Around the Bay 30K 2013 Changes

[DougG]

You are an angry dude. Yikes you must really love slowpokes like me who enter races for, oh I don't know....fun.

[cbaker1]

Math is not my strongest suit, but it really seems like walkers have more time to finish ATB than they do a marathon if you look at it on a per km basis.

If I did my calcs right, if there is a 6 hour limit on many marathons, it works out to just over 8:30 per km pace. Around the Bay is being more generous and offering 9 minutes per km. (Again math is weak for me, so the figures could be wrong and I could be corrected!)

Race directors have to balance a fine line. Keep participants happy, sponsers happy, paid police happy, paid medical staff, volunteers happy etc.

I will never be a race director because I would have to say it like it is. Around the Bay was upfront after last years race when they opened this years registration and stated the limits. RD should have made this clear in the Hamilton Spec. newspaper article and just told them to stop their complaining using other cut offs from other races as examples about how generous ATB is to walkers compared to marathons...

I thought it died down, but I was / am involved in an online pissing match with the Green Bay marathon RD after I publicly posted a reply from him when I wrote about my displeasure in how he cancelled the race midway through the event last year due to idiots continuing to push themselves in extreme heat and then needing medical attention, ruining the experience for more conservative runners. Sometimes when you write online comments, you dont fully explain yourself or you come across as elitist when you don't really mean to be so harsh. In my case I think both me and the RD from Green Bay wrote letters that probably should have been given more thought before we hit send. I will give fingerboy the benefit of doubt ... I think the Hamilton Spectator published a non-news event by listening to grumpy/miserable people that probably complain about the weather too.

[Robinandamelia]

My 2 cents on this regarding walkers surrounds the medal system. Because they have gold, silver and bronze medals based on "GUN" time, having the walkers start early, and then encountering them en route, like someone said, sometimes multiple walkers wide on the road, could be the determining factor between your medal. So while most races are for fun, and times (except for winners) are based on chip times, it's not the case at ATB. I think having them start at the back, like any event, is where they should start. I'm not a super fast runner but I find that it's hard to maneuver around the walkers especially when you are tired. Unfortunately, I find that a lot of them are not too tolerant of runners and don't at all try and leave a clear path.

What would have been the point of ATB having start corrals based on speed if you are just going to have the walkers start in the front anyway.

[Double Bellybuster]

...I thought it died down, but I was / am involved in an online pissing match with the Green Bay marathon RD ...

Are you able to share the URL for our entertainment purposes? I am surprised on this one - you are one of the more thought-out and fact-based posters on RM so you must have just hit the wrong button with him. Awesome!

[La]

My 2 cents on this regarding walkers surrounds the medal system. Because they have gold, silver and bronze medals based on "GUN" time, having the walkers start early, and then encountering them en route, like someone said, sometimes multiple walkers wide on the road, could be the determining factor between your medal. So while most races are for fun, and times (except for winners) are based on chip times, it's not the case at ATB. I think having them start at the back, like any event, is where they should start. I'm not a super fast runner but I find that it's hard to maneuver around the walkers especially when you are tired. Unfortunately, I find that a lot of them are not too tolerant of runners and don't at all try and leave a clear path.

What would have been the point of ATB having start corrals based on speed if you are just going to have the walkers start in the front anyway.

I tend to agree. I think starting walkers early was good for the RD because it meant that they could open up the roads sooner (so it would be less costly) given that walkers would be out on the course longer. It was also nicer for the walkers because they'd be finished earlier in the day. That said, it's clear by the size of the field now that it's not practical to have walkers start early. Putting them at the back makes perfect sense to me - though only if you also ensure that runners are seeded properly, too!

I think the approach they are taking this year is a step in the right direction. Hopefully they'll evaluate whether the changes were effective and tweak them as necessary.

[canalrunner]

Not sure people walking on a tread mill clog a treadmill any more than people running on a treadmill. Helpful tip #1: get there earlier. Helpful tip #2: buy your own. Helpful tip #3: run outside Helpful tip #4: stop this buzzing in my ear--it feels like a low whine.

