a lot of races.  There are several ways to volunteer that would not affect the race results.  For instance, marking the course the day before. Setting up the course earlier in the day.  Helping take down the course and race accoutrements afterwards.

I really think all runners should volunteer at one race for every 5 races they run.  It helps them to appreciate the efforts that the race director and volunteers put in to set up the races for us.  I like to volunteer during my recovery weeks or when injured so that I am not impacting my own schedule.

Note the language:

"You are allowed and encouraged to ask elites to volunteer as long as you arrange it in advance and the runner does not feel the job will interfere with his ability to perform or recover."

The spirit of this rule, as well as every other, is that we are seeking a 100%-100% relationship. We give you everything we reasonably can, and we want you to give us everything you reasonably can. We do not want race directors to expect elite runners to hurt their performance by volunteering.  But at the same time there are things they can do. There is no reason a runner could not carry a couple of light boxes or help for a few minutes directing people during registration while he is stretching. There is no reason he could not give a 5 minute talk at the awards ceremony on how to properly train for a marathon. There is no reason he could not jog to an aid station as a part of his cool down and hand out water for 20 minutes if he is waiting for awards. And there is no reason he could not ask his family members or friends to come and volunteer in other capacities that he cannot fill without hurting his race.

Remember what we are up against. There is a perception that elite runners think of themselves as being better than everyone else, and thus they are too good to be asked to volunteer. This perception is hopefully incorrect, at least I hope nobody on our team thinks that. If we want to have a soil that produces top running performances this perception must be eradicated, it is a weed, it must go, we must do everything we can to get rid of it.  Elite runners would get a whole lot more community support if they collectively demonstrated a spirit of service.

Some more thoughts. One of my goals is to get the race directors of Dog Days 5 Ks and Dog City Half Marathons thinking on what they can do to reduce the cost of having a runner in the race. Our rules create a possibility of having to give 30 comps. This hopefully will help him solve that problem, and the end result would be lower entry fees for everyone, or at least a lower entry fee option.

I was the race director for the Cougar Run for four years, and have given about 800 hours to that event alone.  It benefits BYU women's track.  I was happy to give service to a program I feel so passionately about.  Those service hours are probably enough for a lifetime.  I gave it up when I started working and running seriously.  Service is sometimes given in chunks and there are times and seasons for it (like when you are injured : ) ).

I believe in charitable work, and in donating time and money to charities I deem worthy of my scarce time and money.  It's like thinking someone should give $10 to every charity that asks, instead of big chunks to charities you really are aligned with.

I don't want to feel pressured to give to just any charity (including my time).  I think there should be a separation between my running live and my philanthropy.  I feel like its an infringement of my personal space for someone to suggest I should need to volunteer at a race.  I guess I just don't like being told what to do.  I remember feeling when I was the director of the Cougar Run that any past athlete should donate their cash prize back to the program, but now I realize that cash prizes are earned through so much effort, and that may be too much to ask of an athlete, to have them wear the two hats at the same time (competitive runner, supporter of a charitable cause).

I look to James Barnes and the Provo 1/2 marathon last summer.  Lots of times there are fewer volunteers than are needed, so once you say you'll help guide traffic, you are stuck for over an hour doing it, you don't get in a warm up, and you are just running instead of racing the race.  That's what happened to James.

Nobody is being forced to volunteer with Sasha's rules. It it a trade off for the free entry. If you don't want to volunteer, just pay the entry fee.

Or run a different race.

In my experience, there are plenty of races that are quite happy to comp a good runner, and expect nothing in return other than to put on show (ie - win the race or at least come close). I rarely ask the director for a comp unless I think I can win. Otherwise, I'm happy to pay the entry. Goodness, it's only $30 or so. If $30 changes my world, then I have bigger problems.

All that said, volunteering or getting involved in some other way in races is a healthy thing for any runner to do. It shows us the other side of races, the side that we usually do not appreciate. I am shocked at times at how demanding runners have become, and if something is not just right, we complain loudly about how the band is no good or how the goodie bag stinks or how my garmin measured the course to be 0.05 miles too long. It's worse than old people at a restaurant. After I tried stuffing goodie bags for an evening, and I realized how much work goes into putting on even the smallest race.

lots of times when i am running a race or waiting at the start line, i think to myself "wow, this is a lot of work" (probably 10x more than i think) and then i see all the volunteers at the aid stations and finish line...doing it all for free and always having a blast cheering on the runners and just being so supportive. it wouldn't be possible to put these races on without the many volunteers who do the dirty work to make it happen - like the "chip removers" at the finish line - DIRTY JOB, imo. :)
so, i have always appreciated the volunteers, but as a runner, it never really occurred to me that i should try to get on the other side of things and volunteer for a race - until i went to boston last year. i met a man who was a member of the New York Road Runners and he was talking about how he was trying to get a guaranteed entry into the NYC marathon. one of the requirements is that runners have to volunteer for at least one NYRR-approved race. i thought that was such a neat idea. so i decided that instead of trying to run every marathon i could, i would pick one per year and sign up to be a volunteer. this year it will be the UV marathon, and i am excited to be able to be a part of the race from a different perspective.
http://www.nycmarathon.org/9_1_guaranteed_entry.htm

Paul:

For some runners $30 does change their world. Everybody is different. Some have stable jobs. Others do not. With the economy going downhill there will be more without stable jobs. Some are suffering from bad decisions made in the past and are living on the edge of their means. $30 puts them over the edge. Even if the job is stable, and finances are OK, and $30 in all honesty can be handled, some may have a spouse that complains about the cost of running. In that $30 fee may have political significance that would make a difference between being able to run 90 miles a week with a happy spouse vs barely 40 with an unhappy one.

US distance running will not flourish if having middle-class or higher income before turning 25 is a requirement to be able to afford to race frequently.

There is a problem, though, if the well-off elites do not ask for comps. The race director says to the ones that are not, so-and-so paid the entry fee, and he is faster than you. So the guy has a choice to either not run, or to strain his finances. We need to be united.

