208 replies to this topic

[twosheds]

I would like to add that i am in awe of some of the slower runners out there. Seeing some of the last marathoners who were out there well over 6 hours and they were in real pain- much more pain than I was in at any point and I only had to endure it for a shorter time. Those people are unbelievably tough-I am not sure I would be quite tough enough to put up with that level of discomfort for that long. So well done Ayla- I think you and others like you command a great deal of respect. I know this has nothing to do with the DQ issue- i wont get involved in that.  
twosheds

[Ayla2010]

Quinkin, on 05 July 2011 - 05:41 PM, said:

Good on ya, Ayla, you're in the newspaper that's an official finish.

Disappointment is a part of running, but those disappointments make the great days you'll have even sweeter.

Congratulations, you finished that HM, enjoy your medal and T-shirt you deserve it.

No that is not me

[Ponytail]

I would've thought not being able to finish what you set out to accomplish would've been far worse than being DQ'd after crossing the finish line.  You can say you've completed your first HM, have set a time to beat for future and should be even more determined to complete in under 3 next time.  Disappointment's a part of life - best thing you can do is use it to inspire you to avoid it again.

[Quinkin]

Ayla2010, on 05 July 2011 - 06:02 PM, said:

No that is not me

Congrats anyway.

[rodthehornet]

seris, on 05 July 2011 - 04:51 PM, said:

Just wondering if the reason you were allowed to finish was because the winner of the full marathon finished after you. I can imagine the organisers would want all the half marathoners out of the finish shute before the winner ran through. Probably the main reason why the half starts at 6am and the full at 7:10am.

I thought of this on Monday, but didnt bother to check start times.  I knew the HM started a fair bit earlier, but couldnt remember by how much.  Makes perfect sense to try and have the HM runners finished before the FM runners come thru.

That Seris is a smart cookie.  

[PiledHigherq]

More marathons should institute this policy and go back to runnings roots, maybe 3'10 for those that have a bad cutoff for those that have a bad marathon.

I would personally forfeit a couple of marathon finsihes but starts would be cheaper and marathons more earned.

[Lindyk]

PiledHigherq, on 05 July 2011 - 11:00 PM, said:

More marathons should institute this policy and go back to runnings roots, maybe 3'10 for those that have a bad cutoff for those that have a bad marathon.

I would personally forfeit a couple of marathon finsihes but starts would be cheaper and marathons more earned.

Maybe go back to 2:30 for the marathon, sub 75 for the half & keep running events for national level+ runners only... & then get rid of all those pretenders running fun runs & enjoying themselves & we could all pay a special levy towards the increasing type 2 diabetes problems & encourage the less talented to stay home & watch elite sport on TV.

Interestingly most people see cut offs as necessary but for slow runners - slow seems to be about 15-30 min after that runner's current performance.

Events can't go all day so cut offs need to consider the community, the vounteers, the terrain & the purpose/aim of the event. A charity fun walk is different to an Olympic trial; road closures immediately limit time as do retail areas, other events & a scarcity of volunteers. Remote or difficult terrains also imposes time limits & can make events unsuitable. But where possible why not encourage rather than discourage people from being involved in life rather than spectating. Last year I was the last runner to finish the Fitzroy Falls Marathon in 6:37 - I cannot run at all, I walk with a stick. They let me start 1.5 hrs early so noone was delayed at the end of the event, I carried my owm drinks so the 1st drink stations didn't have to start earlier. Not possible at all events but for those of us who can't improve such consideration is gratefully received.

I'm still feeling touchy after an incident with kids targeting intellectually disabled adults & using the defence "I was joking", made worse when the father of one kid was contacted & he muttered that his kid's victims "should've be drowned at birth". Same hilarious thinking as "exploding time chips". Why should people have to hide away because their performance is limited? Despite disability, weight, physical ability people should be helped to leave the couch & do something positive. The result is physically stronger individuals but also emotionally & mentally stronger people.  

& Blue Dog people who haven't got the co-ordination for running probably aren't crash hot at quilting either! When you've had a fairly charmed passage through life it's easy to laugh at others' struggles & let's be fair there's more Poodle than Blue Dog in your credentials as an Aussie battler. Blue heelers bite tougher targets than the disabled, old & slow.

Lindy

[TropicThunder]

Lindyk, on 06 July 2011 - 02:50 PM, said:

Why should people have to hide away because their performance is limited? Despite disability, weight, physical ability people should be helped to leave the couch & do something positive. The result is physically stronger individuals but also emotionally & mentally stronger people.  

