Is the Marathon too popular?

[monkey]

At a dinner I was asked how long a marathon was. I thought they meant distance, so I told them and got a blank look. Then I said it was for me about 3h30m of continuous running and that they understood and were amazed. They couldn't fathom running for more than a couple of minutes at a time and it would have to be for a life threatening reason.

they would be more impressed with my time cause it took me longer!

[Jwolf]

I really don't care what non-runners (or even *some* other runners, for that matter) think about how far, how fast or how often I run. That's not why I do it. I don't choose my race distances based on what is going to be impressive or meaningful to anyone else.

I don't particularly care personally either, but in many ways I think it would be better for the sport in general if the marathon wasn't viewed as the pinnacle of road racing.

Part of me does think the answer to the original question is "yes" the marathon is "too popular." But it has an appeal that seems to be somehow different than other road racing challenges. We've talked about this before...

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=36816&start=0

[ultraslacker]

I don't really get the question, I guess. how can anything be "too popular"? If people like something, it's popular... where does a value judgment come out of there? It's not a harmful thing. If anything, it's getting people more active... so who cares which distance is popular? And really, by the numbers, 5k and 10k are way more "popular".

Ultras are my favourite, and decidedly the least popular. So... who cares? :)

[Doonst]

Here in Ontario, two of the most popular (in terms of early sellout) races are the 30 K Around the Bay and 25/50 K Run For the Toad. And as someone said, in Ottawa the half sells out before the full. 5 Peaks 12K races all sell out too. A race of any distance can be popular.

That said, the term "marathon" can be confusing to non-runners. I mentioned said to some friends that I haven't done a marathon in two years. One said, so you're just taking it easy? I responded that, no, in fact this year I've done 16 races including PBs in the 5 and 10 K, an olympic triathlon, an ultra, and a series of 6 trail races from 25-32 K. Just no actual marathons. I got a glazed look as response.

[PinkLady]

That said, the term "marathon" can be confusing to non-runners. I mentioned said to some friends that I haven't done a marathon in two years. One said, so you're just taking it easy? I responded that, no, in fact this year I've done 16 races including PBs in the 5 and 10 K, an olympic triathlon, an ultra, and a series of 6 trail races from 25-32 K. Just no actual marathons. I got a glazed look as response.

Yup, that's the Muggle response, alright. As far as non-runners are concerned, there's sprint distances (anything you can describe as 'meters' - so 100m up to 10,000m) and anything over that is a 'marathon' - again, "run really far for really long".

Try telling them next time that you PB'ed in the 5000m and 10,000m. Bet you that will resonate more, since most people have seen those distances on tv at the Olympics. (And if that works, you can say your trail races were like the 10,000m x 3 times in a row. )

[Corpus Cani]

I read somewhere that more people run in the marathon than in the 1,500m for the whole of North America in one year. The survey of city marathons went on to say that half of the competitors ran only 42km in total in a week. That’s about 7km a day for six days. They then expect to run reasonably well, 42.2km in one day.

Part of me does think the answer to the original question is "yes" the marathon is "too popular." But it has an appeal that seems to be somehow different than other road racing challenges. We've talked about this before...

Funny, as a little kid I remember Rodger Bannister broke the 4 minute mile and two weeks later John Landy broke his record. I don't think any of us kids at the time had even heard of the marathon but we would race a mile (more like 600m.) around the dam every night after school

[Doonst]

So I was in Chapters Bookstore today looking for some good short-distance / sprinting running books, but all I could find was books for how to train for Marathons . Okay, there were some shorter distances too ( I think I saw Daniels book say it had programs for 800 meter races).

For my first 3 years of running, I bought one book. Lots of magazines helped for shorter race training. When I decided to run a full marathon, I went out and bought four books. I even read a couple of them.

[jamix]

Lots of replies to this thread, but most opinions seem similar.

Some have pointed out the observation that many shorter distance races fill up first. Perhaps this is a sign that the marathon is held with more prestige, but not as popular in terms of # of individuals signing up to run them.

A few have said they don't care what other people think. I might ask "Are you sure?".

[Jwolf]

A few have said they don't care what other people think. I might ask "Are you sure?".

You ask this in such a way that can only be answered defensively or dismissively.

I think we wouldn't post on a running message board if we didn't care about each others' progress, successes and challenges.

So yes, I care. I care what my friends think, I care what my coach thinks, and I care about what other people read about me because I care about the influence I have on other people- and I hope its mostly positive.

But I DON'T chose my races based on other people's expectations, and I don't care if they somehow think I'm a less worthy distance runner if I prefer 10Ks over marathons. Or if I've never lost a toenail.

[seuss]

Lots of replies to this thread, but most opinions seem similar.