Well, point taken on the "political" aspect of racing.

Sure would change our world...I tried to exchange volunteer work for an entry into the Provo half and nobody ever got back to me...and I live a block away. To get the cheapest entry I had to register two months in advance, otherwise, if I waited for them to get back to me, I'd have to have paid even more. Same thing for the Orem thanksgiving run...I registered like in sept, w/ no shirt to get it as cheap as I could. $30 right now means I can pay some bill or buy the gas I need to get to work, or save money, or pay to print some baby pictures, or clothes that actually fit anyone of us.

Sometimes I wish I could get paid the same rate for working as I pay for some of these races. Or that I could sell used diapers. If I could, I'd be stinkin rich.

Eh...I guess my above statement was a bit brash and insensitive. I apologize. Won't be the first time or the last time.

Also, it seems like this has turned into a new thread, one that is interesting and worth continuing, but perhaps should be moved by admin to its own post topic, so that the Endorsement Rules can be a stand-alone locked post. Up to Sasha though.

I understand where you're coming from though...

For the majority of the people that routinely spend $30 a day on fast food or restaurants, $30 for a race is not that much.

One of the highlights of Nestle Art City days is it's affordability.  They also have huge raffle at the end.  It promotes running and enjoying racing.  But the biggest prizes go in the raffle.  If not the top elite runners would take home freezers, bikes or valuable camping equipment every time.  Would that be right for the other runners in the race who pay their entrance fee and give just as much effort in the race?  I don't think so.  Just because I am a relatively fast runner doesn't make me feel entitled to receive a better prize than anyone else at every race I go to.  If the fast running blog is here to help each runner achieve their potential, then why would it take away the chance for a not so fast blogger who will most likely never win the big prizes off placing overall in a race?  The raffle prizes are there for everyone.  The elite athletes can pick and choose which races they do to maximize their winnings, but don't ask the race directors to take away the average runner's chance of winning a decent prize in the drawing just so the faster runners can always take a prize home. 

Seth - see the rules again. If a race wants to have something like have runners submit an inspirational story and reward them with a prize for overcoming a challenge, that is OK. Or if they pull out a donated prize and ask the runners to nominate somebody that did something extraordinary, not necessarily in the area of running, that is OK too.  That rewards work. If you just throw out prizes, that rewards chance. When those prizes exceed the prizes given out for a combination of work and talent, it communicates the idea that random luck is more important than work and talent. Thus the race has become a disguised lottery. Such "races" will not be promoted on the Fast Running Blog.

Seth makes a good point. The Springville race is an excellent example. It is one of my favorite races, even though the winners get nothing more than cheap trophies while random slow people get nice raffle prizes. However, the race also brings out a huge percentage of the local community most of whom will not run any other races until the next year. Kids get exposed to the sport and adults get a reason to exercise and do something with their families. The kid who wins a ladder in the raffle does not see it a a lucky lottery win, but sees it a a cool prize he won for doing his best in a race. Maybe a new lifetime runner was made. This probably does more for the runnig community than giving the ladder to the same semi-fast winner year after year.

I would argue that the lucky kid will just come next year untrained in hopes of getting something in the raffle. If he sees that his trained friend got a prize for running fast it will be more likely that he will actually train.

Or maybe the kid realizes that he will never be fast enough to win a prize and decides to just settle for playing video games.

Seriously though, the race does have a good model. It manages to bring out 1500 people by offering a t-shirt, a fun time and a raffle entry for $8. The cheap entry fee surely helps, but if the prizes went to the best runners instead of a raffle, only a few hundred people would be showing up.

Of course after thinking about it, they could charge $9 instead of $8 and they would have $1500 for prize money. All 20 of the fast local guys and gals would show up and it would be a nice competitive race. They would still need the raffle or else the slow people wouldn't come and there wouldn't be any source for the prize money.

More deep thinking. What if they could get away with charging $15. Still a cheap race, but now they have $10,000 in prize money. A van full of second tier Kenyans drives up from New Mexico and easily brings home all of the money. Is the community benefiting now? Is this really that much different than giving a smaller check to the same handful of local guys who win all the local races?

Seth is quite right that more talented runners don't deserve to get everything while others get nothing. Sasha is right that giving prizes out randomly cheapens the whole experience somehow. Maybe we should come up with some convoluted way to evaluate the work that someone has put in. Like you could have a prize for the person who improved the most from the previous year. Or, if you have a small race series, the last race could be handicapped so the people who were slowest in the prior races start first (there is a series in Seattle that does this but I've never run in the final race, obviously you could only do this in a small race).

I think is a mistake to get people to focus too much on extrinsic benefits however. It is well known that people will enjoy activities less when extrinsic motivation is used. People should learn to enjoy the feeling that they accomplished something instead of the fact that they got a prize. That's why age groups are so important. There has to be something to motivate people between winning and merely finishing. Another seattle race, "Beat the Bridge", comes to mind. You have to complete the race before the bridge goes up.

I like raffles.  I think most people do.  A whole table of prizes, and everyone has an equal chance of winning.  It's exciting.  Whether it is at a race or a community function or a company picnic, they are fun.  At a race, having a prize for "inspirational story" or "most improved" or to "handicap" everyone sounds good, but I can't see anyone actually doing it- too much work.  I like winning money as much as anyone, but I really don't mind when I don't get prize money but there is a big public raffle.  Just like I could never win a prize at a basketball tournament, the truth is most runners could never take top 3 at a race.  So I think having a raffle where everyone has a chance is great.

I just compare 2 races- the TOU 1/2 has a big raffle after the awards ceremony.  Hundreds of people attend, enjoying the post-race festivities with their families.  Striders 1/2 and 30k has awards, but no raffle.  There are very few people at those ceremonies- pretty much just the people who win the awards.  So which is better for the sport?

