London Marathon

[MJD]

Re: London Marathon

I
>believe she didn't - which make her achievements all the more impressive

Right. Welch is the outlier-not Morris.

[Sprint Stat Man]

Re: London Marathon

>I'm one of the ones trying to bring some realism to this. I wouldn't call that negative.

I would. Didn't your mum ever tell you that if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all? Why do you feel the need to bring 'realism', is it not possible just once to enjoy the story? I can't work out if you object to the coverage on the grounds that (i) 2:33 is mediocre or (ii) she's a much better athlete than people are saying. Probably both.

>Luckily the general media is woefully lacking in that knowledge or it wouldn't be getting the coverage that it is.

Yes it would, because it's a great story. Even the toned-down version you prefer is a great story - started training 18 months ago at 34, has trained seriously for 6 months (around a job) and is now going to the Olympics. If that isn't a story worth celebrating, none is.

The media here in London is not, in any case, 'woefully lacking in knowledge', but is generally very well informed. There's not much track/field coverage but what there is is good. All the reports described Morris's previous achievements acurately and most made the point that 2:33 was not a complete surprise. However, the media can at least spot and enjoy a nice story when they see one, something which seems depressingly difficult for all too many on this and other boards.

[Powell]

Re: London Marathon

>I would. Didn't your mum ever tell you that if >you can't say
>anything nice, don't say anything at all?

We wouldn't have much of a discussion here if we all stuck by that... ;-)

[MJD]

Re: London Marathon

>I would. Didn't your mum ever tell you that if you can't say
>anything nice, don't say anything at all?

I can't control what you think. There is nothing "not nice" about anything I've said and I've given up the gratutitous "Gee this is a great story" which is really the post you are looking for.

Why do you feel the need to bring
>'realism', is it not possible just once to enjoy the story?

It's called discussion. Isn't that what this board is all about? For the life of me, I can't see anything in the guidelines prohibiting "realism".

I can't work out if
>you object to the coverage on the grounds that (i) 2:33 is mediocre or (ii)
>she's a much better athlete than people are saying. Probably both.

Personally, my workouts are internally driven. Couldn't care less about anything that is going on around me.


>Even the toned-down version you prefer is a great story - started training 18
>months ago at 34, has trained seriously for 6 months (around a job) and is now
>going to the Olympics.

That's not a complete version of the story.

All the reports described Morris's previous achievements
>acurately

I saw several that didn't mention her international experience or her times in the 10km and 10 miles.

>"most"

Presented without comment.

>However, the media can at least spot and enjoy a nice story when they see one,
>something which seems depressingly difficult for all too many on this and other
>boards.

I guess you'll just have to take my word for it that I am enjoying this story. I am certainly enjoying the response to it.

[Sprint Stat Man]

Re: London Marathon

>guess you'll just have to take my word for it that >I am enjoying this story.

I'll have to, because it's not apparent from your remarks, which have been entirely negative.

[Sprint Stat Man]

Re: London Marathon

>>I would. Didn't your mum ever tell you that if >you can't say
>anything nice,
>don't say anything at all?

We wouldn't have much of a discussion here if we
>all stuck by that... ;-)

I think it's sad that you can't imagine discussion without conflict. The two are often considered interchangeable - they are not.

[MJD]

Re: London Marathon

Just did a news google search to see what I would come up with. Got 133 hits-mostly UK. This is reasonably
funny-guy can't add or someone didn't edit very well:

"TRACEY Morris knocked an amazing one hour and 15 minutes off her personal best when she became
the first British woman to finish last Sunday's London Marathon."

http://icberkshire.icnetwork.co.uk/0200 ... _page.html

I then refined the search to how many hits I would get if I added "10 mile" to it. I got one- Duncan MacKay
in the Guardian who is knowledgeable but even he doesn't completely describe her junior experience-just
that she ran as school girl.

http://sport.guardian.co.uk/athletics/s ... 10,00.html

[Powell]

Re: London Marathon

I think it's sad that you can't
>imagine discussion without conflict. The two are often considered
>interchangeable - they are not.

Of course not - a discussion can be friendly if the participants can accept that the others may have different opinions. However, it seems that for you the only acceptable reaction to the Tracey Morris story is an unreserved 'oh-she's-so-wonderful' and if anyone expresses a different opinion, your reaction is telling them to shut up ('if you have nothing nice to say, just don't say anything'). I don't see how a conflict can be avoided under these circumstances.

[Asterix]

Re: London Marathon

No comment yet on the parallels between Morris and Christine Clark, surprise winner of the 2000 US Olympic Marathon trial (2:33:31, although her previous PB was 2:40:38). Also an older female (37) in the health services profession (pathologist in Anchorage, Alaska) and mother of two when she qualified. Clark also eschewed 100 mile weeks in favour of 70, many of them on the treadmill.

For what it's worth, Clark PB'd again in Sydney with a 2:31:35 performance for 19th.

[Powell]

Re: London Marathon

How about Jenny Spangler?

[Sprint Stat Man]

Re: London Marathon

>Of course not - a discussion can be friendly if >the participants can accept that the others may
>have different opinions. However, it seems that >for you the only acceptable
>reaction to the Tracey Morris story is an unreserved 'oh-she's-so-wonderful'
>and if anyone expresses a different opinion, your reaction is telling them to shut up

The first line of this reply is quite right. The second line is a hyperbolic misrepresentation of my point.

T&F boards are the most negative places I ever visit online. It seems that even people who consider themselves true fans can't avoid denigrating, questioning or "being realistic" about their sport. Every great performance is considered evidence of drug use. Every media story is ignorant, written by a fool and only half right. All TV commentators are idiots. The administration of the sport is a disgrace. Etc etc.

Tracy Morris is a little ray of sunshine in a sport mired in this negative publicity and self-destructive mindset. The inability of some to simply enjoy the story for what it is - a reminder of what is joyful about our sport - really depresses me.

For the record there is no difference of opinion here. We all agree that she did great. I simply see no need to bring out pins just to prick the balloon with some "realism". Let the balloon fly, it's the first piece of good publicity the sport has had in a while, at least in the UK.

[EPelle]

Re: London Marathon

>Let the balloon fly, it's the first piece of good publicity the sport has had in a while, at least in the UK.

Another positive:

Running raised more than $560 million for charity in 2003 according to USATF:s website (which, incidentally, needs some very serious work!).