Walkers may be a victim of their own success. An early start probably made sense when the numbers were small and so any clogging of the course for the faster runners was minimal. However thanks to very successful walking programs, more people are getting fitter through walking and use the "race" as affirmation of their success. I see nothing wrong with that and don't see them tainting the success of the "real racers". If the numbers are now too large, Having slower runners and wakers start at the back just makes sense. Along with instructions of how to finish the distance after the course closes (sidewalks etc..) would respect everyone's "rights" and allow everyone to succeed. In any race, you will be passer and passee---think we may be overstating how much clogging of the course and "interference" there is in a race.

[toobusy]

unless you are in the lead and winning money, affirmation is really all a 'race' is anyway.

[La]

Not sure people walking on a tread mill clog a treadmill any more than people running on a treadmill. Helpful tip #1: get there earlier. Helpful tip #2: buy your own. Helpful tip #3: run outside Helpful tip #4: stop this buzzing in my ear--it feels like a low whine.

+1

Although this is slightly off topic, I struggle with this sometimes when I see people "wasting" space on a piece of equipment at the gym because they're not "working out" as "seriously" as I think they should be. But you know what - they paid their membership fee just like I did, so if they want to waste their time doing useless movements on a piece of equipment, that's their prerogative.

To bring it back on topic the same goes for race entry fees. You pay your money, you get to race. It's not up to me (or anyone else) to a) determine whether that person is "serious" enough to be allowed to race, b) determine if that person is there for the "right" reasons. This is especially true of charity runners who get so much flak from "serious" runners. Sometimes I feel guilty when I'm in a race (like the London Marathon last year where 80% of runners were charity runners, proudly wearing their charity's logo on their singlets) and people ask, "Which charity are you running for?" and my reply is, "Um, no charity. Just for myself."

[AjaxRunner]

Not sure people walking on a tread mill clog a treadmill any more than people running on a treadmill. Helpful tip #1: get there earlier. Helpful tip #2: buy your own. Helpful tip #3: run outside Helpful tip #4: stop this buzzing in my ear--it feels like a low whine.

+1

Although this is slightly off topic, I struggle with this sometimes when I see people "wasting" space on a piece of equipment at the gym because they're not "working out" as "seriously" as I think they should be. But you know what - they paid their membership fee just like I did, so if they want to waste their time doing useless movements on a piece of equipment, that's their prerogative.

To bring it back on topic the same goes for race entry fees. You pay your money, you get to race. It's not up to me (or anyone else) to a) determine whether that person is "serious" enough to be allowed to race, b) determine if that person is there for the "right" reasons. This is especially true of charity runners who get so much flak from "serious" runners. Sometimes I feel guilty when I'm in a race (like the London Marathon last year where 80% of runners were charity runners, proudly wearing their charity's logo on their singlets) and people ask, "Which charity are you running for?" and my reply is, "Um, no charity. Just for myself."

I agree with your sentiment, but also strongly believe that the company/organizer gets to decide the rules and what type of event they want. Customers/runers/walkers can then decide if they want to participate/buy entry or not. As a business/organizer you will always annoy some subgroup of your customers with pretty much every decision you make.

[turd ferguson]

Not sure people walking on a tread mill clog a treadmill any more than people running on a treadmill. Helpful tip #1: get there earlier. Helpful tip #2: buy your own. Helpful tip #3: run outside Helpful tip #4: stop this buzzing in my ear--it feels like a low whine.

+1

Although this is slightly off topic, I struggle with this sometimes when I see people "wasting" space on a piece of equipment at the gym because they're not "working out" as "seriously" as I think they should be. But you know what - they paid their membership fee just like I did, so if they want to waste their time doing useless movements on a piece of equipment, that's their prerogative.

To bring it back on topic the same goes for race entry fees. You pay your money, you get to race. It's not up to me (or anyone else) to a) determine whether that person is "serious" enough to be allowed to race, b) determine if that person is there for the "right" reasons. This is especially true of charity runners who get so much flak from "serious" runners. Sometimes I feel guilty when I'm in a race (like the London Marathon last year where 80% of runners were charity runners, proudly wearing their charity's logo on their singlets) and people ask, "Which charity are you running for?" and my reply is, "Um, no charity. Just for myself."

As long as they don't think they're entitled to line up at the front of the pack, couldn't agree with you more.

On the topic of charity runners, I did have a funny conversation with a charity organizer in Vancouver a couple years back (can't remember which charity) where she basically accused me of being selfish for running for myself and not for any charity.