Both sides have their points in this issue however I think that one should not worry about who gets what because of this or that.  Maybe I'm a bit sensitive these days but lately it does not seem as if their is any true altruistic spirit on this blog.   It is disconcerting to see so many so egos in constant competition to either put their own interests to the front or the building and puffing up of their own  reputations.    Some of you may push back at me for saying this, but that's ok I kind of expect it to happen.    Just not feeling a true Christlike spirit amongst this blog anymore that is all.

Maybe it's time to find another group or perhaps even another hobby for that matter.
  

steve: i believe you were referring to my comment. i removed it because i feel terrible that i came across in this way. i apologize. it was not intended to be offensive and was certainly not ego-based.

Maybe I missed the real juicy stuff, but I don't see this as as fighting. We're just having a friendly discussion about how best to improve our sport.

A local race is an event my entire family can enjoy.  My wife runs the race to win a raffle prize.  My kid runs the race to win a participation medal.  I run for myself...not to win, but to constantly improve.  If you want to race for money then be a professional and run the large payday marathons or compete in the Olympics.  I will watch you and cheer you on, but don't turn my local race into $110 entry fee race for pros. 

I will not look for races on this board.

Red Dragon - I am not following your argument. I missed how the raffle helps you improve, and I also missed how $50 cash prize for the win raises the entry fee to $110. I am able to offer that with the entry fee of $0.

Sasha- As I understand it, Red Dragon isn't saying the raffle helps him improve.  He is saying that his wife enjoys the raffle after the race, so that is her incentive to participate (so, in some ways, the raffle may actually help her improve by motivating her to participate in races). 

And he isn't speaking of your specific race by complaining about the $110 entry fee.  He is speaking hypothetically, using it to show he doesn't want his entry fees to skyrocket just to pay for more cash prizes for a few people.  If wanted to support elites, he would run Boston or some other expensive marathon with big prizes.  But he doesn't want his local race to raise fees just to pay a few elite runners.

I suppose I can understand the point about the wife. Have to do what it takes to make the boss happy. If the boss is not happy, you cannot train as much, so you will not improve.

As far as prize money paid from entry fees. On its own the idea does not hold a whole lot of water. If you really cared to, you could find a way to fund the prizes without the runners feeling it. Hyrum Oaks, the race director of the Utah Valley Marathon has the lowest marathon entry fee, yet he was able to fund very generous cash prizes. I am funding a modest prize purse without collecting entry fees altogether. It can be done if desired. There is something else behind this argument, and I have been trying to figure out what it is.

One thing is quite obvious, though. People want a party bad enough to want to pay party expenses. However, when it comes to racing, it appears to me deep down most runners do not really want to race. They might want public recognition for racing, but they do not enjoy placing lower in a better company with a higher effort and a better time. With this mindset, when the race is more competitive, this is actually a minus. Thus the complaints about cash prizes coming from entry fees.

This has a consequence of not many races having prize purses, and as a result not a whole lot of support for competitive running. Why do Kenyans leave us in the dust? A Kenyan boy is doomed to poverty if he does not get serious about running. An American boy is doomed to poverty if he does.

This is completly off subject, but I've got to comment. The above statement is technically correct, but at the same time I think that we have a general misunderstanding about Kenyan runners. Yes, they do win all of the big races and prize money, but how many of them actually manage to make a good living off of their winnings? A few hundred? How many diream big and never make it? Probably hundreds of thousands. Maybe their time and effort would have been better placed in school and career preparation.

It's kinda like out situation with football and basketball here in the the US. At almost any given moment I can look out my window and see a bunch of inner city kids playing basketball. Many are just having fun, but many also have dreams of playing in college of hopefully pro. Only a small percentage will be able to use a college scholorship as their ticket out of poverty, even less will go pro. The rest will be working at McDonalds because they were shooting hoops when they sould have been doing their homework. I know I'm overgeneralizing, but the concept is sound. 99.999% of us don't have what it takes to be elite. The rest of us should be in it for other reasons and have a better plan for making money.

Dallen:

To be a professional runner for an American planning to support a family the standard is around 2:12. About 5-7 people out of 300 million right now. If you are slower than that you do not have what it takes. Think about what that means for a guy that is number 50 or so in the nation who is not that good at anything else compared to running. I am not quite there to tell you from personal experience, but I have an idea. I am good at other things, and I might be pushing it to rank in the top 200, but even from that perspective it still hurts to know that nobody really cares. If you had never felt THE FEELING, you would not care either, you would see 5:00 miles as 12mph which can be easily beaten in a car, so you would not care that you or somebody else could string several of those together. But once you've felt THE FEELING, you realize that God gave you a gift, that it is something not to be wasted, you want to develop it, you want to share it with others, you want to help them experience THE FEELING. The greater the gift and the more you've felt it, the more it hurts when you realize hardly anybody cares.

Interesting discussion.


I think this is human nature for most people, especially non-elites.  If you decided to enter a weightlifting competition, Sasha, I would guess you would prefer a local competition with weaker competitors, versus competing in the World's Strongest Man contest.  Even though you know you can't win, it is less embarrasing when you are closer in strength to your competition.  It may be neat to watch the WSM, but getting beat by them would not be fun.

Same thing with running- it is fun to place in the top 10 of a local 5k, even though you would get creamed at a more competitive race.  Even you think this way, Sasha- you would rather run Des News, TOU, and St. Jude where you have a good chance to win money, rather than run Boston or London marathon where the prize money is much greater but more competitive.  It's maximizing profit potential.  But most runners won't win a race, so don't care how competitive or how much money there is.

I would happily race a competitive half where I would finish in 250th place or below if the cost of travel was manageable. But such halves do not exist, primarily because I am reluctant to spend money on travel. A marathon is a little different because I can put only so many of them into my legs, they pay much better than halves, they still pay pennies for the time I put into running, but a penny saved is a penny earned, so then a penny earned is definitely a penny earned, and I have a wife and six kids to feed. Plus I like to feel what it's like to have to depend on your legs for income. It is a humbling experience, and it makes you treat your body with more respect. Perhaps that is why I am carrying this thread. There is a value to road prize money that most people do not understand. It is very fine, it is easy to miss, but it is there, and it is powerful, even if it is just petty cash.

