Anders and his sub-3 marathon.

np426z said:

Hey, by all means have ambitions. But don't tie ambition to a set time or
distance, that's too easy. Set it against effort, measure it against hope,
judge it against dreams.

Don't listen to him Anders. He's trying to make you age prematurely. Listen to
him, and you'll instantly turn into an old man. The young Roger would most
probably never utter such wishy washy horseshit.

Quoted message said:

And always, always, remember to laugh at yourself
along the way.

Anders, will you have failed if you never achieve your sub-3? Will you
have succeeded when you dip under the mark? Are the criteria by which your
measure your running life so easily defined? And, if not, then why stress
over numbers plucked from thin air?

The numbers are a good motivator. Numbers can't be easily fooled. They must be
earned. You can fool yourself with wishy-washy feel-goodisms, but you can't
cheat the clock. I like defying the clock. Running that little bit faster does
mean something to me. Sure, running a 4:49 mile instead of a 4:51 mile might
not make much difference to the rest of the world, but for me, the feeling of
covering that distance 2 seconds faster is worth struggling for. I can't
explain it in words, you either get it or you don't.

Quoted message said:

What I think of you - and how you view yourself - should have little to do
with the times you run. Are you determined? Are you motivated? Amusing?
Thought-provoking? Do you give of your best?

Of course Anders is a fine guy, and will still be a fine guy if he doesn't go
sub 3. Part of what makes him a fine guy is his determination and courage in
his struggle against the clock, a struggle many of us share -- even those of us
who are faster than 3 hours, those of us who are much slower, and even those of
us who choose to struggle over some other distance.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

np426z said:

Quoted message said:

Hey, by all means have ambitions. But don't tie ambition to a set time or
distance, that's too easy. Set it against effort, measure it against hope,
judge it against dreams. And always, always, remember to laugh at yourself
along the way.

I read a long time ago a theory about how some people are intrinsically
motivated and some are externally motivated in sporting endeavors. Maybe
this has been covered here before, so I'm sorry if it's a boring repeat.

The article said people who are intrinsically motivated in a sport do it
because they love doing it, and they don't need to compare themselves to
others to get enjoyment out of the activity.

People who are externally motivated are more into beating other people
or a certain goal- p.b., etcetera. They also enjoy the activity, don't
get me wrong, but part of the enjoyment comes from getting better and
achieving concrete goals.

The article concluded that some of the best athletes may be
intrinsically motivated, but the world will never know about them
because they aren't interested in competing or telling others know about
their accomplishments.

I'm not sure that you can ask someone to change what motivates them.
Maybe. It certainly can change with time and experience, and maybe not
always for the better.

-J, unmotivated either way

Donovan Rebbechi <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

np426z said:

Hey, by all means have ambitions. But don't tie ambition to a set time or
distance, that's too easy. Set it against effort, measure it against hope,
judge it against dreams.

Don't listen to him Anders. He's trying to make you age prematurely. Listen to
him, and you'll instantly turn into an old man. The young Roger would most
probably never utter such wishy washy horseshit.

Quoted message said:

And always, always, remember to laugh at yourself
along the way.

Anders, will you have failed if you never achieve your sub-3? Will you
have succeeded when you dip under the mark? Are the criteria by which your
measure your running life so easily defined? And, if not, then why stress
over numbers plucked from thin air?

The numbers are a good motivator. Numbers can't be easily fooled. They must be
earned. You can fool yourself with wishy-washy feel-goodisms, but you can't
cheat the clock. I like defying the clock. Running that little bit faster does
mean something to me. Sure, running a 4:49 mile instead of a 4:51 mile might
not make much difference to the rest of the world, but for me, the feeling of
covering that distance 2 seconds faster is worth struggling for. I can't
explain it in words, you either get it or you don't.

Right on, bro. What I like about running (and what I hate about
soccer) is that you can't hide. Nancy boys like David Beckham, with
their supreme skills and pathetic work rate, would die in athletics.
Numbers keep you real, keep you honest, and tell you where you are.
In some ways, however, I think Roger has a point. The three hour mark
for the marathon is very cruel, because it comes at a point where a
moderately good club runner can find himself on the cusp forever.
With respect to them, runners at or around the four, five and six hour
marks do not wrestle in quite the same way with getting under the
hour.