& Blue Dog people who haven't got the co-ordination for running probably aren't crash hot at quilting either! When you've had a fairly charmed passage through life it's easy to laugh at others' struggles & let's be fair there's more Poodle than Blue Dog in your credentials as an Aussie battler. Blue heelers bite tougher targets than the disabled, old & slow.

Lindy

Lindy I feel your pain reading the above post - I am sorry you had to endure that clown - not Blue Dog the other one  

The under current which I'm sensing has been brewing for a long time now is a touch of resentment to the continual "everyones a winner" "anyone who puts on a pair of runners is a champion, a legend etc".

I'll relate the climate (what i feel on CR) to kids sport in Australia. Which is now a total joke. When I played (not that long ago   )the kid who watched the seagulls fly past was taken off and had the game and the reason we're at a soccer ground explained to him - and low and behold he learned.......it took a few weeks but he learned.

Now one of my boys has had a tough 7 years of life, no charmed passage - but he busts his gut every time he enters the soccer field, gives his all, scores a couple of goals, stops some others, gets full on kicked in the back by one of the opposition players after he scored, walks off at full time covered in dirt with bloody knees - totally knackered.

Now the team's seagull watcher get's "man of the match" - as it his turn!!!. No one wins - the kid with no care or idea is rewarded, his parents jump up and down and tell him how well he played, so his behaviour is reinforced. My son is pragmatic but still upset. Now nearing the end of the season my son has worked out who getting the reward each week - so he tells the coach why should he bust his gut when XYZ will get this weeks award!!!. Mum and Dad have long discussions with son about the bigger picture to keep him motivated.

This is the issue - not the bagging of "slow runners"

[seris]

Brilliant post Tropic.

[Steve 'The Footman']

Wow this thread sure is popular.  Ayla you should certainly be proud of that.Having run Marathons from 4:20 to 2:33 I found it is much more challenging to run the slower times.  I think the feeling of achievement in completing a half marathon is even greater when the challenge is also greater.  I do not think you should let an arbitrary DQ by the organisers to diminish your wonderful achievement.

As a race organiser I would like to explain the rationale for cut-off times.  

The main reason is because of the limitations imposed by council and police permits.  If runners are allowed to continue past the cut off times then it does not bode well for future permit applications.  This may jeopardise the very existence of the event and at the least make future compliance costs much greater.

The other difficulty for long races is keeping the marshals on course.  They may have been out there for 6 hours without a toilet stop and are getting tired and hungry.  It may be a bit hard to convince them to stay a little longer for a few runners.  Police and traffic management also have to continue to be paid and that can easily cost many more times greater than the entry fee of those few runners still on course.

At the Brisbane Marathon we start the marathoners and half marathoners together and have a 6 hour cut off time that applies to both distances.  If the marathoners do not get to 20.5km in 3 hours they will be told they have missed the cut off time and continue at their own risk.  As they get to sections of the course where roads are being reopened they will be directed onto the footpath which may make them cover a greater distance.  They need to know the course as marshals may have left and they should carry their own hydration in case aid stations have closed up.  They will be reminded of the cut off times at two other locations on the course and reminded they continue at their own risk.  We still try to keep track of them with a following cyclist.  The start/finish area will begin to be dismantled at 6 hours as it takes two to three hours to pack up and the people doing the pack up have been there since 3am.  The slowest runner we have had in the last 7 years was 7:30.  However most years there is no more than one runner slower than 6 hours and a half dozen slower than 5:30.  But we get a much smaller field than Gold Coast.  I noticed that Melbourne Marathon this year has introduced an alternate route for those missing the cut offs.

I think it is unrealistic to ask event staff to pull people off the course as confrontations with tired, sore and energy depleted runners is unlikely to have a good outcome.  Last year one of Brisbane 's running identities was told to pull out with a few hundred metres to go.  He refused and got on the front page of the Gold Coast Bulletin.  It was a bigger story than the race itself.  I think Gold Coast was trying to avoid this happening again at least for the marathoners. For the half marathoners they probably stopped anyone who could not get to the finish before the first marathoner so that the photos and TV coverage just had the winners.  

You should count this as your first half marathon in 3:03.  Don't be discouraged by the DQ.  You now have a benchmark to beat for your next half marathon.

[Ayla2010]

Thanks Steve I do understand now, and am not blaming anyone.  Looking forward to a better time at the M7 relay

[undercover brother]

not sure if anyone has specifically mentioned this yet.
but cutoffs are...
10km 90mins which is 6.666666666km/hr
21.1km 3hrs: just over 7km/hr
42.2km 6.5hrs: just under 6.5km/hr
these seem pretty 'competitor friendly' to me.