Yup, I understand that.  Same reason I don't go to SLC for a 5k and complain about going to Park City or St. George.  I also know that running Boston as part of a vacation a while ago was a great, memorable experience- very fun.  I'm sure I will travel to a race every now and again (including the 100 miler I am planning in TX next winter), but it will be the exception more than the rule.

Sasha, it's too bad you are self employed.  If you were working for a company where you had to travel sometimes, you could maybe work some races into your trips.  Then you aren't spending your own money but find some very competitive races.

It does not work too well. When you are on a business trip you do what the client expects you to do. One time I went to Texas on a business trip and thought, hey, I am at a low elevation, I am going to try a tempo run. I brought my wheel with me and wheeled out a course. I struggled hitting 5:50 pace for 3 miles due to the fatigue from the meetings, bad sleep, and other travel-related stress. I came back home and ran 5:15 pace in a 3 mile tempo on a slight downhill, followed by 5:25 pace in a 5 K on a hilly loop course.

I respect the right of this blog to endorse races according to their criteria.  As a race director, my reaction
is that this smells of elitism.  Perhaps this is just me.  What rubs me the wrong way are requirements to give
out prize money, free entry to "elites," restrictions raffles to make sure more of the money goes to elites.
That should be up to the race. It sounds like elites want their pockets filled with money, that they have
earned the respect and better be respected.

Sorry to be critical, but that is what it sounds to me.  I believe one of the dangers of this sport is
elitism.   Now, I know that so many of the "elites" give a ton back to the sport and help so many others.  And I
know "elites" are stuggling to make ends meet.  But there are other ways to do this instead of trying to
impose races to be "elitist."   

A free race, for the love of the sport, doesn't meet this criteria and would not be endorsed.  Something is wrong here.

Davy- based on the discussion on this board, it seems many people on the forum do not necessarily agree with Sasha's requirements for free elite entry, prize money, and raffle restrictions.  Myself included.  That being said, they are Sasha's rules, so he can do what he wants, though understanding that Sasha's FRB rules represent his unilateral decision, and not the collective decision of blog members. 

If I were a race director, I would feel like you do.  I think some of Sasha's rules are due to his background- he is a runner who tries to maximize his race earnings and not pay entry fees.  If he were a lifetime mid or back-of-the-pack runner, I imagine he would have a different perspective.

That's yet another reason I love trail races- non-elitist, laid back, done only for the love of running.  And times or places are definitely secondary to participation and finishing.

Jon:

My bottom line would be a whole lot better if I never raced. If I cut my mileage to 40 a week I would still get health benefits, and used the extra time to make money. I do already have a way to get a comp in races where I have a shot at prize money (marathons), and making the Dog Days 5 K more competitive does not do me personally much good as I cannot win it as it is. If enough race directors begin to apply those rules, the guys that are beating me in 5 Ks will start to properly train for the marathon, and then I will never see any prize money whatsoever. I have given extensive help to talented local runners knowing very well that it will eventually result in me not being able to beat them over any distance. I am funding a race with prize money out of my own pocket. All the work I put into the blog results in local races being more competitive, thus less chance for me to win them.   So, no, I am not setting up anything for myself, I find it strange that you would suggest so.

My concern is for a guy that comes out of college and he has to decide if he is going to eat or if he is going to run competitively. I want to give him a reason to run competitively. A few comp entries and $100 here and there will not cut it, he would still have to find some other source of income, but this is at least a start. Feeling that the community cares about how fast he runs might make him and his family more willing to deal with the sacrifices it requires to fulfill his potential.

I am also concerned about the fact that once somebody qualified for Boston, there is nothing else for him to qualify for except maybe the vague national elite status of sub-2:30 and after that the trials. Which for most is not attainable, at least in a visible time span. There is no reason for a 3:00 guy to try to run under 2:40. 3:00 is a fast jogger. 2:40 is still a just fast jogger. Those who have run under 2:40 know very well that a jogger attitude does not get you there unless you have the talent for 2:15, and yet we do not recognize all that work, by all standards you are still considered a fast jogger. I feel there should be a tangible reason for a 3:00 guy to keep on striving for a better time, and I want to do what I can to help create it. Local elite status can serve that purpose.

Sasha- I wasn't trying to say that you are setting yourself specifically up for anything (i.e. by making these rules, you would be more likely to win money), just that you have more focus on comps and prizes at races than many runners because you are fast enough to generally get them and have visibility into that side of racing.  And I think your races with no entry and out-of-pocket prizes are very, very admirable.  I apologize if I offended you with my comments.

I was just stating that your FRB sponsorship on races which requires comps and prizes, and less emphasis on raffles, is due to your beliefs about supporting/encouraging fast runners, on top of supporting running in general.  Other races emphasize other things (i.e. Olympic trials= Olympic qual, Race for Cure = charity, Smithfield Health Days 5k = encouraging general fitness).  We need all types and emphasis.  I just think some RD's (like Davy) aren't big fans of mandatory prizes, restricted raffle, etc.  I'm just happy if a race is an accurate length, with sufficient course markings, road closures (if necessary), and port-o-potties.  Oh yeah, and some good food at the finish.  Preferably lots and lots of good food...

Jon if I remember right, you were the one who ate the peanut butter & jelly sandwiches after the Ogden marathon last year, the ones they stamp into a circle?  If that's your definition of good food, I think I'll pass.

Michelle, I'll eat anything after a race- no one has ever called me picky.  And don't rip PB&J- it's good stuff!  Those sandwiches were pretty tasty.