Some have pointed out the observation that many shorter distance races fill up first. Perhaps this is a sign that the marathon is held with more prestige, but not as popular in terms of # of individuals signing up to run them.

A few have said they don't care what other people think. I might ask "Are you sure?".

prestige? not necessarily. requires the opportunity to properly train for and respect the distance. yes.

but i have had some pretty talented marathoners respect my 6:22 marathon, so throw that into the mix.

[jamix]

A few have said they don't care what other people think. I might ask "Are you sure?".

You ask this in such a way that can only be answered defensively or dismissively.

I think we wouldn't post on a running message board if we didn't care about each others' progress, successes and challenges.

So yes, I care. I care what my friends think, I care what my coach thinks, and I care about what other people read about me because I care about the influence I have on other people- and I hope its mostly positive.

But I DON'T chose my races based on other people's expectations, and I don't care if they somehow think I'm a less worthy distance runner if I prefer 10Ks over marathons. Or if I've never lost a toenail.

This sounds reasonable. Sorry for the way I asked.

[jamix]

Lots of replies to this thread, but most opinions seem similar.

Some have pointed out the observation that many shorter distance races fill up first. Perhaps this is a sign that the marathon is held with more prestige, but not as popular in terms of # of individuals signing up to run them.

A few have said they don't care what other people think. I might ask "Are you sure?".

prestige? not necessarily. requires the opportunity to properly train for and respect the distance. yes.

but i have had some pretty talented marathoners respect my 6:22 marathon, so throw that into the mix.

And for strangers, you can say that a marathon is running continuously for 6:22 .

[Corpus Cani]

Lots of replies to this thread, but most opinions seem similar.

Some have pointed out the observation that many shorter distance races fill up first. Perhaps this is a sign that the marathon is held with more prestige, but not as popular in terms of # of individuals signing up to run them.

A few have said they don't care what other people think. I might ask "Are you sure?".

Jamix, I was lucky enough to fondle an Olympic gold medal once and have seen plenty of others from behind a glass screen. The thing is they were all exactly the same even though they were for different distances.
For me it's like that with all running, I don't see any difference or place different values on different races, I love them all and raced them all, I just happened to be more suited to marathons.



Still.....I would have killed to be able to run a good 800m


Mate, I didn't take any offence in the way you posed your question

[seuss]

Lots of replies to this thread, but most opinions seem similar.

Some have pointed out the observation that many shorter distance races fill up first. Perhaps this is a sign that the marathon is held with more prestige, but not as popular in terms of # of individuals signing up to run them.

A few have said they don't care what other people think. I might ask "Are you sure?".

prestige? not necessarily. requires the opportunity to properly train for and respect the distance. yes.

but i have had some pretty talented marathoners respect my 6:22 marathon, so throw that into the mix.

And for strangers, you can say that a marathon is running continuously for 6:22 .

i was supposed to run? maybe that was the problem...

[danielb]

I am not speaking from a position of experience as I'm not very fast in short distances nor have I done a marathon (first one planned for fall 2011) but as the initial post was about the availability of books I think that the reason why marathon books are more popular then books for shorter distances is that training required to complete a marathon is something that you can teach yourself with the proper reference material. Where as becoming competitive in shorter distances requires a combination of good genes, individual coaching; stuff you're not going to find in books (again, this is my thoughts, not experience). Also, most running books I have flipped through have programs from 5k up to the marathon.

And to add to what a lot of others have said on this topic, the marathon run here in St. John's this past fall had half the number of runners as the half-marathon. The most popular local race was a 10 miler and had 35 times the number of runners as the marathon.

[La]

A few have said they don't care what other people think. I might ask "Are you sure?".

You ask this in such a way that can only be answered defensively or dismissively.

I think we wouldn't post on a running message board if we didn't care about each others' progress, successes and challenges.

So yes, I care. I care what my friends think, I care what my coach thinks, and I care about what other people read about me because I care about the influence I have on other people- and I hope its mostly positive.

But I DON'T chose my races based on other people's expectations, and I don't care if they somehow think I'm a less worthy distance runner if I prefer 10Ks over marathons. Or if I've never lost a toenail.

^^ This.

[PinkLady]

I read somewhere that more people run in the marathon than in the 1,500m for the whole of North America in one year. The survey of city marathons went on to say that half of the competitors ran only 42km in total in a week. That’s about 7km a day for six days. They then expect to run reasonably well, 42.2km in one day.

HALF of the competitors did this?!?!? (I'm assuming that's in training, not in taper weeks obviously). Which marathon was this survey for?

First reaction - OW!!!

Second reaction - I gotta get myself down to some of these marathons then, cuz I'd likely do really really well!