My personal goal has always been a sub one hour ten miles, but
although I have done it in training (once, in 1983), I've never done
it in a race and now, at 47, I never will. I have gone under 30
minutes for five miles, so that's something I suppose. My next
realistic goal is to break 37 minutes for 10k.

Does Roger care about my feeble feats? I doubt it. Do I care that he
doesn't care? Not a jot. They're my goals, which for purposes of
illustration I share here. They matter to me, and keep me motivated.

My problem, as pointed out to me by my occasional training partner (an
ex-olympic 800 metre runner, who now runs marathons at around 2.45),
is that I don't train, I run. So as a result, I can run for a long
time (2 hours plus, and I'm not training for anything in particular)
but I can't do it very fast. He's going to come up with a 10k
training plan for me - my target race is in February, so I'll keep you
posted. Yes, Ms Thrope, doubtless you have already marked it in your
calendar.

Edward
--
The reading group's reading group:
http://www.bookgroup.org.uk

Anders is a punk.

Donovan Rebbechi <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Don't listen to him Anders. He's trying to make you age prematurely. Listen to
him, and you'll instantly turn into an old man. The young Roger would most
probably never utter such wishy washy horseshit.

Yes, early, premature resignation in the face of aging
is a terrible thing to behold:-)

But even if we should dread to enter it ourselves, we
should perhaps not be unkind to those who once could
sample the taste of true athletic achievement and who
once really knew what it felt like to be in top shape
and to run fast.

No matter what they do, their results will appear
pathetic to them (and may even seem to ridicule them),
and they can escape it only by stepping out of the
box completely. In fact, we whould perhaps be thankful
that not all of them view us with disdain or proceed to
tell us that what we are only fooling us!

Anders

"np426z" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

I can't believe they really imagine that I, or anyone else, will view them
differenly were they to shave under some magic barrier by a few seconds or
even a few minutes. If they do, then they are sadly mistaken. Ovett I
admire for his courage and personality, not for his pr's or world records.
Walker I admire for his dedication to his craft, his longevity, his
resilience. And so on...

I definitely view any citizen racer who _attempts_ to
break some magic barrier differently; I respect the
dedication and the effort, I feel a certain camaraderie
and I will root for his success (and envy it) and share
his disappointment. In fact, I view *myself* differently
since accepting the (self-presented) challenge.

I don´t so much admire or even respect those who´ve
achieved the goals (that I`ve had or I still have) as
acknowledge, however grudgingly, that achievement. And
I´m grateful for the motivation it gives me.

(BTW possibly you wouldn´t have paid attention to or
followed the careers or Ovett or Walker if they hadn´t
been succesful. There are probably quite a few perennial
also-rans who´ve demonstrated the same fine qualities?)

Quoted message said:

"Oh, but it's not for others. I'm setting targets for myself", some wail.

Well, I cannot honestly promise that I could shut up
about my eventual sub-3:-) And even if it´s only the
wordless recognition of those who´ll finish the marathon
with me that day, I´ll probably seek that eye contact and
that nod or that handshake from *others*.

Quoted message said:

Hey, by all means have ambitions. But don't tie ambition to a set time or
distance, that's too easy. Set it against effort, measure it against hope,
judge it against dreams. And always, always, remember to laugh at yourself
along the way.

I certainly think that I´ve been been able to do so (and
I hope that I´ve been able to make others, too, laugh at
me - but I know I´m often too long-winded, stuffy and
solemn to be as succesful as I´d like to).

One reason why we have always had annual feasts is to give
a certain form and a rhythm to what would otherwise be
nothing but a long run of days, and for very much the same
reason we often thrive when we think up, plan and execute
projects of various kinds.

My running would be a formless mass of activity without
my sub-3 project. No doubt I would occasionally enjoy
moments of satisfaction provided by sheer physical exertion,
moments of a feeling of flow when the running´s really
good, or moments of visual or tactile pleasure when I´m
surprised by the richness of nature and the sensations
it can provide without committing myself to a project -
but I haven´t had to sacrifice any of those moments yet.

