Yesterday's 5K: Stopped Runners for Traffic

arussell134

I was super excited for my 5k yesterday and had a time goal of sub 25 minutes. I'd trained for that, and was reasonably confident I could pull it off.

The first mile was tough, b/c I had to weave around quite a few runners (it was a very crowded event), but I was still on track to meet my goal. About a mile or so in though, they stopped the runners - to let a car go by! I was standing there, kind of stunned - but what do you do? But then it happened again, this time they stopped to let several cars go by. I could not believe it. I noticed a little bit farther down the course, they were stopping runners to let the commuter train go by!

At this point, I really struggled mentally and felt like what did it matter? While I know things outside my control could always happen at a race, I guess I did not expect something like this. And I didn't have enough energy/mental toughness to know how to recover from it.

My finish time was 25:08, which made it even more heartbreaking. I emailed the race folks my experience & thoughts. I did place well - #8 for my age group out of 766 and 95th female overall (over 5100). (This is good for me anyhow - I used to routinely place bottom 50%.)

So two questions: 1) have you ever had this happen during a race before? Stopping the runners to let cars or other people go by? 2) any tips for how I could have handled myself better in the final mile or tips for becoming mentally tougher to handle unforeseen obstacles during a race?

I'd love your thoughts & feedback. Thanks!

snowflakesav

This is not typical of chip timed races. definitely let the race directors know that they need to align themselves to support the running community. If runners were stopped for other than a safety issue or train they need to clarify with the city about course usage. You ran a great time!

arussell134

snowflakesav wrote: »

This is not typical of chip timed races. definitely let the race directors know that they need to align themselves to support the running community. If runners were stopped for other than a safety issue or train they need to clarify with the city about course usage. You ran a great time!

OK thank you. I've just never had that happen and was so taken off guard. Thanks for your encouragement. I did email the race directors this morning.

dalhectar

The big question I'd have is did course marshalls treat faster (or slower) runners any different, or did they treat groups of runners in a larger or smaller pack different.

If the course marshalls let the top finishers speed through and block traffic, but then started stopping racers for traffic that would be awful.

Might have been a stipulation on the special use permit for the 5k that traffic flow had to be maintained for specific crossings. Also if it was a more casual race, such as a charity run, course marshals place safety over halting traffic and race officials incurring the wrath of drivers being stopped in traffic for perhaps up to 20-30 minutes.

Nothing you can do about a train though. A train can't stop. Course should have been routed to avoid train lines.

arussell134

dalhectar wrote: »

The big question I'd have is did course marshalls treat faster (or slower) runners any different, or did they treat groups of runners in a larger or smaller pack different.

If the course marshalls let the top finishers speed through and block traffic, but then started stopping racers for traffic that would be awful.

Might have been a stipulation on the special use permit for the 5k that traffic flow had to be maintained for specific crossings. Also if it was a more casual race, such as a charity run, course marshals place safety over halting traffic and race officials incurring the wrath of drivers being stopped in traffic for perhaps up to 20-30 minutes.

Nothing you can do about a train though. A train can't stop. Course should have been routed to avoid train lines.

It was the Shamrock run in Portland, so a large race, but I'm beginning to wonder what the agreement may have been with the city. It's entirely possible there were stipulations I wasn't aware of, but also weren't communicated. And, I agree about the train - route a different course!

This race is HUGE and in addition to the 5k, there was an 8k, 15k, and inagural half. Finish line was chaos. My husband was watching for me and said when the 5k leaders came through they were entirely missed because the race staff was paying more attention to the other finishers. DOH.

The other issue, they had the 5k walkers start before the runners. So about 2 miles in, bam, I found myself having to navigate around walkers (many who were walking 2-3+ abreast).

I'll be curious to hear if I get a response. It may just be I live & learn and pick a better race next time to attempt to PR. Thanks for your thoughts.

