Competitive Jerks Racing and Training - 2023 (Read 572 times)

JMac11


RIP Milkman

     

    I'm outraged with some aspects of the discussion - generally the views expressed by those on one far side of the debate.  I have multiple non-running friends who believe that the women's division of all sports should be open to all who identify as women, independent of physiology.  Some of those friends believe that there is truly no difference in performance physiology wise, and that any difference that does appear is either minimal or the result of cultural factors.  Others believe that inclusion should be the highest priority in sports.

     

    That latter point really ticks me off, honestly.  I think that's because I grew up in a time where women were encouraged to be active and play sports (thanks, Title 9) but we were encouraged to do them for fun, for the physical benefits, and for the joy of interacting with our peers.  Being competitive against anyone except yourself - i.e. wanting to win - was a social faux pas.

     

    So when someone tells me that women's sports are about inclusion, and that I should be fine with losing to someone who identifies as female but has male physiology, I get really angry.  Because it sounds like a return to an earlier era I thought we had moved past, where men are encouraged to want to win and to demand fair competition, but women should welcome and nurture everyone.

     

    At the same time, as I've noted before, I do think that defining what is physiologically female is much harder than having someone drop their pants.  And that it is possible, for someone who was born physically male to transition to a different sex.

     

    So I take a middle position, which pretty much aligns with where World Athletics has currently fallen.

     

    All of this is spot on. Honestly anyone who thinks this is just because of cultural factors is delusional. These people have a world view narrative, facts be damned. It's the world we live in today (and yes, this is definitely a "both sides" issue). Do they think 12 year olds don't compete in the NBA also because of cultural factors?

     

    This entire topic is very complicated and I'm very happy to see this is a place where people are arguing legimate points in both directions without just throwing out ad hominem attacks, which is where much of this goes sadly. Ultimately I feel closer to where Steve does - that there may just need to be a third category. Although even that has its pitfalls as trans men vs trans women who transitioned pre-puberty would not be fair either, which all then leads to one sad conclusion: just one single open division, which is the end of women's sports.

     

    And to flavio - I think it is fair for someone in your position to feel that way. Many of us on this thread though have daughters, and I can't imagine where this issue will be in 10 years. It won't be the one off case anymore.

    5K: 16:37 (11/20)  |  10K: 34:49 (10/19)  |  HM: 1:14:57 (5/22)  |  FM: 2:36:31 (12/19) 

     

     

    JMac11


    RIP Milkman

      Just a note on more "local" issues - looking like a windy race for me. I haven't had a good half marathon forecast 3 straight races now! I am not really looking forward to this race which worries me a bit as I've lost a bit of fire, but hoping that is just temporary. Going out and running halfs at least 2 minutes slower than PR in windy cold conditions doesn't do it for me anymore!

      5K: 16:37 (11/20)  |  10K: 34:49 (10/19)  |  HM: 1:14:57 (5/22)  |  FM: 2:36:31 (12/19) 

       

       

      wcrunner2


      Are we there, yet?

        Just a note on more "local" issues - looking like a windy race for me. I haven't had a good half marathon forecast 3 straight races now! I am not really looking forward to this race which worries me a bit as I've lost a bit of fire, but hoping that is just temporary. Going out and running halfs at least 2 minutes slower than PR in windy cold conditions doesn't do it for me anymore!

         

        In another group the QOTD earlier this week was asking about windy races.  Way back in January 1972 I ran the 1st Jersey Shore Marathon, an out and back from Asbury Park north to Sandy Hook Park and back.  We had a nice tailwind on the way out, then had to finish running into about a 20 mph wind. Despite being well off my PB I consider this one of the best races I've ever run. I managed the conditions much better than most of the runners with a small positive split of about 2:00 and final time of 3:00:59, while many of the others were running positive splits of 20:00 or more. I also moved up from 40th at the turnaround to finish 18th.

         2024 Races:

              03/09 - Livingston Oval Ultra 6-Hour, 22.88 miles

              05/11 - D3 50K
              05/25 - What the Duck 12-Hour

              06/17 - 6 Days in the Dome 12-Hour.