And a project doesn´t have to be a prison or a desk
job; I "should" have been following a strict program,
but all I´ve done since Midsummer is have fun in
small orienteering races without feeling any less
dedicated, determined or motivated - because I know
I have a project to return to!

Quoted message said:

Anders, will you have failed if you never achieve your sub-3? Will you
have succeeded when you dip under the mark? Are the criteria by which your
measure your running life so easily defined? And, if not, then why stress
over numbers plucked from thin air?

Because, like the peaks of Himalaya, "they are there":-)

What else could I use to build a project around? I don´t
think I want to follow Tim or Steve...

If I succeed one day, I will paint the missing eye of my
Daruma doll and pat myself on the back so much that my
hand will be sore. Then I shall buy a new Daruma doll.

If I never succeed, I will know that I´ve at least tried,
that I´ve had a couple of interesting years in my running
life thanks to trying. One day I´ll no doubt ask the
nurse to pour me a stiff drink from the special bottle
I´ve reserved and mourn over the lost opportunities:-)

I define my running life as "very good" when I´m not
injured and I have the time to run. It´s "abysmal" when
I´m ill or injured and cannot run as much - which may
vary - as I´d like to.

Anders

"Anders Lustig" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

What else could I use to build a project around? I don´t
think I want to follow Tim or Steve...

Well, Steve is clearly mad, but equally clearly *I'm* normal and I can't for
the life of me think why you wouldn't want to follow my road.... ;-)

FWIW, much as I enjoy my long runs, the 3 hr marathon is one of my long term
targets too.

We shouldn't be too hard on Roger though. He's obviously "past it" and has
to adopt zen like philosophies to cope with his decline. Those of us who
came to running late in life can still look forward to years of
improvements.

Tim

And you're a fat slob. I cancel you out.

TABR

On 19 Aug 2004 08:51:10 GMT, [email hidden] (TheBillRodgerz)

Quoted message said:

Anders is a punk.

And I double dog dare you.

TRABR

TheAntiBillRodgers said:

And you're a fat slob. I cancel you out.

TABR

On 19 Aug 2004 08:51:10 GMT, [email hidden] (TheBillRodgerz)

Quoted message said:

Anders is a punk.

Make mine a triple!

TRRABR

TheRealAntiBillRodgers said:

And I double dog dare you.

TRABR

TheAntiBillRodgers said:

And you're a fat slob. I cancel you out.

TABR

On 19 Aug 2004 08:51:10 GMT, [email hidden] (TheBillRodgerz)

Quoted message said:

Anders is a punk.

"Donovan Rebbechi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

np426z said:

Hey, by all means have ambitions. But don't tie ambition to a set

time or

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

distance, that's too easy. Set it against effort, measure it

against hope,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

judge it against dreams.

Don't listen to him Anders. He's trying to make you age prematurely.

Listen to

Quoted message said:

him, and you'll instantly turn into an old man. The young Roger would

most

Quoted message said:

probably never utter such wishy washy horseshit.

Some people run to live and others live to run. I've been both and find
the clock a bore. I must be low on my meds, I'm agreeing Rodger. 😉

-DougF

"Tim Downie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

We shouldn't be too hard on Roger though. He's obviously "past it"

and has

Quoted message said:

to adopt zen like philosophies to cope with his decline. Those of us

who

Quoted message said:

came to running late in life can still look forward to years of
improvements.

I don't think it has anything to do with age and/or decline but a
personal view. Even during my "redlining" years and still making
improvements I grew tired of running for the clock. I run today because
I enjoy running. The only time I wear a watch is to make sure I get home
in time for a meal.

I understand and appreciate those that set goals. What I do find is
those in the redline phase think that everyone that chooses to eschew
the clock is perceived as someone that "just doesn't understand" and
throws out pejorative terms like old, declining, etc. Some people run
their entire life, never enter a race and live in ecstasy.