[TheRuns]

Where'd you see those? Does seem fair to most but obviously it could never be fair to all.

[Ayla2010]

undercover brother, on 06 July 2011 - 05:51 PM, said:

not sure if anyone has specifically mentioned this yet.
but cutoffs are...
10km 90mins which is 6.666666666km/hr
21.1km 3hrs: just over 7km/hr
42.2km 6.5hrs: just under 6.5km/hr
these seem pretty 'competitor friendly' to me.

Yes I know I am fat and slow but everyOne has to start somewhere don't they? Or should people like me just stay home and not try?

[undercover brother]

no.
not at all.

[Ayla2010]

What are you saying then?

[TheRuns]

Ok Bro, I read it on the GCM website myself.

[slowmo]

Ayla2010, on 06 July 2011 - 06:16 PM, said:

What are you saying then?

Ayla - running is a big world full of all sorts of folk and CR is just the same. You'll find people here who are friendly and encouraging to all, and you'll find others who think anyone who isn't seriously fast and competitive is not a "real runner". All of these people are entitled to their opinions and entitled to express them, but in the end there is only one person whose opinion matters about your own efforts and that is you.

slowmo

Edited by slowmo, 06 July 2011 - 07:01 PM.

[Ayla2010]

Thanks slowmo, you are right. I finished it in what I think is reasonable time for someone who is obese and has been running for only 11 months. I am very Proud of my effort and I know I'll keep improving

[slowmo]

Ayla2010, on 06 July 2011 - 07:03 PM, said:

I am very Proud of my effort and I know I'll keep improving

Of course you will. I've seen you run and I have no doubt you'll stick with it long term and enjoy your running more and more

slowmo

[halfwaydown]

As I recall - the original thread was about the heartache of finishing just outside the official cut-off time and the disappointment  in how it was handled.  I have read many useful comments have been made to explain why and the difficulty of how to handle this better and  Ayla has graciously accepted that and moved on.
IMHO All this stuff about how friendly/competitive or not the cut off time is probably as irrelevant to this discussion as it was to the GC organisers.
And BTW cut-off times for 14km City2Surf is 4.5 hrs for the slowest runners BUT a whopping 6hrs (thats 25minutes/km!!) for the fast runners - is it any wonder we're becoming uncompetitive  

Edited by halfwaydown, 06 July 2011 - 07:21 PM.

[frankenstein]

Lindyk, on 06 July 2011 - 02:50 PM, said:

Maybe go back to 2:30 for the marathon, sub 75 for the half & keep running events for national level+ runners only... & then get rid of all those pretenders running fun runs & enjoying themselves & we could all pay a special levy towards the increasing type 2 diabetes problems & encourage the less talented to stay home & watch elite sport on TV.

Interestingly most people see cut offs as necessary but for slow runners - slow seems to be about 15-30 min after that runner's current performance.

Lindy

+1. Well said. My daughter ran in her first 10k at the GC on Saturday. When she entered the event several months ago she was worried that she wouldn't make the 90 minute cuttoff time, but hard work and consistent training got her over the line in 75 minutes. For a lot of runners this might be viewed as woefully slow, but the pride we both felt for her achievement is incomparable and now the running community has one more member who's now aiming for the half next year. The suggestion that running should go back to its roots (men only marathons, anybody?) is shortsighted and selfish.

[maryclaire]

TropicThunder, on 06 July 2011 - 04:30 PM, said:

The under current which I'm sensing has been brewing for a long time now is a touch of resentment to the continual "everyones a winner" "anyone who puts on a pair of runners is a champion, a legend etc".

....

This is the issue - not the bagging of "slow runners"

reminds me of my husband who raced our then 12 y.o. son in the pool, as well as 2 of our son's mates (same age).  My husband reached the end first and jumped out and pumped his fists in the air and did a victory dance.  The boys laughed.  I told my husband off as it was obviously not a fair competition.  He shrugged and said that these boys are on the ascendancy, while he is on the decline - and when they do eventually beat him fair and square (a matter of when, not if), their victory will be all the sweeter.

edit: the 12 y.o. is now 16 y.o. and towers over my husband and kicks his father's butt at just about everything.

Edited by maryclaire, 06 July 2011 - 07:28 PM.

[rodthehornet]

Ayla2010, on 06 July 2011 - 06:08 PM, said:

Yes I know I am fat and slow but everyOne has to start somewhere don't they? Or should people like me just stay home and not try?

Not at all.  How about SMC.  You run there every month.  Low key runs, no cuts, plenty of aid stations.  Start there, practice running the distance.  Learn how your body copes with the distance.  Build the confidence up so that you know what to expect.  Then move onto larger events with more runners and yes - the dreaded time cut.  The confidence gained in the SMC races will stand you in good stead.  