[Joe Dwarf]

I would hazard a guess that for most people, including many runners, distances 5 k and over don't have a time value attached - if you have completed that distance, you have accomplished the goal, moving on now. So of course, the longest distance you can complete is the toughest goal. Not many of us realistically have a shot at posting a competitive time at any distance but the shorter distance times are more concrete for most people. Most people know that a world-class time for 100 m is under 10 seconds but probably not many know a world class 10k is under 27 minutes. I'd wager that unless you are a serious sprinter starting from high school or earlier, very very few working adults are training for 100 m but lots race 10ks. Anybody can complete 100m - what's the point unless you're going to race it seriously? But just finishing 10k is a huge accomplishment for many. The fact that someone's 1 hour 10k time is no more remarkable athletically than a 20 second 100 m is best left unsaid.

So for those people who dream of finishing 10 k, finishing a marathon probably seems the ultimate attainable goal. Breaking 30 minutes in the 10k is just not in the cards for most of us - they're not even thinking of that.

[monkey]

I would hazard a guess that for most people, including many runners, distances 5 k and over don't have a time value attached - if you have completed that distance, you have accomplished the goal, moving on now. So of course, the longest distance you can complete is the toughest goal. Not many of us realistically have a shot at posting a competitive time at any distance but the shorter distance times are more concrete for most people. Most people know that a world-class time for 100 m is under 10 seconds but probably not many know a world class 10k is under 27 minutes. I'd wager that unless you are a serious sprinter starting from high school or earlier, very very few working adults are training for 100 m but lots race 10ks. Anybody can complete 100m - what's the point unless you're going to race it seriously? But just finishing 10k is a huge accomplishment for many. The fact that someone's 1 hour 10k time is no more remarkable athletically than a 20 second 100 m is best left unsaid.

So for those people who dream of finishing 10 k, finishing a marathon probably seems the ultimate attainable goal. Breaking 30 minutes in the 10k is just not in the cards for most of us - they're not even thinking of that.

which makes more people sign up for half marathon and marathon, and more demand of training books for these long distances. If there's training books for 400m - 1 mile, they'll probably sit in book stores collecting dusts for a long time...

[PinkLady]

I was also thinking that the other thing that makes the longer distances more attractive to the running masses is the cost of entering races. When 5K/10K races start costing $40-50 and more with taxes/processing fees added in, people start to think well, why not just pay a bit more and get 4x the amount of race?

I know I think like that.....$35 for half an hour isn't worth it, but $70 for 2 hours is a much better deal.

[HCcD]

I was also thinking that the other thing that makes the longer distances more attractive to the running masses is the cost of entering races. When 5K/10K races start costing $40-50 with taxes/processing fees added in, people start to think well, why not just pay a bit more and get 4x the amount of race?

Good point, Pinky ... Except for the odd marathon, like Goofy, MCM and now Vancouver, for example, I would rarely repeat a race, in particularly a travel destination, just for the sake of going down to a race ... and, if I were paying $500-$1,000+ for travel, hotel, etc., then a marathon and/or even a half marathon would be my minimum distance to justify the expense ...

[ultraslacker]

I was also thinking that the other thing that makes the longer distances more attractive to the running masses is the cost of entering races. When 5K/10K races start costing $40-50 and more with taxes/processing fees added in, people start to think well, why not just pay a bit more and get 4x the amount of race?

I know I think like that.....$35 for half an hour isn't worth it, but $70 for 2 hours is a much better deal.

no kidding! I paid $71 (including tax/fees) for my 10k a couple of weeks ago. An extra $10 would have gotten me into the halfM.

[mcshame]

I was also thinking that the other thing that makes the longer distances more attractive to the running masses is the cost of entering races. When 5K/10K races start costing $40-50 and more with taxes/processing fees added in, people start to think well, why not just pay a bit more and get 4x the amount of race?

I know I think like that.....$35 for half an hour isn't worth it, but $70 for 2 hours is a much better deal.

That is the biggest reason I don't run as many shorter races, and haven't run a 5k yet. I just can't get around some of the prices. For the marathon, big race, big price, I can digest this better.

[दिवंगत]

Does anyone else see the irony in how the discussion has moved to better value and cheaper price for the marathon versus shorter races, in the context of the OP?

Just because the race is shorter doesn't make it worth less... You pay for race day magic and all the services that go with race day, tangible and intangible. I know you can make a case that marathon lasts longer so more services/closures, etc. But really, not so much.

[mcshame]

Does anyone else see the irony in how the discussion has moved to better value and cheaper price for the marathon versus shorter races, in the context of the OP?

Just because the race is shorter doesn't make it worth less... You pay for race day magic and all the services that go with race day, tangible and intangible. I know you can make a case that marathon lasts longer so more services/closures, etc. But really, not so much.

ok, look at it from an entertainment perspective. 4hrs+ entertainment (a good half a day at least) versus 1hrs. Well, it's sort of entertaining, I guess...