Article: There is no "should" in running

davemunger

Neat article on Competitor.com:

Last weekend, my friend Jen celebrated her first half marathon finish. As she shared her memories of the day with me, I proudly pointed out how far she had come since lacing up her first pair of running shoes only one year ago.

“I guess I have to do a marathon next.”

“You don’t sound too excited about that.”

“Yeah,” she sighed, “I’d rather go back to 5Ks.”

“So go back to 5Ks, then.”

My statement was met with a sheepish shrug. “But I should do a marathon … right?”

“Should” is a dangerous word. Especially when that word is followed by “marathon.” There seems to be an assumption that all runners must follow some sort of trajectory—first a 5K, then a 10K, then a half marathon, then a full, then qualifying for Boston, then …

Sometimes, this assumption is a naïve one—like a coworker who thinks all races are marathons—but more often than not, our fellow runners are driving this belief. At the finish line, a hearty congratulations is usually followed by “What’s next?”

“Should I do a marathon?” is one of the questions I get asked the most by runners. More often than not, a quick conversation reveals their real question: “Do I have to do a marathon?” My answer is always the same: You don’t have to do anything. Do you want to run a marathon?

Not everyone wants to follow the trajectory of “shoulds,” and that’s cool. But for some reason, runners are made to feel like sticking with a shorter distance is somehow settling; as if declaring “I run 10Ks” or “I love racing the mile” is akin to saying “I’m OK with mediocrity.” As a running buddy once lamented, “Apparently, I’m not a real runner until I do a marathon.”

That same buddy is the one who invited me do my first mile race—his favorite distance—a couple of weeks ago. The experience was … well, it was painful. It was brutal, it was sadistic, I could feel my heartbeat in my ears, and my lungs were angry for three full days after the race.

In short, it was as real as it gets.

Milers are real runners. Those who unleash the beast in 5Ks, ultramarathons, and everything in between are also real runners. Those who run without any race in mind—they’re real runners, too. That a checklist of “shoulds” exists for any runner to earn her title is preposterous.

Run what you love. Run what you are. If you’re that guy who trickles measured drops of badassery over 26.2 miles, groovy. If you’re the gal who unleashes a torrent of awesome over 5K, rock on. Don’t let anyone try to convince you otherwise.

Because if it makes you feel like a runner, that’s exactly what you should be doing.

Link to original article: http://running.competitor.com/2014/05/out-there/out-there-there-is-no-should-in-running_102898#e8v6QW2kHx1GkcPR.99

ZenInTexas

Love this! Do what make you happy.

saskie78

This is great! 5ks scare the bejesus out of me. True story

CarsonRuns

Amen!

iwannabinnarnia

Thank you for posting! Great article! Makes me feel better about wanting to stick with 5ks.. for now.....

_Josee_

Very well said!

sjohnny

I love it!

And I'd rather run a half marathon than a 5K any day. So I don't understand the "only running 5K" thing as "settling".

3dogsrunning

Also love it.

A similar topic came up when a poster responded to a question in Fitness and Exercise saying that he no longer runs 5ks because they are below his fitness level.

Runner's World this month also has a section dedicated to the 5ks and the challenges that go with them, including an article from an champion at the 5000m. She related a story about chatting with a guy on a plane on her way home from a championship in Sydney. He was into marathons and they chatted about that for a bit. He noted she seemed to know a lot about running and asked if she ran marathons. She told him no, she races 5ks. He told her that's ok, keep trying, you'll get there. :noway:

CarsonRuns

This all comes from the mentality that the achievement is the distance, not the performance. To some extent, that's perfectly fine. For newer runners, running a longer race is a challenge. The problem is that this attitude is being bolstered by running stores and charity groups, like Team in Training, for instance. They sell this idea that the marathon is the ultimate accomplishment and newer runners feel they need to get there to be successful. This just isn't true. I think it takes more training, and it's exponentially harder, to run a sub 20 (hell, even sub 22) 5K than it is to complete a marathon. Actually, I know this to be true. Look at the number of marathon finishers at any race compared to the number of people that run under 22 in a big 5K. It's astounding. If memory serves me correctly, nearly a half million Americans completed a marathon last year. I'd bet that less than 10% of that number ran a sub 22 5K.

davemunger

This all comes from the mentality that the achievement is the distance, not the performance. To some extent, that's perfectly fine. For newer runners, running a longer race is a challenge. The problem is that this attitude is being bolstered by running stores and charity groups, like Team in Training, for instance. They sell this idea that the marathon is the ultimate accomplishment and newer runners feel they need to get there to be successful. This just isn't true. I think it takes more training, and it's exponentially harder, to run a sub 20 (hell, even sub 22) 5K than it is to complete a marathon. Actually, I know this to be true. Look at the number of marathon finishers at any race compared to the number of people that run under 22 in a big 5K. It's astounding. If memory serves me correctly, nearly a half million Americans completed a marathon last year. I'd bet that less than 10% of that number ran a sub 22 5K.