From what it sounds like, you didnt take advantage of something that was available to you every month, but you chose to jump in the deep end.  It was your decision to line up at GCM and it didnt quite go to plan.  If you got honest advice off people they would have told you in the nicest possible way that this was the best way to achieve your goals.  You might have asked people what to do and they most likely blew smoke up your backside and told you that you were doing the right thing and what you wanted to hear.  In my opinion they were wrong.

No one has mentioned you were fat or obese or any other title but yourself.  To be honest, most here either dont know you or havent met you.  When all the emotion is removed, it is a fairly abstract discussion about time cuts and the application of same.  Best to leave the emotional baggage at the front door and remain positive rather than dwell on negatives.  

I would say most if not all people on here want you to do another half marathon and do well.  That is what it is all about.  Old saying, it is not how you handle success, but how you respond to failure that defines a person (or similar - no good at quotes).   You are running for good reasons and that is what counts.  Dont get bent out of shape if the RD puts a cut on a race.  Either make the cut or choose another race.  I have wanted to do NYM for years, but cant make the grade.  No harm there, life moves on and there are plenty more races to choose from until I improve.  Use the cuts as motivators to improve, not distractions, excuses or a conspiracy theory against slow or overweight people.  

At least I kept my facebook promise to write what I think more on CR.

Good luck.
Rod

[undercover brother]

Ayla2010, on 06 July 2011 - 06:16 PM, said:

What are you saying then?

a couple of things.
first and foremost simply providing some perspective especially from a race organisers viewpoint - they need to think about who and how many are going to turn up to each event and the logistics surrounding.
secondly about goal setting.
one of my favourite sayings is 'if you never DNF then you've never explored your limits'.
(not saying you DNFed - the saying is more relevant to ultras; but i think i am correct in saying that you didn't achieve your goal of <3 hours?)
it's a very inspiring saying but to be honest DNFing/missing goals suck (i should know) and also as a new runner you're less likely to 'explore' things without injury or other setbacks.
it's nice for people to be 'encouraging' as say well done, keep it up etc...
but in the end you need to decide what you want to achieve and in what timeframe.
i have no idea what you did to prepare for the HM, how many 10-20km races/training runs, how much mileage etc...
but in the end the best advice/encouragement people can receive is from people who run with them, know about their training have experience and can look them in the eye and either say 'good luck for the step up to a marathon in a month' or 'do you think you would've gained more from a successful 10km race?'.
good honest advice.
i hope you have people around you that can tell you this.
best of luck with your next race!
edit: was still typing and rod said pretty much the same thing. must be good advice!

Edited by undercover brother, 06 July 2011 - 08:06 PM.

[Ayla2010]

What do you mean I didn't take advantage of what was available to me? So you are saying I shouldn't have tried?

[Ayla2010]

And you think i just one day decided to do the half without training properly?
Yes I had some time off earlier this year due to a problem I had way back when I was pregnant that didn't go away, plus recent illness.
I have been working all of this year towards that half, it was everything to me. Things on the day made me waste a bit of time, and yes I should have just gone faster, but I did the best I could. My splits right up until about 15 km or so were consistent and pretty good for me.  I am not a super lean super fit athlete just yet, but I will be. Maybe I did try for my first half too soon, but I was confident and I thought I could do it. I finished and that is what matters to me.
I can only improve from here.

A while ago I did worry that I might not make the cut off, but I then thought that I could and decided to focus on the positive and on the day I truly thought I would make it.

[Jimmy4990]

Not many here are running for money. We are running for many other good reasons. It is important to remember those reasons. Rules, regulations & alike may cause us some short term grief but we must not allow them to dampen our enthusiasm to do the best we can be. Whatever the reason. I understand both sides of discussion on this thread but at the end of the day if other people & the decissions they make can lessen your resolve, you need to get some more resolve. Set Backs are an essential part of ambition.

[Peterhorse]

"what you focus on expands"... i like that saying so much it's in my signature... it's deep... it works - positves, negatives, whatever the focus.

Ayla, let's focus on the goal not the past huh?

think CAN and start focussing on the next attempt :-)

have a gander at this

Good luck - i'll back you for a kick ass experience some time soon. go you good thing!

PH

[Perseus]

Summarising what happened:

Competitors after the cut-off were allowed to finish and had their place, time, splits etc. published at gcm.com at about 3pm. They still received a medal and t-shirt.

About 5pm their record was changed in the results to a "DQ" with no additional details. For the marathon this meant those with a nett time greater than 6.30 were disqualified.