Jon:

Here is what I find odd. A lot of people run. A lot of people buy expensive toys to measure how fast they run. A lot of people read advice on how to get faster. A lot of people run races that are timed using expensive sophisticated technology. Many runners are upset if they do not get their chip time. Obviously how fast somebody runs does matter, you cannot say people are out there just to jog, eat the food, and have fun. Yet at the same time there is a phenomenon that I call "mid-pack mindset".

Some symptoms of the disease:

* Your average race director finds it offensive to be expected to offer a few elite comps, some pocket change for prize money, and award the runners according to merit rather than random luck.

* Somebody who is younger than 40 sees a local elite at a race, finds out he is in the same age division, and says "darn it". Or, he is very excited about next year because that local elite will get a year older and move out of his age division. He does not mind being beat by an older guy as long as he gets his age division trophy. No concern about the meaning or value of that trophy.

* You catch up to somebody during an easy run going maybe 20 seconds per mile faster than him and invite him to join you. He has seen you run fast before. He says, no you are too fast for me and gives up without trying your pace at all.

* Most runners will have no idea who won the race and with what time.

* You finish a race and are jogging back to find somebody to pace during your cool-down. A few runners will comment (trying to act like it is in jest) that it is not fair that you finished so far ahead of them.

Note that I am talking about mid-pack mindset vs mid-pack pace. Somebody with his very best training will still be running only mid-pack pace. And by definition if you have 2000 people racing regardless how fast somebody will finish in 1000th place, and somebody will even be last. Those people may be cursed with a mid-pack pace but they do not have to have a mid-pack mindset. That is one reason, if not the main reason, I put all the time and effort into the blog. I want people to truly apply themselves and reach for the stars regardless of their level of ability. I believe, however, that you cannot truly reach for the stars yourself if you feel indifferent or even jealous towards excellence in others, when you happily pay $5 for ice cream, but grumble about $1 towards prize money.

I enjoyed your list of symptoms.  Very true- if I didn't know better, I'd think that you had encoutered some of those, esp. the smart aleck comments as you run the race course backwards  ;)

I think you are getting into human nature.  I think most people want to do the best they can during the race (i.e. run as hard as they can), but they didn't necessarily put in as much training as they could have in the months leading up to the race to allow them to run the fastest time they are theoretically physically able.  It takes lots of determination, dedication, and perserverance to run to your physical limit.  Sasha, I think you are one of the few people with that level of dedication.  And the blog certainly has lots of others with similar characteristics.  Distance runners are certainly different than the general American population.

One thing I find interesting- there are two people I know of on this blog who offer free races: You and Davy.

Regarding the "mid-pack mindset symptoms"

- Comps.  As an RD, I have not problem with them, but it depends on where the race is in its life-cycle.  If it is just starting out, this might be unreasonable.  I think comps should be a private thing, not a public requirement.  Prizes are great and helpful to further attract good competition.
- Who won.   I think this is more of a problem with how massive road races are.  With ultras, the community is small enough that even back-of-the-packers pay attention to who won the races.  Ultras also seem to have much more opportunity to socialize pre, post, and during the races.  I think this is more a cultural thing than an attitude.
- cool downs and pacing.   I've got to admit when I ventured outside of ultras and ran my first 5-10ks, I observed you guys doing this and it looked more like a "victory lap" being performed by guys who were self-absorbed in their talent.   Later I came to understand better what you were doing and who you were.   However, one thing you could do is take a page from the ultras.  Whenever we have out-and-backs the runners almost all always greet the other runners with a "good job", "looking good", etc.   If on your reverse course job back you did this more, people would better understand.   Because I have to tell, you, it looks like a victory lap.

> there are two people I know of on this blog who offer free races: You and Davy.

Yes, I think I offer the only free 100-mile race in the country.  My main reasoning is to avoid overhead and RD time.   My race requires crews provided by the racer so I don't have to put together aid stations.  Also I don't want to deal with insurance, etc.  If I limit the size, I can avoid other overhead imposed by the county.  So that is my free race.  I do offer finisher awards out of my own pocket.   My motivation for putting on this race is to provide an "easy" 100-mile race, one that can be shared with family and friends by going along as crews.  Also to expose people to the beauty of the west desert in Utah.

I'm also on the race committee for the Antelope Island race that turned out this year to be the largest trail race ever held in the state.  So this is now a big-time race.  We don't yet offer prize money, but probably are now in a position where we could.  We have good sponsorships and good support from the state park.   Competition is better.  However, this race will never attract the national elite from the sport because the terrain is too flat.   Perhaps prize money would attract them.

Not everyone enters a race to win. Not everyone even enters a race to do their best. This does not make them wrong, just different.

For example, my wife is entered in to a triathlon this summer and she has absolutely no intention to approach it in anything closely resembling a competitive manner. She thinks it will be fun and she wants to get into shape. On race day she will be the one talking to the person next to her rather than racing the person next to her.

A completely different analogy. Lets look at car washing. Some people spend hours washing and waxing their cars to make sure that their cars look absolutely perfect. They take pride in how their car looks and they take every step to make sure it is the best it can be. They might even enter their car car in some sort of contest, or race or parade or whatever. Then there is me. I might hose off my gar if it it is covered with mud or if the windshield is covered with bird droppings, but I am not going to spend all of the time and effort to make it look perfect. A 50% effort is good enoug h for me. Now, should the other car owner look down on me as a "mid-pack" car owner? He might think I am wasting the potential of my car, but I am perfectly happy the way I am.

Good car example, Dallen.  We can't all be great runners, amazing cooks, car washers, gardeners, painters, and make homemade quilts.  We pick a few things to work hard at, a few more to give moderate attention, and ignore everything else.  And people might choose to put running in any of those categories.

> Not everyone enters a race to win. Not everyone even enters a race to do their best.

I understand what you are saying and agree with one exception.   It bugs me that people enter races without the intention to properly train.  In a race that is limited in size, requiring lottery, this takes away a slot from someone who is willing to put in the effort.  This can be seen more dramtically in ultras, such as Wasatch 100.  Some people are just happy to go 50 miles or less and quit without the proper training.   I realize that you usually have to DNF ultras to get to the point that you finish them, but they should go test out their fitness on other races that don't have such restrictions.   I have not idea if this translates into similar concerns for marathons since I rarely run those races.