-DougF

Doug Freese said:

"Tim Downie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

We shouldn't be too hard on Roger though. He's obviously "past it"
and has to adopt zen like philosophies to cope with his decline.
Those of us who came to running late in life can still look forward
to years of improvements.

I don't think it has anything to do with age and/or decline but a
personal view.

Looks like my hook caught the wrong fish. ;-)

Tim
--
Remove the obvious to reply by email.

"Tim Downie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Doug Freese wrote:
Looks like my hook caught the wrong fish. ;-)

It happens when you fish with a net. 🙂 I'm sure Roger will also bite.

-DougF

Doug Freese said:

Some people run to live and others live to run. I've been both and find
the clock a bore. I must be low on my meds, I'm agreeing Rodger. 😉

And look how old you are. Don't say I didn't warn you.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

"Doug Freese" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

I don't think it has anything to do with age and/or decline but a
personal view. Even during my "redlining" years and still making
improvements I grew tired of running for the clock. I run today because
I enjoy running. The only time I wear a watch is to make sure I get home
in time for a meal.

You may not wear a watch to measure your pace, but it
strikes me that you still need a tall order, a bar set
fairly high or a "project" in the form of those long
races you do. It´s only after you have quit them or at
least stopped aiming to finish as well as you did the
previous year, conditions permitting, that I could
begin to view you as a purely recreational runner who
is essentially different from me.

Anders

Doug Freese said:

"Tim Downie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

We shouldn't be too hard on Roger though. He's obviously "past it"
and has
to adopt zen like philosophies to cope with his decline. Those of us
who
came to running late in life can still look forward to years of
improvements.

I don't think it has anything to do with age and/or decline but a
personal view.

FWIW, I think Tim's comment was a bit harsh, I wouldn't be that mean even to
Roger (the intended target).

Quoted message said:

I understand and appreciate those that set goals. What I do find is
those in the redline phase think that everyone that chooses to eschew
the clock is perceived as someone that "just doesn't understand" and
throws out pejorative terms like old, declining, etc. Some people run

No, the people who ``don't understand'' why Anders wants to run a sub 3 really
don't understand. It's a tautology. I'm not going to comment on the
``declining'' part.

Quoted message said:

their entire life, never enter a race and live in ecstasy.

Yeah, but they're wimps.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

"Anders Lustig" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Doug Freese" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

You may not wear a watch to measure your pace, but it
strikes me that you still need a tall order, a bar set
fairly high or a "project" in the form of those long
races you do. It´s only after you have quit them or at
least stopped aiming to finish as well as you did the
previous year, conditions permitting, that I could
begin to view you as a purely recreational runner who
is essentially different from me.

My training is ridiculously simple. I lay out a schedule for a race of
distance N and insure I get N long runs of time T. For an upcoming 50
mile trail race I will do about 4 runs of 5-6 hours. The distances are
25-30 miles and they have a [censored] load of elevation. My emphasis is time
on my feet which I can use a sundial for. I run my races without a
watch and simply go out easy and try to run negative splits. I do fairly
well compared to my fellow runners but that is a byproduct of loving to
run hills. I have no preconceived times. From 15 years of experience at
this long stuff I know roughly how I will do based on my training. The
only speed I do is a very infrequent local race or tempo run. My time is
my time is my time.

My success, if that is a valid term, is from running nothing but hills.
Sometimes I snag and age group award but that is not why I run. If I
added some other stuff to my training, I could do a lot better. But to
do better I would have to do what I found sucky in the past. In essence
I run long because I like it, nothing else.If anything, I enjoy my give
a [censored] attitude.

-DougF

"Donovan Rebbechi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

FWIW, I think Tim's comment was a bit harsh, I wouldn't be that mean

even to

Quoted message said:

Roger (the intended target).

I thought it was obvious that Tim was playing withg his head.

Quoted message said:

No, the people who ``don't understand'' why Anders wants to run a sub

3 really

Quoted message said:

don't understand. It's a tautology.

For you it is.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

their entire life, never enter a race and live in ecstasy.

Yeah, but they're wimps.

And to them you are a macho chest thumping speed weenie. Sticks and
stones...... 😉

-DougF