22 finishers between 6.30 and 7.33 were DQ'd from the marathon and a significantly larger number from the half. The majority of those DQ'd from the marathon were Japanese including the guy carrying a sousaphone.

(The slowest official time I could find from the GC was 8.45 in 2000)

[NKOTB]

TropicThunder, on 06 July 2011 - 04:30 PM, said:

Now the team's seagull watcher get's "man of the match" - as it his turn!!!..

This is the issue - not the bagging of "slow runners"

   Not to mention the end of season trophy awarded to all players which my son like the best. Someone tell me please, when did all this encouragement and egalitarian stuff been going on for. Kids nowadays are way too soft IMHO.
   Great post TT and once again not bagging "slow runners".

New_Kid

[plu]

Hi all,

Nothing like robust debate, though there is some extrapolation and assumed knowledge required to understand some posts which I am not picking up on. I will let this pass through to the keeper.

I understand the need for cut offs and I helped a friend through the four  cutoffs  (10, 11,15 and 21 km ) for the SMH half this year actually making the first one by 1 second. We finished in the last 20 out of 11000+ overall.


Three hours was the cut off fair enough - my view is that it could be much more generous.

The Gold Coast run has the capacity for all runners to be involved for all distances with much more generous cut offs because it has multiple races on essentially the same course.

Just to  give one example that comes to mind. I finished the marathon and was walking to drinks at 1:30 pm while there were people still on the  same course as the half marathon  many hours later ( ie:4:30 hours  after the cut off) not 9:00am - surely there is no  need for such a rigid cut of for a race amongst multiple races.

The Gold Coast 5, 10 , 21 and 42 has the unique ability to allow a lot more to have a go - lets let more have a go at experience what we experience.

Now back to #tdf - they have serious cut offs - ask Tom Boonen the sprinter about this tonight.

cheers Plu

[blair]

Why is everyone tiptoeing around the real issue here? You have said you are "fat" and "obese". If you want to improve you need to do something about that. See a dietician and get your diet sorted out and lose some weight. Then, without any additional training, you will improve your times. I dare say you'll probably feel a lot better about yourself too. Good luck with it. I hope you keep running.

[SurfStrider]

blair, on 07 July 2011 - 08:21 AM, said:

Why is everyone tiptoeing around the real issue here? You have said you are "fat" and "obese". If you want to improve you need to do something about that. See a dietician and get your diet sorted out and lose some weight. Then, without any additional training, you will improve your times. I dare say you'll probably feel a lot better about yourself too. Good luck with it. I hope you keep running.

You call your self an administrator, no wonder there are so many rude and arrogant comments which are posted everyday which are allowed to continue.

Ayla has mentioned she still has weight to lose, if you read her signature you can see that she has done a tremendous job to date and still is striving for more.  As part of her program she is obviously running to reach those goals (plus i am sure she is loving running like the rest of us).
I think she is deserving of the congratulations she has been getting and seems like she had done the work and only just missed the cut off, so her expectations were not to far off her performance (there is a contradiction in UCB post suggesting one one hand that you can't know your limits until you DNF and on the other hand suggesting that you should work your way up to without ever pushing the limits - so i think she has not attempted the HM too early - as her expectations seem to have closely matched her performance).

It appears that some people don't like having people who don't like like greyhounds racing because it must detract from the Kudos they like to give themselves - crap if someone who doesn't look as fit as me can finish than that reduces my bragging rights.

There have been many studies showing the difference between exertion and speed and they show that there is no difference in exertion between a slow runner and a fast runner - they genreally work equally hard in the event, so therefore have pushed themselves just as hard http://www.ncbi.nlm..../pubmed/8558627

Ayla mentions on her signature the target weight loss she still has to go - i would challenge these exploding time chip, make cut offs faster, people to throw on a back back with that percentage of weight above their ideal and see how well they go, having done many bushwalks i would say that most couldn't do it, but even that wouldn't be a like for like comparison because you will likely be coming form a base of many years of running.  I think then you might understand the reason for congratulations.

Which brings me to this theory about seagull watchers - now i wont challenge on what the best parenting method as I am not a psychologist and haven't done the studies in that area, but that is hardly a justification for the fact that people seem to be unable to congratulate someone who has put in a gutsy effort - it is insulting to link that story with Ayla's experience.  But lets take that idea further and let the course of time develop.  Perhaps because that seagull watcher never had the parenting to push him towards running he doesn't get into it and maybe due to a bunch of other reasons he puts on weight - so 20 years later he lacks running conditioning and is overweight, and then at some point in the future of his own volition he decides to change his life and start running - he does his training, works his butt off and he completes his target event - I would say that story and effort is worth more congratulations than anything i have achieved from a physical exertion level as it has always been relatively easy for me, you would seem to suggest they are not worthy of congratulations due to a lack of external factors or not being on the path long enough - perhaps we won't congratulate anyone who doesn't achieve an age record? Why suggest that because of circumstances in that persons past (in your example poor parenting and teaching methods) that they are somehow lesser when they make the conscious choice on their own behalf- as Lindy suggests, you haven't been in there shoes or walked or probably don't know their story.

