What's your take on this New York Times article about slow people running marathons?
The best part is that one of the people quoted complaining about the slow people ran her marathon in 4:05...so it's not as if she's exactly in danger of winning a marathon anytime soon herself.
And as usual, the comments are more fun than the article itself...I'm slowly making my way through all 400 if I can!
(And for credit, I found the article through this blog! She somehow dug up the email addresses of two of the people quoted in the article, I wonder if anyone who reads her blog had the nerve to actually write them!)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
That article makes me proud to be running the Honolulu Marathon. :)
I can't believe anyone had the mindset to write that article. Do they seriously think that our society would be better off if people who finish a marathon in 6+ hours didn't even start and just sat on the couch instead? PLEASE.
I thought the article was stupid and unnecessarily inflammatory. And in classic fashion, the NYT's fitness reporting was naive. However, I love that the comments largely disagreed with the premise.
I think it is cool that there are ones like boston where you have to qualify or do charity, and I think it is 26.2 miles - I think 6:30 pace or less is an accomplishment. Otherwise, I feel like anyone that is not in shape could finish a marathon.
That's pretty shocking. Everyone has there only levels of achievement. It's a mass participation sport. I like the idea of running behind (WAY behind) Paula Radcliffe et al.
Post a Comment