Only the top three marathoners need apply?

A fellow participant in my marathon-fitness training program told me yesterday (Thanks, Fran!) about an article in The New York Times that appeared three days ago.

“Plodders Have a Place, but Is It in a Marathon?” is the title of the article.

The article quotes Adrienne Wald, Head Cross-Country Coach at College of New Rochelle, as saying this:

It’s a joke to run a marathon by walking every other mile or by finishing in six, seven, eight hours. It used to be that running a marathon was worth something — there used to be a pride saying that you ran a marathon, but not anymore. Now it's, “How low is the bar?”

Excuse me?!

Wald is 54 years old and should be wise enough to know better. If Wald is fast enough to get first, second, or third in a marathon, then why can Wald not be happy with that? Why must Wald say that others' completion of the same marathon effectively cheapens Wald's completion? Does Wald believe that there should not be age-bracket distinctions? Following the logic in the quotation, the presence of older folks, who generally do not have the fastest three times across an entire marathon, cheapens the meaning of any marathon. Does Wald also believe that there should not be a distinction for men versus women? Again, following the logic in the quotation, the presence of women, who usually do not have the fastest three times across an entire marathon, cheapens the meaning of any marathon. Following Wald's thoughts to their logical conclusion, only three people should participate in any marathon. After all, anyone who finishes with a time slower than third place effectively cheapens the significance of a marathon.

Remember this …



It is the entry fees of the hundreds, thousands, or tens of thousands of participants who make it feasible for the top three runners to win first, second, and third places. Hundreds or thousands of volunteers are NOT going to support a marathon for three participants. For example, the Chevron Houston Marathon is America's premier volunteer-supported marathon with its 5,000 volunteers. But they do it to support 22,000 race-day participants, NOT three participants. Spectators, such as the some 200,000 in Houston or one million in Berlin, are not going to show up in anywhere near those numbers to watch and cheer a grand total of three participants run a marathon. The news media are not going to cover a marathon with only three participants. The top three runners typically do not run for charity. In contrast, the participants in the Chevron Houston Marathon, Aramco Houston Half Marathon, EP5K and ABB Team Challenge raised more than $1 million for charity in 2009.

Here is a suggestion for Adrienne Wald: Run all future marathons on your own. This will prevent others from cheapening your achievement, and you will always come in first place.

Have you ever come across such an elitist attitude about marathons or other foot races? What was the gist of the person's argument? What would you say in response to that argument?

Please leave a comment here. Thanks!