Response to "How Oprah Ruined the Marathon"

On the Running Room forum, www.runningroom.com/discussion, someone shared a link to a CBC interview with Edward McClelland and John Stanton. McClelland wrote an article on his belief that Oprah ruined the marathon since her finishing time of 4H 30M has set a standard for others to follow suit -- resulting in more racers and the average finishing time increasing. The CBC interview is located at http://www.cbc.ca/sunday/2007/11/110407_7.html

Here are some thoughts that come to mind while watching the CBC interview:

1.) "You can even walk a marathon."

Having completed 3 marathons as a walker, I can tell you that walking 42.2K it isn't easy. It takes me about 6 hours -- and that's non-stop. I've gotten used to it so the time does go by quickly.

Without a generous time limit, folks such as myself would not be able to enter. The Toronto Scotiabank Waterfront (in late September) and the Hamilton Marathon (this past weekend) have 7 hour time limits. Even more impressive was the separate reporting of race results in the Hamlton race -- although there were only 14 of us. With 9000 (?) racers in the 5K; half; and full in the Scotiabank Waterfront, there were many walkers --my worry would after the half and full marathoners diverged at the 18K mark that it would be a lonely journey -- that wasn't the case!

I know it's tough to have the course stay open too long since it's expensive (e.g., police). I do wonder if the Hamilton marathon will continue to have an early start of 1.5 hours. It wasn't exclusive to the walkers since the race directors made it clear that anyone taking more than 5.5 hours (whether walking or running) had to take the early start due to the Lincoln expressway having to reopen. The Toronto marathon has a separate walking category for the half marathon. But the finishing times for the full marathon are close to or slightly over 6 hours -- thus, walking that marathon would be a lonely journey.

2.) "Exclusive for elites or everyday Joes?"

I forgot where I read/heard that eite runners want slower racers since the prize money would go up. Elites start in the front so us "everyday Joes" won't interfere with them. Even if there is an early start of us "everyday Joes", there are always cars or bikes that escort the lead runners -- telling us "everyday Joes" to move to the side.

Is there another sport when one can say they competed with the superstars? I can rightfully say that I was in the same race as the Kenyan that set a Canadian record of slightly less than 2H 10 M in the Toronto Scotiabank Waterfront. This sport is inclusive --some go after awards; others seek their PB; others want to finish the race upfront with a smile and not worry about time -- not to mention the charity aspect to raise money for excellent causes. At the finish line, we all get the same finishers' medal.

3.) Knowing the names of the elite runners

I know of Ryan Hall from reading the Runners' World magazine -- can't name anyone else. There is no doubt that Hall is an up-and-rising racer with superstar potential. But do I relate to him? The answer is no. Rather, I relate to people like John Stanton and John "The Penguin" Bingham (both who I met at the Toronto Waterfront marathon expo). They are folks who encourage people to run and walk for fitness and to challenge oneself.

To me, Karl Gruber is a superstar -- he completed 52 marathons in 52 weeks. I cannot relate to him but he is a superstar. His times were not award winning -- usually around 4 hours. Boston recognized his feat by waiving the qualifying time for him to run Boston.

All-in-all, I don't agree with McClelland's thinking. I didn't even know Oprah completed a marathon...