         

         

             

        JMac11


        RIP Milkman

          Thats so funny. I had a jersey shore half scheduled this past October but it was 35+ mph and I bailed and ran in CT where it was only 20.

           

          The winds on the shore can be brutal!

           

          I've just had bad luck with half marathons. 4 of my last 5 have been either very windy or hot. I've had one good race. It just wears on you when you keep getting bad race weather days (not to mention NYC last fall).

           

          Luckily I have 5 more races scheduled this spring, something I've never done before. Hopefully 2 or 3 of those turn out to be nice days.

          5K: 16:37 (11/20)  |  10K: 34:49 (10/19)  |  HM: 1:14:57 (5/22)  |  FM: 2:36:31 (12/19) 

           

           

          darkwave


          Mother of Cats

            Shamrock Half-Marathon 2017

             

            The 17 MPH wind listed here was a massive undercharacterization.

             

            As you can see, I went out at over 7 minute pace (for me then, that was a bit slower than goal marathon pace) into the headwind, and then ran the later miles at around 6:20-ish with the tailwind.

            Everyone's gotta running blog; I'm the only one with a POOL-RUNNING blog.

             

            And...if you want a running Instagram where all the pictures are of cats, I've got you covered.

            JMac11


            RIP Milkman

              Is Heartbreak Hill at Boston more difficult than 5th Avenue at NYC? 

              I didn’t do my homework when I ran NYC and didn’t realise that 5th Avenue was a gradual uphill climb (which feels like a mountain at mile 23) and thought I was dying a slow death. But once I got to Central Park I recovered and managed a “sprint” finish to sneak under 3 hours!

               

              Hard to compare. It's much steeper, but it's much earlier in the race. It's also after a series of other rolling hills.

               

              The problem with NYC is that it just lasts...for...ever. Personally I'd take Heartbreak over the 5th Avenue hill, but that's just my style: I like to get the damn thing over with. The other problem with 5th Avenue is that you get to the top of the hill, and then it's a good mile of level running. With Heartbreak, you get a downhill almost immediately to help recover.

               

              But don't worry: at CIM, you'll be laughing all the way to the bank with the downhills 

              5K: 16:37 (11/20)  |  10K: 34:49 (10/19)  |  HM: 1:14:57 (5/22)  |  FM: 2:36:31 (12/19) 

               

               

              JMac11


              RIP Milkman

                Shamrock Half-Marathon 2017

                 

                The 17 MPH wind listed here was a massive undercharacterization.

                 

                As you can see, I went out at over 7 minute pace (for me then, that was a bit slower than goal marathon pace) into the headwind, and then ran the later miles at around 6:20-ish with the tailwind.

                 

                Unfortunately, NYC is almost a straight shot to the NNW. This wind is a WNW wind. So a diagonal headwind the entire race. Obviously better than a direct headwind, but the problem with a point to point race is you just get 0 relief from that wind. It's almost more the mental wearing down than the physical.

                 

                But hey - ya'll ran the 2018 Boston Marathon, so I can't complain.

                5K: 16:37 (11/20)  |  10K: 34:49 (10/19)  |  HM: 1:14:57 (5/22)  |  FM: 2:36:31 (12/19) 

                 

                 

                mmerkle


                  RP That workout would be good on any given day. Doing it two days after a 5k is definitely a good sign. Good call sticking with effort too. What's up with the stomach issue though? Just a one off or is that normal during long tempos for you? I imagine 6 at T is probably the same stimulus as 2 X 3 with short recovery so I don't blame you for combining. I personally can't stand repeats of any distance over a mile. I'd rather run it continuously. What I've read is a short recovery of 1 to 2 minutes isn't really enough to clear lactate and recover, so the effort feels about the same throughout. Which leads me to believe the recovery may just serve as a mental boost.

                   

                  Dw That's a very balanced perspective with the added bonus of explaining your personal experience. I wasn't aware that transitioning seems to level the field more for distance running than some other sports. I'll keep that in mind. I also agree that inclusion should not be the top priority in competitive sports. That's just not their intended purpose I don't think. I understand them as tests for sets of athletes who are reasonably "alike" within a certain tolerance. That immediately implies some degree of EXclusion is needed.