Case in point: the winner of the 5K we timed this morning finished in 22:42!

http://davidsontiming.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Queen_City_Overall_PDF.pdf

Eyeballing this chart, I'd estimate that about 600 out of 10,000 runners finished under 22:00. That suggests about 0.6 % of all runners doing 22 minutes or better.

http://www.pace-calculator.com/5k-pace-comparison.php

Now we would just need to know how many people run 5Ks each year.

http://www.runningusa.org/State-of-Sport-Road-Race-Trends?returnTo=annual-reports

Looks like about 5 million. So maybe 30,000 finishers in under 22:00, compared to 500,000 marathon finishers! Wow!

sjohnny

This all comes from the mentality that the achievement is the distance, not the performance. To some extent, that's perfectly fine. For newer runners, running a longer race is a challenge. The problem is that this attitude is being bolstered by running stores and charity groups, like Team in Training, for instance. They sell this idea that the marathon is the ultimate accomplishment and newer runners feel they need to get there to be successful. This just isn't true. I think it takes more training, and it's exponentially harder, to run a sub 20 (hell, even sub 22) 5K than it is to complete a marathon. Actually, I know this to be true. Look at the number of marathon finishers at any race compared to the number of people that run under 22 in a big 5K. It's astounding. If memory serves me correctly, nearly a half million Americans completed a marathon last year. I'd bet that less than 10% of that number ran a sub 22 5K.

Case in point: the winner of the 5K we timed this morning finished in 22:42!

http://davidsontiming.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Queen_City_Overall_PDF.pdf

Eyeballing this chart, I'd estimate that about 600 out of 10,000 runners finished under 22:00. That suggests about 0.6 % of all runners doing 22 minutes or better.

http://www.pace-calculator.com/5k-pace-comparison.php

Now we would just need to know how many people run 5Ks each year.

http://www.runningusa.org/State-of-Sport-Road-Race-Trends?returnTo=annual-reports

Looks like about 5 million. So maybe 30,000 finishers in under 22:00, compared to 500,000 marathon finishers! Wow!

Wow! indeed. This is eye opening.

Thank you.

davemunger

This all comes from the mentality that the achievement is the distance, not the performance. To some extent, that's perfectly fine. For newer runners, running a longer race is a challenge. The problem is that this attitude is being bolstered by running stores and charity groups, like Team in Training, for instance. They sell this idea that the marathon is the ultimate accomplishment and newer runners feel they need to get there to be successful. This just isn't true. I think it takes more training, and it's exponentially harder, to run a sub 20 (hell, even sub 22) 5K than it is to complete a marathon. Actually, I know this to be true. Look at the number of marathon finishers at any race compared to the number of people that run under 22 in a big 5K. It's astounding. If memory serves me correctly, nearly a half million Americans completed a marathon last year. I'd bet that less than 10% of that number ran a sub 22 5K.

Case in point: the winner of the 5K we timed this morning finished in 22:42!

http://davidsontiming.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Queen_City_Overall_PDF.pdf

Eyeballing this chart, I'd estimate that about 600 out of 10,000 runners finished under 22:00. That suggests about 0.6 % of all runners doing 22 minutes or better.

http://www.pace-calculator.com/5k-pace-comparison.php

Now we would just need to know how many people run 5Ks each year.

http://www.runningusa.org/State-of-Sport-Road-Race-Trends?returnTo=annual-reports

Looks like about 5 million. So maybe 30,000 finishers in under 22:00, compared to 500,000 marathon finishers! Wow!

Wow! indeed. This is eye opening.

Thank you.

I knew something was wrong there -- that just didn't seem right. 6% of runners finish 22:00 or faster, which means 300,000 in a year. Still fewer than complete a marathon, though!

sjohnny

This all comes from the mentality that the achievement is the distance, not the performance. To some extent, that's perfectly fine. For newer runners, running a longer race is a challenge. The problem is that this attitude is being bolstered by running stores and charity groups, like Team in Training, for instance. They sell this idea that the marathon is the ultimate accomplishment and newer runners feel they need to get there to be successful. This just isn't true. I think it takes more training, and it's exponentially harder, to run a sub 20 (hell, even sub 22) 5K than it is to complete a marathon. Actually, I know this to be true. Look at the number of marathon finishers at any race compared to the number of people that run under 22 in a big 5K. It's astounding. If memory serves me correctly, nearly a half million Americans completed a marathon last year. I'd bet that less than 10% of that number ran a sub 22 5K.

Case in point: the winner of the 5K we timed this morning finished in 22:42!

http://davidsontiming.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Queen_City_Overall_PDF.pdf

Eyeballing this chart, I'd estimate that about 600 out of 10,000 runners finished under 22:00. That suggests about 0.6 % of all runners doing 22 minutes or better.

http://www.pace-calculator.com/5k-pace-comparison.php

Now we would just need to know how many people run 5Ks each year.

http://www.runningusa.org/State-of-Sport-Road-Race-Trends?returnTo=annual-reports

Looks like about 5 million. So maybe 30,000 finishers in under 22:00, compared to 500,000 marathon finishers! Wow!

Wow! indeed. This is eye opening.

Thank you.

I knew something was wrong there -- that just didn't seem right. 6% of runners finish 22:00 or faster, which means 300,000 in a year. Still fewer than complete a marathon, though!

Still wow.

CarsonRuns

I knew something was wrong there -- that just didn't seem right. 6% of runners finish 22:00 or faster, which means 300,000 in a year. Still fewer than complete a marathon, though!

Thanks for the statics to confirm my hunch. And just to close the loop, there were 541,000 marathon finishers in 2013

http://www.runningusa.org/marathon-report-2014?returnTo=annual-reports

Some other very interesting statistics in that link as well.