So, your shoddy car is parked in a premire slot that causes a shiny car to be parked out in the alley.

I totally agree with this. There is something wrong when the average guy takes a lottery spot in the St George marathon before he has started running while another guy who has been training all year can't get into the race.

There is also something wrong with buying the latest car washing technology at a premium price, subscribing to a magazine that discusses washing cars in detail, and constantly wishing for your car to be clean, but not spending a whole lot of time washing your car and feeling you deserve just as much in a clean car contest as somebody who does a decent job cleaning his car.

Now this is making me laugh!  ;D

I think Sasha might have won the debate with this one.

I might acutally be good at this sport, so I should figure out how to subscribe to that magazine. Is the car washing contest based on time or overall cleanliness or some combination of the two?  Is there prize money?

All this debate has done is make me feel guilty about my dirty car.  I'll wash it this weekend.   If someone enters a car-cleaning contest I don't think it is a sub-par contest because they give a squeegee to the winners instead of cash.

I'll chime in here since I'm an RD.  My take on comps is this, I offer comps to people who offer me something in return that will be of benefit to the other runners in my race.  For example, I offer anyone who works at Striders Running Store free entry since they are huge supporters of my race.  People or companies that offer something to the runners in terms of prizes to be given away also get comp offers.  Would I comp elites? No, I don't need to to attract non-elite runners.  Do elites run my race?  Some have, some elites have volunteered at my race.  I have yet to offer prize money but am considering it for 2010.  The amount would probably not show up on an elite runner's radar.  Elites race to win and the amount of prize money I would offer wouldn't be much of an incentive.
I gear my race towards a trail running event rather than a race.  People hang out all day after they finish, we eat, drink, cheer on other runners and generally have a great time.  What's nice is even the top finishers will cheer on the others, even while on the trail themselves.  I also think that ultras tend to be much more egletarian than the average road race.
Also, each comp costs money, real money that is made up thru the entry fees of other runners who paid.  By not comping too many runners, it helps to keep the entry fees a little lower than they would be otherwise, especially since I charge less for my 50K and 50 mile than Salt Lake charges for a marathon, and provide more stuff as well as a much more scenic venue.  Anyway, my 2 cents worth, and it's worth about that much.

Jim
RD Antelope Island Buffalo Run
Definitely a non-elite runner

Great points Jim.  One thing I have been really impressed about the ultrarunning culture is that so often the "winner" of the race stays for hours at the finish line congratulating and cheering all the finishers.  They aren't out doing victory laps, cool-downs, pacing, etc.  They are taking the time to encourage the finishers and getting to know them.  Karl Meltzer is a great example of this.  Also Jose Pacheco and other true elites in the sport.   Us "non-elites" don't feel like we are in a different "class."  To Sasha's credit, I saw him greeting many runners as they finished Ogden Marathon.   I know he does a ton encouraging others.

Finishing is a victory for all.  Defining classes in running doesn't seem useful to me.   Setting individual goals and reaching for them do.    Anyway, Sasha certainly has the right to only endorse races that fit his desired criteria, but I must say, that the criteria struck me as "elitist."   Races for the elites, not really for those who just enjoy running....makes me want to avoid any of those type of races.

It is obvious to me that people don't care to use this way as an endorsement, other wise there would be other races advertised than Sasha's own race.  It is silly to think you can control the way someone wants to put on their own race, they are to passionate about what they believe a race should be.  Besides there are other race guides that do the same thing and they don't have to conform to any kind of rules or regulations.  
All of us want to be recognized for what we do but the reality of it all is we don't, I don't get high fives and money for doing an excellent job of being a mom.  But I do get the satisfaction of looking at my beautiful children asleep in there beds every night before I climb into bed and collapse from being so tired.  I think this is all just a little silly and most people like to race to have a good time and there is nothing wrong with that.  If you want to be recognized as the top elite runner in Utah take an add out in the paper or put your face on a bill board.  The fact is some people will still won't know who you are, because they fill there time with other more important things.  I don't think everyone knows who the MVP is in basketball this year or last year, or who the world champion jouster is for 2009, but I don't think they care and just happy with there own accomplishment.  I love to run, I love to race, and I love to be fast but I don't like people to tell me how I should do it.

The time standard is elitist.  It is a race.  He or she who shows up and wins a race, WINS THE RACE!
Also, it should be universally recognized, that anytime people get together to be active, it is a really a GREAT thing, under ANY circumstance.  That is what is important.
Sasha absolutely has the right to support any race he wishes, 100%.  It is unfortunate that you (Sasha) can't see that you "standards" tend to demean and negate the honest efforts of other racers/runners/directors that you have declared sub-standard.

Well said Marion....I have the same thoughts.

Some elite runners have no idea of how hard it is for a non-elite to even gain some ground.  Whie I know I have the ability to go faster and farther if I push myself, I will never, ever, ever be an elite runner because I haven't been given the natural abilities that will allow me to reach that level.

As a definite non-elite, I find that each marathon and ultra marathon I complete are a victory because it means I have pushed my body past the point a normal person can and I have conquered the demons that tell me to not work out or to quit when it hurts. 

Marion and I were just talking about my decision to 'pace' her in the UVM tomorrow instead of pushing myself so that I can help her get through her first marathon.  While some people would feel that not doing your best in every race is a cop out, I find that I can learn something in each race.  Some I choose to push, some I choose to finish as a long training run, some I choose to try different methods in.

One of my proudest minutes was winning my Age Group in a 5K on New Years Eve.  Even though I was the only person in my age group, I busted my butt in that race and felt I earned that award.  However, under these standards I would not even be considered as having put forth effort worth consideration and I can only say that I disagree with standards like this and probably would not compete in races that are so elitist because of the way they remind me of being in an abusive marriage where nothing I did was ever considered good enough.