                   

                  I somewhat like the idea of having an open category as a third category. Will it be perfect? No, but I can't help but wonder, if it really comes down to it, are we going to inconvenience the large number of athletes who are biologically female, or the, as dktrotter pointed out, small number of athletes who are Trans female?

                  CommanderKeen


                  Cobra Commander Keen

                     

                    All of this is spot on. Honestly anyone who thinks this is just because of cultural factors is delusional. These people have a world view narrative, facts be damned. It's the world we live in today (and yes, this is definitely a "both sides" issue). Do they think 12 year olds don't compete in the NBA also because of cultural factors?

                     

                    This entire topic is very complicated and I'm very happy to see this is a place where people are arguing legimate points in both directions without just throwing out ad hominem attacks, which is where much of this goes sadly. Ultimately I feel closer to where Steve does - that there may just need to be a third category. Although even that has its pitfalls as trans men vs trans women who transitioned pre-puberty would not be fair either, which all then leads to one sad conclusion: just one single open division, which is the end of women's sports.

                     

                    And to flavio - I think it is fair for someone in your position to feel that way. Many of us on this thread though have daughters, and I can't imagine where this issue will be in 10 years. It won't be the one off case anymore.

                     

                    This whole thing seems to me as having been made overly complicated. I'm just quoting you here because your comment perhaps comes closest to the below and serves as a good starting point.

                     

                    Having an "open" category and a female (XX chromosomes exclusively and/or physiology past/current/future that gives capacity to produce large, sessile gametes - these two are actually the same) category should be all that's necessary. For some reason having categories by male and female sex (which is essentially the same as above) seems too simple

                     

                    Having a 3rd (or any subsequent) groups based upon how a person "identifies" makes as much logical sense as having a category defined by favorite color or food. All of those are or can be considered "fluid", and none of those have anything to do with physiological performance capacity.  People can identify however they want, but it has no impact upon biology. Biology is not a social construct.


                    The organization of sport is fundamentally meant to give everyone a fair shot - not an equal one. If things were "equal" or "equitable" then Usain Bolt would have started behind everyone else/everyone else started ahead of him, we would have had Michael Phelps starting after everyone else, etc. That's akin to Harrison Bergeron for sports.

                     

                    Two categories are all that should be needed to supply the most fair, level playing field possible.

                    5k: 17:58 11/22 │ 10k: 37:55 9/21 │ HM: 1:23:22 4/22 │ M: 2:56:05 12/22

                     

                    Upcoming Races:

                     

                     

                    SteveChCh


                    Hot Weather Complainer

                      Keen - I am closest to you on this discussion.  Maybe my natural inclination to avoid being called a bigot is why I suggested a third category.  I really need to stop that - just because someone says you're a bigot doesn't make it so.

                       

                      It does feel like we're being gaslit when someone says a man who thinks they're a woman has always been a woman (even, say, when they impregnated their ex-wife).  My partner has a similar outraged reaction to darkwave when she sees a man getting an award for Woman of the Year or describing what it's like to be a woman.  Men don't know what it's like just as women don't know what it's like to be a man.  Period.  Sidenote: I got permanently banned from Reddit for saying "men don't get periods".

                       

                      I think anyone who identifies as trans should be treated with respect and get the care they need, or whatever medical procedure they choose (assuming they pay for it and are of age, and have received counselling).  It doesn't mean everyone else should be forced to deny biological facts.  That's where the activism becomes a problem:

                       

                      1) there seems to be a trend to wipe out gay people.  I've heard too many stories of younger people who are gay having it pushed on them that maybe they are the other gender.  It's new age conversion therapy.

                      2) it wipes out women's elite sport, creates unsafe situations in all women's sports involving physical contact, encroaches on spaces which a woman should rightly be guaranteed not to share with a man.

                       

                      I feel like that is all common sense but that post would get me a ban from many places.

                      5km: 18:34 11/23 │ 10km: 39:10 8/23 │ HM: 1:26:48 9/23 │ M: 3:34:49 6/23

                       

                      2024 Races:

                      Motorway Half Marathon February 25, 2024 1:29:55

                      Christchurch Half-Marathon April 21, 2024

                      Selwyn Marathon June 2, 2024

                      Dunedin Half Marathon September 15, 2024

                      CommanderKeen


                      Cobra Commander Keen

                        Keen - I am closest to you on this discussion.  Maybe my natural inclination to avoid being called a bigot is why I suggested a third category.  I really need to stop that - just because someone says you're a bigot doesn't make it so.