I am not someone who gives out false praise, but i think Ayla deserves congratulations.  She has got over her cut off disappointment as she now better understands some of the reasons and is determined to keep going.  I think she did a great job and reading the comments from people who seem to know her this has come from a lot of hard work.  Keep it up.

[UnfitnessFanatic]

Ayla2010, on 06 July 2011 - 08:46 PM, said:

What do you mean I didn't take advantage of what was available to me? So you are saying I shouldn't have tried?

Ayla2010, on 06 July 2011 - 09:03 PM, said:

And you think i just one day decided to do the half without training properly?

Re read this whole thread, the only person saying you are slow and fat is yourself and noone has said you shouldn't have run or that you didnt do enough training.  

You need to take this as a learning experience and grow from it.  If you don't then what's the point of posting here seeking advice then not accepting it cause of your own insecurities.  

Im sure as are alot of other people here are that you are going to get out there and smash a huge chunk out of that 3.03 half marathon time at your next race.  Especially now that you know how you coped with running the distance on the training you did and with your experiences from the race ie stopping for the toilet.

[SirPlod]

blair, on 07 July 2011 - 08:21 AM, said:

Why is everyone tiptoeing around the real issue here? You have said you are "fat" and "obese". If you want to improve you need to do something about that. See a dietician and get your diet sorted out and lose some weight. Then, without any additional training, you will improve your times. I dare say you'll probably feel a lot better about yourself too. Good luck with it. I hope you keep running.

Very helpful comment there.

I’d say that the part in her signature where it says “Weight loss to date: 33.2 kg - 23.8 kg to go” pretty much indicates that she IS doing something about it. Sheesh.

[blair]

SurfStrider, on 07 July 2011 - 09:08 AM, said:

You call your self an administrator, no wonder there are so many rude and arrogant comments which are posted everyday which are allowed to continue.

Not sure what rude and arrogant comments you refer to but I don't recall ever seeing any of these posts reported by you so how am I supposed to know about them. I have a life - I can't read everything.

As for the rest of your post I'm not sure I understand your point. I am merely providing some constructive criticism. Ayla can either take it for what it is and hopefully it helps or she can ignore it and blame everyone else for her problems.

SirPlod, on 07 July 2011 - 09:16 AM, said:

I’d say that the part in her signature where it says “Weight loss to date: 33.2 kg - 23.8 kg to go” pretty much indicates that she IS doing something about it. Sheesh.

Well excuse me I'm sure for not reading every single word that appears on the page. My mistake. I won't attempt to help anyone ever again.

[Waverider12]

blair, on 07 July 2011 - 09:25 AM, said:

Ayla can either take it for what it is and hopefully it helps or she can ignore it and blame everyone else for her problems.



Well excuse me I'm sure for not reading every single word that appears on the page. My mistake. I won't attempt to help anyone ever again.

She asked for your help?  I though the thread was about her DQ.

[Colin]

blair, on 07 July 2011 - 09:25 AM, said:

Not sure what rude and arrogant comments you refer to but I don't recall ever seeing any of these posts reported by you so how am I supposed to know about them. I have a life - I can't read everything.

As for the rest of your post I'm not sure I understand your point. I am merely providing some constructive criticism. Ayla can either take it for what it is and hopefully it helps or she can ignore it and blame everyone else for her problems.

Well excuse me I'm sure for not reading every single word that appears on the page. My mistake. I won't attempt to help anyone ever again.

Blair,
Administrator or not, your post was out of line. How about starting by reading title of the thread you are commenting on if you don't have time to read everything.
Oh..and you can take this as a 'report' to you.

Waverider12, on 07 July 2011 - 10:05 AM, said:

She asked for your help?  I though the thread was about her DQ.

Exactly.

Should there be a cut off, what should it be etc ...up to organisers, they need to manage their logistics.
DQ or DNF...DNF because she has broken no rule.
Should she have been allowed to stay on the course...why not, creates less problems.

plu, on 07 July 2011 - 01:13 AM, said:

.....there is some extrapolation and assumed knowledge required to understand some posts which I am not picking up on. I will let this pass through to the keeper.