Now this I totally agree with.  I think you should train for and be ready for every race you run in and not go in thinking you will pull out if it gets too tough.  Particularly with races that have limited entries - it is a waste of time to register and then not give it your best intentions of completing the race.  I would rather DNS a race than DNF (not counting injuries) if I couldn't complete the distance.

Maurine:

We have a better idea than you think. I am racing this weekend knowing in advance I have next to zero chance for third.  The only way this can happen is if there are no shows, royal blowups, or injuries with a DNF while I run a perfect race.  Ezekiel Ruto has never blown up as far as I know. Shin does not blow up either, not royally, like he needs to to be in my reach. William Tete might blow up, I do not know, but again a 2:17 guy would need to blow up royally or be extremely out of shape to become accessible. Seth can blow up, but he needs to blow up royally for me to get him. He's done it only once after not eating or sleeping for a couple of days before a race.  If Jeff does not blow up, I am toast as well, and we have worked diligently to avoid his blow up.

I will probably finish 7 minutes out of money. That might not seem like a lot, but it is very difficult, next to impossible to cover at that level. It is much easier to shave off an hour for somebody who runs 4:00 off 30 miles a week than 7 minutes for somebody who runs 2:30 off 90 miles a week. A slower runner has more fixable things to fix while a faster runner does not have that luxury, every minute of improvement comes with blood, it requires a serious training/recovery breakthrough.

The story gets more interesting. Seth and Ezekiel will skin me. Hobbie Call will skin both of them. Josh Rohatinsky will skin Hobbie. Ryan Hall will skin Josh. And Sammi Wanjiru will skin Ryan. And then Sammi Wanjiru is not safe himself, there is always somebody out there than can come out of nowhere, you get outkicked and your pay goes down. You blow up, and you do not have a pay. You get injured, and you do not have a pay for a long time. Never look up thinking that grass is greener for somebody who stands a rung or even several rungs up a ladder.

You may have noticed the frequent use of the term "blow up". It illustrates the grim reality of racing. It is not your textbook fairy tale with heroes winning against the odds by working hard and having a positive attitude. A commentary from LetsRun.Com during Boston is revealing: "Maybe Hall isn't finished. He's right with Cheruiyot and Merga is known for blowing it too early.", and "Ryan Hall is 24 seconds back of Merga. If Merga blows up, Hall could do it!!" Note that they did not say "If Hall makes a heroic effort and increases the pace he could do it!" Because Hall was already making a heroic effort and going as fast as his body was capable of that late in the race. Being outclassed by a rather small margin his only hope was the competitor's poor performance.

So faster runners do know very well what it feels like to be outclassed, perhaps a whole lot better than the slower ones, and  have to learn to humbly accept the reality of the predicament.

I have been following this discussion since day #1 and have kept quite because I am very non-confrontational.  I have discussed it with many bloggers in person and with many in my running group who either have never blogged here or who have stopped.  So, I am just going to put in a very quick 2 cents.  I feel like these rules eliminate 95% of the people who blog here (I know you like numbers Sasha, so you can give me an exact percent).  I think everyone is trying to improve.  Some work really hard every day, some do not have the time but give it what they can, and some are just not quite ready to give so much of their life over to running at this point (it is not high on the priority list, although the desire is there).  But setting a standard that has to be met to get a monetary award seems silly to me.  I have read in so many places where you (Sasha) have discussed how some people are just born with the ability and the physiology to run fast and others were not so blessed.  You have this uncanny ability to look at someone's training and race times and be able to predict maximum potential, and I think you are usually right.  Last September you told me that within 2 years you thought I could run a 3:05 marathon if I started training more consistently and you gave me some tips.  I kind of laughed it off out loud, but in my head I thought, "I wonder???"  So, less than a year later I have cut 12 minutes off my marathon just through being more consistent and upping miles.  I am at a point where I have to decide if I want to go for it and push my body that hard and aim for that 3:05 or if I want to not feel pain and just enjoy the ride, the exercise, the runner's high, whatever.  I have to say that reading all of this is disheartening and discouraging.  To me a 3:05 would be amazing, but to you a 3:05 is considered barely more than jogging.  I would have to bust my rear end to get that 3:05 and push my body to limits I am not sure I want to, but then why would I bother if that is never really good enough to be considered a runner?  Much less to be considered a very good and respected runner?

I run with men and women 2-3 days a week who range in ages from 25 to well over 50.  We all run together, we do the same work-outs, we all push as hard as we can for our bodies (and for the day or week or even month we have had).  None of us finish together, but we wait for everyone (we call it regrouping).  We respect the effort that every runner puts in, whether it is a 5 hour marathon finish, a sub 3 marathon, or everything in between.  We are a community of runners who enjoy each others company, enjoy pushing each other, enjoy racing, and just plain like to help each other out.  I have often wondered why our 3 speediest runners do not find a new group that is faster, but I am so thankful that they do not and that they stick around to push us and teach us a thing or two, and support us every step of the way.  And they often comment that WE, the weaker runners in the group, push them and that is why they keep coming back.  Isn't this what we all want?

And I would like to add just one confrontational item:  you better believe I deserve the money or the trophy or the medal or the plant if I just so happen to win a race!  It is not my fault if I am the fastest person who shows up.  I did not go out and Tanya Harding all of the other "real" runners into not showing up.  If I am there and I win, give me my prize!  If I do not win, you better believe I will be cheering the loudest for the winner (even though I may be miles behind!)  I am proud of my accomplishments irregardless of who I beat and who beats me.  Everyone likes a little recognition for what they do, and everyone deserves it whether they are in the front, the back, the middle, or on the golf cart injured because 99% of the world is at home on the couch!

That's all, I am done.  Love you all, really. :-*

Thanks Kelli. We need more of the mid-packers to voice thieir opinions.