RunnerElizabeth

So I ran a HM out here in Newton (runs down heartbreak hill of Boston Marathon fame). There is a spot that particularly effects the 9-10 min pace people, you know, me. It's actually right after heartbreak hill, I think it was mile 11, I got stopped at a major intersection. Totally threw me off, my pace dropped after it happened, I think I lost 3 minutes for the whole ordeal, ran 2:06 that day. I think that there was a note about it on the website though. It was annoying and i couldn't get my mojo back, but I live in a city and kind of expect this sort of thing.
But, in a 5k, that would just completely suck.

vcphil

arussell134 wrote: »

two questions: 1) have you ever had this happen during a race before? Stopping the runners to let cars or other people go by?
Yes. Last year, at a huge major USATF race they made an announcement that the meto train thing/rail/idk what it's called Would be going by at "X" time. They laid time mats down right before and after it in case you did get stopped. However, ignored his statement because I figured I'd beat the train crossing time. Luckily I did.

2) any tips for how I could have handled myself better in the final mile or tips for becoming mentally tougher to handle unforeseen obstacles during a race?

Maybe just tell yourself it's just practice/just a workout. It'll make a good story? You'll be able to have a boat lpad of excuses to why you didn't hit your goal time. Lol.. I've ran races in very icy/unplowed roads before, and I thought the roads were going to be clear. Sometimes, I talk to other people after the race & make a joke of it. Ask what they thought of the race. It's really inevitable that some unforeseen things happen during a race :-) luckily it was just a local 5k! Image training all year for a marathon & tapering, and even traveling across the country for a race then at the start, they CANCEL the race when the gun was supposed to go off.

I'd love your thoughts & feedback. Thanks!

_Waffle_

This sounds like the biggest cluster FFFF that ever was for any race. Don't feel too bad. I'm sure they started the people with canes before the walkers and the double amputees were the first out of the gate.

I expect traffic lights on long runs in town but if I had this during a race I'd never do it again. Ever. I've never been in a race where you had to stop for traffic. Sounds like terrible planning and design.

Congrats on the time! Sounds like you would have broken 25:00 easily without the interruptions.

lporter229

Yeah, that's pretty bad. I once did a 5K (inaugural 5k for a local theater group) where a part of the path was flooded, so the just took it out. Made the course almost a quarter mile short. I have noticed that as the popularity of 5K races has picked up, it has become more common to have events put on by people with no real running experience. They don't really understand that some people take this stuff seriously!

When I run a 5K, I try to get a feel for the level of running "professionalism" involved. If it doesn't seem serious, I just treat it as a fun run. But if I am going to give an all out effort to try and PR, I would definitely like to know ahead of time that it's a certified course.

lishie_rebooted

I don't think I'd ever do that event again, and potentially other events by that company. It'd piss me off so bad.

I've been in races, recently a 10 miler, that had cars stopped and if there was a big enough gap between groups of runners, they let the cars go. But I didn't witness them stopping runners for it. I could imagine stopping walkers, which sounds really mean, but still...

Have you heard back from the RD yet?

litsy3

I think if the race was expensive to enter, one of the things you are paying for is road closures, so I'd expect to know what my entry fee went on if not providing a clear course to run on. I've done races where marshals let traffic past, but only when there was a suitable gap between runners. I think it's only acceptable if it's an untimed fun run.

brandiuntz

That's crazy. Never heard of that before. I'd never run that event again. Sounds like it was very disorganized (walkers before runners?!). Curious what the race director says back.

I've become somewhat picky about the races I do, especially 5k's. If they're more "fun" than "race", I avoid them because my pet peeve is walkers/runners who don't respect (or know) the basic etiquette of a race. Only in my third year of running and I've been in some fantastically well organized races and a few lousy ones. Makes a difference in the experience.

Congrats on your time, though. You would have blown 25:00 out of the water if not for the stops.

CarsonRuns

Never ever seen this before. I would have just walked off the course.

The_Enginerd

I wouldn't be doing another run with that group ever again. Sounds VERY poorly executed. If this was just a cheap 5k fun run for charity, that's one thing, but they had a 1/2 marathon on this event. It should be more serious.

arussell134

Thanks everyone for commiserating. Part of me was wondering if I was just being a poor sport and should suck it up, but it's nice to know that yeah, this isn't the norm.

The thing is, I've done races for years, but only in the last few months have decided to go after it more competitively. I thought choosing a large race would mean = more professional.

I will definitely let you guys know if I hear back from the race director.

So here's my off-shoot question: if you are after a PR as I am, what kinds of things would you look for when selecting a race? I live in the Seattle/Tacoma area, in case anyone here lives or runs in that area and has any particular recommendations.