The way an admin/mod should be responding.

[mutk]

Just briefly,

IF you were denied access to the finish line - even if you are technically disqualified - THAT would have been nasty. Especially if you missed the cut off by 3 or 4 minutes.

The organisers did not do anything wrong, and in my opinion displayed sensitivity in permitting many non-finishers ( as in the technical DNF due to not crossing the finish line within the well advertised cutoff time) to cross the line.

I am extremely impressed with your guts and fortitude in hanging in there to go the distance. And now I fully expect that someone as mentally tough as you clearly are will also accept the simple fact that you failed to be classified as a finisher because of this technicality. And move on to better thing sand more success !!!

[AthleticLisa]

If you think the loo stops prevented you from finishing in the cut off time.. (3 loo stops.. at least 1 min each i think)
Then do what supersam1979 said to me, get some orca tri shorts and just piss in your pants and wash it down at the next water aid station!!

Sorry but someone has to shed some light on the thread as its getting a bit serious and nasty     

You have done very well to lose the weight that you have so far. I commend you for that as most people trying to lose that amount of weight just give up and certainly dont put themselves into long distance running to do so.  
Do you yourself a favour and put this behind you NOW and focus on the next event.

Good luck!

[Wedgetail]

Looking through this thread, there are a couple of issues.

First, is it reasonable for Race Directors to set conditions such as maximum times.  The answer has to be yes and if we accept the conditions on entry to the race we then need to accept that the DQ of DNF is reasonable.   I would prefer that they use DNF but it is really up to the RD.

The second issue is why we run in the first place:
If we run to get fit then the RD decision is not important. You are succeeding.
If we run to lose weight, same.
If you run to post a PB then the first one is always a PB. You know it.  Just do better next time. The DQ doesn't matter as next race you have a new PB (hopefully).
If we did the run to run with others as a social event, still no problem.
If its to experience running a course that you usually can't or don't run, again no problem, you've done it.

Its really only if you want your name and time published that there is a potential problem.  The big question now is whether the problem is with the RD or is it with the thinking on why you run.  

I suspect you run for all the right reasons but have just forgotten that these are far more important than getting your name published.  Put it behind you and get running again or it could destroy what has been your motivation for a healthy and fit you.

[maryclaire]

Ayla2010, on 06 July 2011 - 09:03 PM, said:

I did the best I could. .

that sums it up - if in your heart of hearts you know that you did your best, then there's nothing anyone can say to denigrate that effort.  I know I've had some shocking races where I came way disappointed however with honest self-reflection, if I knew that I had given all that there was to be given on that day, then I could only be satisfied.  On the other hand, I've had some poor performances where honest self-reflection led me to accept that I had indeed failed to give the event 100% and in these cases I had to cop it sweet - and of course, learn for next time.

You also state that your splits for the 1st 15km were consistent and "pretty good for me".  Does this imply that perhaps you went out too fast?  After all is said and done on this thread, a good race strategy is imperative.

Edited by maryclaire, 07 July 2011 - 10:55 AM.

[Gismo76]

UnfitnessFanatic, on 07 July 2011 - 09:12 AM, said:

Re read this whole thread, the only person saying you are slow and fat is yourself and noone has said you shouldn't have run or that you didnt do enough training.  

You need to take this as a learning experience and grow from it.  If you don't then what's the point of posting here seeking advice then not accepting it cause of your own insecurities.  

Im sure as are alot of other people here are that you are going to get out there and smash a huge chunk out of that 3.03 half marathon time at your next race.  Especially now that you know how you coped with running the distance on the training you did and with your experiences from the race ie stopping for the toilet.

UnfitnessFanatic is correct. Except for his name that is.  He lost all rights to use that name after the performances he has been putting in. Learn from the experience and keep up the great effort you have achieved thus far and build on it. If you keep up your training and effort the next Half Marathon you run will be under 3 hours.

As for the cut-off times, they were advertised and there are reasons for enforcing it. As some others have pointed out, it would have been better to just list "did not make cutoff time" instead of just DQ for those who did cross the finish line.

Still a good effort in nearly getting there in time and enjoy the fact you made it the full distance. Keep up the good effort.

Edited by Gismo76, 07 July 2011 - 10:58 AM.

[Steve 'The Footman']

Runners with ability don't just look like they are doing it easy.  It really is easier for them.  Talent is an unfair arbitrator of speed and effort.  I have been a runner at the pointy end and while you are running closer to your maximum it is just so much easier to do that.  Being overweight (for me) and unfit now I found it much harder to run a sub 2 hour half at Gold Coast this year then my PB 68 minutes.  And this was despite trying to run at an easy realistic pace the whole way.  Part of the problem is you are out there a lot longer so the suffering is extended.  Of more significance is the extra pounding you take when you are not a wippett.  I would like to see how fast the female winner would have run carrying an extra 50kg for the race.