Also, 3:05 is not jogging. Even if you were a guy.

Kelli:

Have you actually read the rules? In what way do they eliminate 95% of the runners? I do not ask the race director to set a time standard for entry, I only ask them to give comp entries to the ones who meet the standard if they want their race to be promoted on the blog and receive other assistance from me. I also ask them to reward performance above random luck, but nowhere do the rules say that rewards cannot be given unless certain performance standards are met.

In my races I do require a time standard for cash awards.  I do so because the money comes out of my pocket, and I have only so much of it. When I have only $200 total to give,  I want to make it count. When I have more, I could lower the standard some, but there will still be a standard. I do not understand why people complain about time standard for cash. They have to run a time standard just to get into Boston, and nobody complains.

Kelli:

You do raise a good point, though, that there is not a whole lot of reason for a woman to work to improve from 3:26 to 3:05. With 3:05 you will get a few comps, including St. George, and you will pick up some cash in marathons here and there, but there is not a whole lot of reward for getting faster at that level. You already have a BQ, your neighbors and friends already think you are amazing and will have next to zero appreciation for the meaning of the improvement once it happens. You should actually be interested in promoting the Endorsement Rules - they will guarantee you a comp in every endorsed race if you go under 3:10.

Even worse, for a woman to improve from 3:40 to 3:20 or for a man from 3:10 to 2:50 there is absolutely no incentive in the current award system. You already have a BQ, you are already getting you age division award plaques, your neighbors and friends already think you are amazing, but you are too slow for comps in the few races that do care about having a fast field, and you are a far cry from prize money.  You improve 20 minutes, and you are still too slow for comps, still too slow for prize money,  the age division plaques are still the same, and your neighbors and friends have no clue about the meaning of that 20 minute improvement.

Could race directors do something about it? Sure, if they cared. E.g. give a discounted entry fee by $1 a minute faster than BQ or progressively if you meet certain reasonable standards. Or have separate raffles for different finishing time brackets. Or a million other things if they understood and valued the principle of rewarding a performance. But they do not care enough. Probably because runners do not care enough.

I would like to improve my marathon PR from 2:39 to 2:35 or even sub-2:30.  Why?  Not to help me get comps or to win prize money.  I have one reason only:  personal satisfaction. 

And I personally believe that that is the reason most runners try to improve their times.  Seeking acceptance or validation for my improved times from my family, friends, neighbors, race directors, or anyone else is meaningless.  External rewards are fleeting and will leave you wanting more.  Personal satisfaction comes from within and can never be taken away from me (and the enjoyment I get from the runs).  That is why I run and why I want to improve- because I can take satisfaction from knowing that I did the hard work and can be proud of what I accomplished.  And that is regardless of if I am a first time 5k finisher or the world record marathon holder, or if I lost those 5 extra pounds or just can say that I didn't sit on my butt all day watching TV. 

I am proud of each and every runner and all that you accomplish.  Good job.

Don't forget the other reason to keep trying to get faster: Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder.

Jon:

Good point. Ultimately that is why we run. If you do not have the internal drive, you will not run well regardless of the reward. However, let me ask you, pick a pursuit that is somewhere on the level of spitting cherry seeds for distance that you enjoy, if you do not enjoy spitting cherry seeds for distance that much. Would you invest into it as much as you do into running and why?

I suppose the answer is no. And the reason is that because the society does not value that skill as it does your ability to run (not that it values your ability to run that much anyway, but it is a whole lot more than your ability to spit cherry seeds). Running means something to you to a great extent because it means something to society, enough people consider it beneficial to your health, and ability to run long and fast a worthwhile accomplishment. If running meant to the people you associate with as little as spitting cherry seeds you would not run an hour a day or more six days a week.

Thus the internal drive in good measure is a product of the environment you are in. I would compare your own drive to a seed, and the environment to the soil. If we want the seeds to grow, the soil needs to be fertilized, and the seeds need to be watered. Currently, the way races are set up, and the way running is viewed in general, it is a desert. Only the toughest plants can grow in it. If you are still running, consider yourself a cactus.

Kelli - I would love to see you get a 3:05, and while your non-running friends wouldn't know the difference, your blogging friends would, and we're the only ones who count, right?

Plus, Kelli, with that time, you'd be queen of the Bingham Butt Kickers, and that's saying a lot!

To me, this recent discussion is disturbing -- that running motivation comes from money or praise of the world.   Neither enters into my motivation for running at all.  Don't teach others that we should cultivate a running culture that embraces this.

I never expect to win a dime from my races or any comp entries.   Yes, I got invited to be on the Runner's Corner Ultra team based on my contribution to the sport, and if they want to give me free stuff in exchange to wear their shirt, fine.  But all this money award talk is silly.  Go get sponsored, go do paid-online training, publish articles in magazines for fees (I do), whatever, but keep the money-mongering away from local runners.   Reserving cash-awards for only those who perform above a standard is elitist, reserving it only for your buddies.  If you can't afford it, don't offer it to anyone and just let people run.   Hey, but they are your races.   Just don't be surprised if very thoughtful runners choose not to run your races because of the principles you are promoting.

Folks, if improving your marathon time by 15 minutes is pointless because you get no rewards or praise, go find much more satisfying running activities to do with your time than chasing marathon minutes.  Push your limits in other ways.  Discover ultras, trail running and other events.  You will discover there is a running world beyond the track and city pavement and that your can still push yourselves to new limits that you thought were not possible.  Throw away the watch and discover nature.

I suppose some people do not get it and never will.

That's pretty harsh and very one-sided and tunnel-minded, Sasha.  There is no "right" way to view running that everyone needs to share.  Some run for health, some for enjoyment, some for the outdoors experience, some for the challenge, and some for the money or worldy praise.  If they run for different reasons than you, maybe they "get it" in a different way. 

Although some may think that statement is ironic, coming from you, Sasha.  ;D

Jon:

Some people still do not get it. Possibly because they read too fast.