I have appreciated everyone's sympathy/kind words as well as advice today. Thanks, friends!

arussell134

CarsonRuns wrote: »

Never ever seen this before. I would have just walked off the course.

I was extremely tempted to do just that, but we'd driven down to Portland to do it (I'm from Tacoma) and I knew my kids and husband would be waiting for me excitedly at the finish line (it almost never works out where they can watch me finish).

brandiuntz

arussell134 wrote: »

Thanks everyone for commiserating. Part of me was wondering if I was just being a poor sport and should suck it up, but it's nice to know that yeah, this isn't the norm.

The thing is, I've done races for years, but only in the last few months have decided to go after it more competitively. I thought choosing a large race would mean = more professional.

I will definitely let you guys know if I hear back from the race director.

So here's my off-shoot question: if you are after a PR as I am, what kinds of things would you look for when selecting a race? I live in the Seattle/Tacoma area, in case anyone here lives or runs in that area and has any particular recommendations.

I have appreciated everyone's sympathy/kind words as well as advice today. Thanks, friends!

Don't laugh, but if I'm going for a PR in a 5K, I look for a small race that's been around for a few years. Small races are the only way I have a chance to place high in my age group (which I've done twice). If the race has been around a few years, there's a better chance the "bugs" have been worked out and it runs smoother. I also look for causes I believe in.

Smaller races are nice, too, because I can start close to the front and have fewer people to go around.

litsy3

arussell134 wrote: »

So here's my off-shoot question: if you are after a PR as I am, what kinds of things would you look for when selecting a race? I live in the Seattle/Tacoma area, in case anyone here lives or runs in that area and has any particular recommendations.

I would choose a race that has fast winning times in previous years, even if I can't run that fast - a good quality field usually means (1) you won't end up running on your own whatever your pace, and (2) if the winners run fast times, it means that fast runners pick that race because they know it is a good race for a PR.

I live in the UK so I don't know the running scene in the US at all and I get the impression that you have a lot more races that emphasise participation rather than competition, but I'd also be looking out for races that local running clubs target, perhaps by checking out their websites if they have a race calendar on there.

The_Enginerd

arussell134 wrote: »

So here's my off-shoot question: if you are after a PR as I am, what kinds of things would you look for when selecting a race? I live in the Seattle/Tacoma area, in case anyone here lives or runs in that area and has any particular recommendations.

Is the course USATF certified? If they bother getting certified, they are at least serious about the event.

litsy3

Oh, and brandiuntz can type faster than I can! I like small races too, but for me I think it's: small race if I want to win or place, big race (usually) if I want a PR. I was trying to PR at 10k last autumn and there were two races on consecutive weeks. I picked the first one - bigger race, hosting the Scottish championships, more expensive - for the PR attempt, and did the second one - local race, cheap and easy to get to - just for fun. So I got my PR but was 14th female overall, and in the second race I won by miles but was over 30 seconds slower and ran a fair bit of it on my own (too far behind the guys in front, too far ahead of the next runners). The company in the bigger race plus the more competitive atmosphere helped a lot with the PR.

arussell134

brandiuntz wrote: »

arussell134 wrote: »

Thanks everyone for commiserating. Part of me was wondering if I was just being a poor sport and should suck it up, but it's nice to know that yeah, this isn't the norm.

The thing is, I've done races for years, but only in the last few months have decided to go after it more competitively. I thought choosing a large race would mean = more professional.

I will definitely let you guys know if I hear back from the race director.

So here's my off-shoot question: if you are after a PR as I am, what kinds of things would you look for when selecting a race? I live in the Seattle/Tacoma area, in case anyone here lives or runs in that area and has any particular recommendations.

I have appreciated everyone's sympathy/kind words as well as advice today. Thanks, friends!

Don't laugh, but if I'm going for a PR in a 5K, I look for a small race that's been around for a few years. Small races are the only way I have a chance to place high in my age group (which I've done twice). If the race has been around a few years, there's a better chance the "bugs" have been worked out and it runs smoother. I also look for causes I believe in.

Smaller races are nice, too, because I can start close to the front and have fewer people to go around.