I have nothing but admiration for the 3+ hours half marathoners and especially for those who have turned their lives around to achieve it.  I think the fact that running is a sport that is open to all ages, abilities and sizes is what makes it so great.

If anyone is worried about not making a half marathon cut-off time then come run at Brisbane on August 7th.  You have six hours and need to run 17 minutes/ km to be able to finish.

Edited by Steve 'The Footman', 07 July 2011 - 11:40 AM.

[Colin]

Wedgetail, on 07 July 2011 - 10:51 AM, said:

..... if we accept the conditions on entry to the race we then need to accept that the DQ of DNF is reasonable.   I would prefer that they use DNF but it is really up to the RD.

/////

..... The DQ doesn't matter as next race you have a new PB (hopefully).

Sorry to labour this point, but it is the crux of the complaint on which this thread is based.

As an RD -6FT, SMC etc- it is not up to me to DQ someone for not finishing, absolutely not. It is a DNF

Runners at 6Ft who finish after 7hrs or get pulled from the course by sweepers are classed as DNF -Did Not Finish.

Runners who (hypothetically) abuse officials, take a short cut, start in wrong wave, use the bridge instead of going through river would all be disqualified and classed as DQ, because they have broken a rule.

There is a huge difference in the stigma associated between DNF and DQ, and it is not up to the RD to arbitrarily classify you as one or the other.

[KevinCassidy]

maryclaire, on 03 July 2011 - 06:52 PM, said:

Can I throw a cat amongst the pigeons and query why a medal/shirt is given to arunner who's been DQ'd?  That in itself seems contradictory to me.

As for the cut-off (which seems arbitrary to us runners) it is common practice to not be given official results if one is slower than the cutoff time.  If you want a harsh experience of this, simply look to the Comrades Marathon!  Now THAT is harsh.

Agree, Grace.  Cut offs are cut offs.  Race organisers don't hide them beforehand, they are part of the entry information like everything else.  Best example is the Western States 100 miler in the US.  Cut off is 30 hours. I can't remember the year but a woman once crossed the line in 30:00:05 with a large crowd [including the organisers] loudly urging her on.

No result, no medal, no record of having run...come back next year and try again.  And the woman concerned had no gripes at all, "They are The rules and I knew them before I started" she said.

The thing is, if you let someone be recorded for finishing 5 seconds outside the cut off, then you have to do it for someone in the future who may be 10 seconds over....and so on and so on....the floodgates are then well and truly open.

[Anne Victor]

Blue Dog, on 03 July 2011 - 07:47 PM, said:

Another strong case for the introduction of Exploding Timing Chips.

Dog out.

My hero!   Welcome back to CR!

[Android]

Steve, on 07 July 2011 - 11:39 AM, said:

I have nothing but admiration for the 3+ hours half marathoners and especially for those who have turned their lives around to achieve it.  I think the fact that running is a sport that is open to all ages, abilities and sizes is what makes it so great.

The best comment I have heard in a very long time. Well said and I agree whole heartedly !

Get out to the SMC races and you'll see Ayla2010 giving her heart and soul along with the rest of us.

[Android]

Colin, on 07 July 2011 - 11:44 AM, said:

As an RD -6FT, SMC etc- it is not up to me to DQ someone for not finishing, absolutely not. It is a DNF

Runners at 6Ft who finish after 7hrs or get pulled from the course by sweepers are classed as DNF -Did Not Finish.

Runners who (hypothetically) abuse officials, take a short cut, start in wrong wave, use the bridge instead of going through river would all be disqualified and classed as DQ, because they have broken a rule.

There is a huge difference in the stigma associated between DNF and DQ, and it is not up to the RD to arbitrarily classify you as one or the other.

The term "DQ" is a sticking point for me aswell so if it's any comfort to you Ayla2010 I'll proudly stand by you as a fellow DQ'r knowing that I also did the best I could (admittedly my DQ is for a very different reason, my timing chip is sitting somewhere in the gutter between the 35km and 40km timing mats !).

To Colins point a DQ is as he described it in my humble opinion. You'll have to excuse me for the serious dose of sour grapes but when you see a runner registered as a sub 3 hour finisher who didn't cross the timing mats after 30km has a second half split 30 minutes faster and is shown walking over the finish line you wonder why this acronym has not been applied to them yet ?