or swim, or bike ... but doing it anyway.
That was a great article. Particularly since it was written by someone not slow, fat, or undertrained. When I started running nearly 20 years ago, the "standard" for many years after that for the marathon was under 4 hours for women. If you were slower, you didn't attempt the distance. By the time I did my first marathon, and finished in 4:10 (that would be a dream time for me now!), I felt it wasn't good enough because I felt I was expected to qualify for Boston on my first attempt. Coincidentally, my first marathon was Chicago, and that year has gone down in history as the COLDEST year to date. But yet, I felt bad about my 4:10 finish. Why? Because of the expectation by others that I "should" be able to finish faster. (If I coulda, I woulda) And because one guy at my gym finished in 2:35, someone who while a very nice guy had no concept of what it was like to be over 40 and finish over 4 hours. So it was good to reach Mark's article. Thanks for posting it.
mark is one-of-a-kind.
Thanks for posting this... good read definitely.
Thanks for linking that! I have intentionally been trying to avoid people slamming slow runners so it is nice to see them being stuck up for by someone fast!
Yep, I left him a comment, good for him--and all of us:-)
Post a Comment