Not going to laugh. My last 5k was exactly that. I placed 2nd female overall. BUT - and here is the big BUT - my Garmin read 25:37 and their 'official' time was 25:01. One of these is obviously off. By a lot. I wouldn't let it prevent me from choosing a smaller race again, but the chip timing accuracy is obviously going to be important to me.

arussell134

litsy3 wrote: »

arussell134 wrote: »

So here's my off-shoot question: if you are after a PR as I am, what kinds of things would you look for when selecting a race? I live in the Seattle/Tacoma area, in case anyone here lives or runs in that area and has any particular recommendations.

I would choose a race that has fast winning times in previous years, even if I can't run that fast - a good quality field usually means (1) you won't end up running on your own whatever your pace, and (2) if the winners run fast times, it means that fast runners pick that race because they know it is a good race for a PR.

I live in the UK so I don't know the running scene in the US at all and I get the impression that you have a lot more races that emphasise participation rather than competition, but I'd also be looking out for races that local running clubs target, perhaps by checking out their websites if they have a race calendar on there.

THAT is excellent advice & completely makes sense to me. Thanks. In this case, I'm more concerned about achieving my personal best than being a top finisher.

arussell134

litsy3 wrote: »

Oh, and brandiuntz can type faster than I can! I like small races too, but for me I think it's: small race if I want to win or place, big race (usually) if I want a PR. I was trying to PR at 10k last autumn and there were two races on consecutive weeks. I picked the first one - bigger race, hosting the Scottish championships, more expensive - for the PR attempt, and did the second one - local race, cheap and easy to get to - just for fun. So I got my PR but was 14th female overall, and in the second race I won by miles but was over 30 seconds slower and ran a fair bit of it on my own (too far behind the guys in front, too far ahead of the next runners). The company in the bigger race plus the more competitive atmosphere helped a lot with the PR.

Yes, this makes complete sense to me. It's fun to place at the smaller races, but I'm really gunning for my PR. I could see selecting difference races for different goals. Ah, it's a whole new ball game once you decide you actually want to race - and not just do a "fun run!"

Roxiegirl2008

I have seen that once before to a smaller race but not one with that numbers. Did you at least get a cool medal? That was my saving grace. HA

I was totally off my game on Saturday. I ran the St. Paddy's race in Tacoma and it was AWFUL!!!! There was little to no course support, the runners had to circle back around on each other...not only were you dodging the people you were passing you had to dodge the people that were coming back up the course. There was no separation at all. It was cold, rainy, hilly and windy. Yeah nothing I could do about the hills or the weather it just really got into my head. I swear my marathon seemed shorter. To kick me when I was totally down I went to get my gear check bag it is was sitting in a puddle of water. My shirt was soaked and I was cold. Yeah not my best race. I still managed to beat my PR by 7 seconds which annoyed me even further. HAA I guess it was one of those weekends.

arussell134

Roxiegirl2008 wrote: »

I have seen that once before to a smaller race but not one with that numbers. Did you at least get a cool medal? That was my saving grace. HA

I was totally off my game on Saturday. I ran the St. Paddy's race in Tacoma and it was AWFUL!!!! There was little to no course support, the runners had to circle back around on each other...not only were you dodging the people you were passing you had to dodge the people that were coming back up the course. There was no separation at all. It was cold, rainy, hilly and windy. Yeah nothing I could do about the hills or the weather it just really got into my head. I swear my marathon seemed shorter. To kick me when I was totally down I went to get my gear check bag it is was sitting in a puddle of water. My shirt was soaked and I was cold. Yeah not my best race. I still managed to beat my PR by 7 seconds which annoyed me even further. HAA I guess it was one of those weekends.

Nope, no medal. I did get a SUPER cool race shirt and a sweet race bib to add to my wall (I've been creating a wall of my race bibs in my garage, above my treadmill).

AH! Did I know you were in Tacoma? That's my hometown. I had several friends that did that race. At one point I was wondering if I should have done that one instead. Based on what you said, sounds like my experience there wouldn't have been much better! But, good for you for sticking it out and getting your PR.

