Athenas and Clydsdales (Read 821 times)

It's just about weight:

From the USAT rules, “Clydesdale and Athena athletes: Minimum weight standards for this category are 200 pounds for men, 150 pounds for women respectively, to be monitored by the local race director. The age breakdown will be 39 years of age and under and 40 years of age and over.” Most people just refer to this division as the ‘Clyde’ division in general.

Some races have award groups and even age group awards for heavier runners. They tend to be slower, but there are plenty of fast heavier runners. I've run with guys 6'3" and 200 pounds, technically Clydesdales, but they could run. But the reality is that not many are going to keep up with your average 120 pound skinny guy with no muscle mass above the waist. Those of us too stocky to be "lithe and runnerly" (don't ask) but too short to hit that 200 pounds (or 150) are just outta luck. We should probably sue somebody, since its clearly discrimination.* If I was 6'1" I'd safely be in the Clydesdales. And you're out of luck with your short people theory, by the way. According to my friend Google, shorter runners don't do so well at the middle distances and shorter, but once you get longer they do just fine. Some of the best marathoners in history are tiny Ethiopians and Kenyans. A lot of them are really, really short. Paul Tergat is 5'5". This guy claims to be 5'4" and he's probably stretching that to impress the babes: http://www.ethiopians.com/haile_gebreselassie.htm Here's a discussion on that topic, says most of the same stuff. http://www.coolrunning.com/forums/Forum22/HTML/005168.shtml Summary: being short is not an excuse. No matter how much I occasionally argue that it is. Weighing 150+ as a female (or 200 as a male) probably is a pretty good excuse. Not that you can't get fast, though. Just don't expect to beat Geb in a foot race anytime soon. * This is a joke. Mostly. Help, help, I'm being oppressed.

JK: > shorter runners don't do so well at the middle distances and shorter ... > This guy claims to be 5'4" and he's probably stretching that to impress the babes: > http://www.ethiopians.com/haile_gebreselassie.htm Um, sounds like you're saying Haile didn't do so well at middle distance Or maybe the sarcasm went right over my head...

Sorry. I wasn't clear. Two separate points (and both off topic, sorta). Shorter runners don't tend to do well at shorter distances - but seem to either have no problem or an advantage at longer distances. I just pointed to Geb because he's kind of fast and awfully short (and rather famous). Didn't mean to diss his middle distance records, just using him as an obvious example at longer distances. Being short isn't an excuse.

In fact, the argument can be made that it's an advantage. Fewer miles of veins, arteries, and capillaries you gotta pump all that blood through. That's what I tell myself, anyhow.

None of which keeps me from occasionally insisting that if my legs were 6 inches longer, I'd run really, really fast.