John B
10-06-2010, 08:17
The facts: I'm 49 yrs old, 6'0, and weigh 202. On Sept 26, I ran the State to State half marathon. My time was 1:58:20, for a 9:06 pace. I finished 243 out of 503 registered entries. The winner was a 29 yr. old guy who weighed I'd guess about 135. His time was 1:11.
My analysis: I expected to win the race. I always expect that. I tried to win the race. I ran as fast as I could. The other guy was faster; in fact there were 242 other people faster than me that day. I'm in a trail race in November and I'm entering another marathon in Florida in late December. I'll try to win those. Maybe I will, maybe I won't. Maybe I'll qualify for Boston, maybe I won't. But no matter where I finish, it will be exactly where I deserve based on my time in comparison to all others.
The PC running world (aka "He ain't heavy, he's my brother"): You mean I don't have to finish 243rd? I can be a top-10 or maybe even #1 while still being a slow chub? You see, it just ain't fair that I have to compete against people who are in great shape, who have talent, who don't scarf doughnuts, and who train +60 miles a week. Because just like Garrison Keillor says, in America "all the women are strong, all the men are good looking, and all the kids are above average ." Everyone gets a medal here no matter how slow they are.
According to an article in the NY TIMES, the latest thing is not only to categorize runners by gender and age (the more categories, the better the chance of being "#1"), but now to add in a weight category. Nope, fatties like me aren't called fatties, we're "Clydesdales"! Tell people the unvarnished truth and they get their feelings hurt, so let's candy coat everything.
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/04/weight-classes-aim-to-balance-races/
It gets better, too, 'cause there are different classes of Clydesdales (btw, in the pc world, women fatties aren't Clydesdales, they're "Athenias). So if I put it all together, in my gender, age group, and now weight category, I didn't really finish 243rd, I came in 1st! I love 21st century Amerika. I really do.
My analysis: I expected to win the race. I always expect that. I tried to win the race. I ran as fast as I could. The other guy was faster; in fact there were 242 other people faster than me that day. I'm in a trail race in November and I'm entering another marathon in Florida in late December. I'll try to win those. Maybe I will, maybe I won't. Maybe I'll qualify for Boston, maybe I won't. But no matter where I finish, it will be exactly where I deserve based on my time in comparison to all others.
The PC running world (aka "He ain't heavy, he's my brother"): You mean I don't have to finish 243rd? I can be a top-10 or maybe even #1 while still being a slow chub? You see, it just ain't fair that I have to compete against people who are in great shape, who have talent, who don't scarf doughnuts, and who train +60 miles a week. Because just like Garrison Keillor says, in America "all the women are strong, all the men are good looking, and all the kids are above average ." Everyone gets a medal here no matter how slow they are.
According to an article in the NY TIMES, the latest thing is not only to categorize runners by gender and age (the more categories, the better the chance of being "#1"), but now to add in a weight category. Nope, fatties like me aren't called fatties, we're "Clydesdales"! Tell people the unvarnished truth and they get their feelings hurt, so let's candy coat everything.
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/04/weight-classes-aim-to-balance-races/
It gets better, too, 'cause there are different classes of Clydesdales (btw, in the pc world, women fatties aren't Clydesdales, they're "Athenias). So if I put it all together, in my gender, age group, and now weight category, I didn't really finish 243rd, I came in 1st! I love 21st century Amerika. I really do.