I'm doing the Tacoma City Half in May & Sound to Narrows 12k in June. You running either/both of those?

brandiuntz

arussell134 wrote: »

litsy3 wrote: »

Oh, and brandiuntz can type faster than I can! I like small races too, but for me I think it's: small race if I want to win or place, big race (usually) if I want a PR. I was trying to PR at 10k last autumn and there were two races on consecutive weeks. I picked the first one - bigger race, hosting the Scottish championships, more expensive - for the PR attempt, and did the second one - local race, cheap and easy to get to - just for fun. So I got my PR but was 14th female overall, and in the second race I won by miles but was over 30 seconds slower and ran a fair bit of it on my own (too far behind the guys in front, too far ahead of the next runners). The company in the bigger race plus the more competitive atmosphere helped a lot with the PR.

Yes, this makes complete sense to me. It's fun to place at the smaller races, but I'm really gunning for my PR. I could see selecting difference races for different goals. Ah, it's a whole new ball game once you decide you actually want to race - and not just do a "fun run!"

Too true about looking at races differently when you have different goals. I'm so new at this, a new PR and placing well are about the same for me. (5K PR is 27:32)

I'll get an interesting test in a few weeks. Running a 5K because of the charity. I think it's going to be a small race, so I'll try for a new PR and hope that also means placing in my age group.

I've been lucky on timing so far. My GPS watch is only off because I tend to forget to stop it! Took me nearly a minute to remember at a half I ran yesterday.

Roxiegirl2008

We are doing the Portland Rock and Roll 1/2 in May. I have heard the other two are much better though. Yeah I have heard a couple of others that ran it talking about it as well. I mean there you go up a hill around 12.5 mile mark...then down a hill and then up one at MILE 13!!! I mean really mile 13. HAAAA

arussell134

Roxiegirl2008 wrote: »

We are doing the Portland Rock and Roll 1/2 in May. I have heard the other two are much better though. Yeah I have heard a couple of others that ran it talking about it as well. I mean there you go up a hill around 12.5 mile mark...then down a hill and then up one at MILE 13!!! I mean really mile 13. HAAAA

Oh HECK to the NO. In my opinion, all races should have the last mile downhill! LOL! Didn't they get the memo? I had a friend that did REALLY well on that half yesterday - she finished in 1:40! Pretty darn fantastic, esp after hearing how you've described the course!

Roxiegirl2008

arussell134 wrote: »

Roxiegirl2008 wrote: »

We are doing the Portland Rock and Roll 1/2 in May. I have heard the other two are much better though. Yeah I have heard a couple of others that ran it talking about it as well. I mean there you go up a hill around 12.5 mile mark...then down a hill and then up one at MILE 13!!! I mean really mile 13. HAAAA

Oh HECK to the NO. In my opinion, all races should have the last mile downhill! LOL! Didn't they get the memo? I had a friend that did REALLY well on that half yesterday - she finished in 1:40! Pretty darn fantastic, esp after hearing how you've described the course!

That is awesome for your friend!! Yeah they missed that memo!!! HAA

3dogsrunning

I was going to post here some differing thoughts until I checked out the race. If it was a "fun run" I wouldn't have been upset. Also, where I am, we cannot obtain permits to close the roads at all. All of the races are done on open course and our course marshalls do not have the authority to stop traffic. In most cases it isn't an issue. Courses are on low traffic roads and with Police assistance the busier intersections are handled, but I could see a case where the odd runner may have to yield to traffic.
However, after checking out the site, they even say it was a closed course with the exception of emergency vehicles. I would not have been happy.

arussell134

3dogsrunning wrote: »

I was going to post here some differing thoughts until I checked out the race. If it was a "fun run" I wouldn't have been upset. Also, where I am, we cannot obtain permits to close the roads at all. All of the races are done on open course and our course marshalls do not have the authority to stop traffic. In most cases it isn't an issue. Courses are on low traffic roads and with Police assistance the busier intersections are handled, but I could see a case where the odd runner may have to yield to traffic.
However, after checking out the site, they even say it was a closed course with the exception of emergency vehicles. I would not have been happy.

I tried to go back and check on that too.... like did I miss something here? Had it been communicated somewhere beforehand, I would've opted for another race. And yeah, had I been doing this one just for fun, I would've lowered my expectations. Apparently this is one of the biggest runs in Portland and the leading males all had times around 15:xx and females well under 20 minutes as well. I may be scratching my head about this one for awhile, lol. But had you seen something I'd missed, I would've 100% been open to differing thoughts/POVs.

Honestly how I'm feeling this afternoon: mostly just mad at myself for not fighting hard enough to gain back those seconds. GRRR.