                         

                        It does feel like we're being gaslit when someone says a man who thinks they're a woman has always been a woman (even, say, when they impregnated their ex-wife).  My partner has a similar outraged reaction to darkwave when she sees a man getting an award for Woman of the Year or describing what it's like to be a woman.  Men don't know what it's like just as women don't know what it's like to be a man.  Period.  Sidenote: I got permanently banned from Reddit for saying "men don't get periods".

                         

                        I think anyone who identifies as trans should be treated with respect and get the care they need, or whatever medical procedure they choose (assuming they pay for it and are of age, and have received counselling).  It doesn't mean everyone else should be forced to deny biological facts.  That's where the activism becomes a problem:

                         

                        1) there seems to be a trend to wipe out gay people.  I've heard too many stories of younger people who are gay having it pushed on them that maybe they are the other gender.  It's new age conversion therapy.

                        2) it wipes out women's elite sport, creates unsafe situations in all women's sports involving physical contact, encroaches on spaces which a woman should rightly be guaranteed not to share with a man.

                         

                        I feel like that is all common sense but that post would get me a ban from many places.

                         

                        Steve, there's no such thing as gaslighting. That's all in your head.

                         

                         

                         

                         

                         

                         

                         

                         

                         

                        I figured out in jr. high/high school that most accusations are either insults or meant to distract from something else (such as a losing/lost argument). In either case it's not really possible to fight against it (can't prove a negative, and even if you could they'd just make up something else right away). As such, it has been my philosophy to just ignore such things and continue on about my business if it ever comes up. Bonus points that this usually infuriates people because they're not used to anyone ignoring their attempts at bullying.

                        5k: 17:58 11/22 │ 10k: 37:55 9/21 │ HM: 1:23:22 4/22 │ M: 2:56:05 12/22

                         

                        Upcoming Races:

                         

                         

                        JMac11


                        RIP Milkman

                           

                          This whole thing seems to me as having been made overly complicated. I'm just quoting you here because your comment perhaps comes closest to the below and serves as a good starting point.

                           

                          Having an "open" category and a female (XX chromosomes exclusively and/or physiology past/current/future that gives capacity to produce large, sessile gametes - these two are actually the same) category should be all that's necessary. For some reason having categories by male and female sex (which is essentially the same as above) seems too simple

                           

                          Having a 3rd (or any subsequent) groups based upon how a person "identifies" makes as much logical sense as having a category defined by favorite color or food. All of those are or can be considered "fluid", and none of those have anything to do with physiological performance capacity.  People can identify however they want, but it has no impact upon biology. Biology is not a social construct.


                          The organization of sport is fundamentally meant to give everyone a fair shot - not an equal one. If things were "equal" or "equitable" then Usain Bolt would have started behind everyone else/everyone else started ahead of him, we would have had Michael Phelps starting after everyone else, etc. That's akin to Harrison Bergeron for sports.

                           

                           

                           

                          Yep all good points here, although I would argue a tad on the "fair shot" point but that's not worth debating really.

                           

                          I think the only reason for the third category is it just is a compromise and it doesn't impact biological women. I am really thinking about a lot of this at the amateur level to be fair, not pros. It also follows my general philosophy on a lot of this stuff, which is "as long as what you're doing doesn't impact me or my family, I don't care." The third category fits that group. I guess in theory it could take away "prize" money from local road races as it's split into a third category, but that stuff is more just for fun. Nobody is living off their $100 first place prize at their Lucky Leprechaun 5K race today.

                          5K: 16:37 (11/20)  |  10K: 34:49 (10/19)  |  HM: 1:14:57 (5/22)  |  FM: 2:36:31 (12/19) 

                           

                           

                          CommanderKeen


                          Cobra Commander Keen

                             

                            Yep all good points here, although I would argue a tad on the "fair shot" point but that's not worth debating really.

                             

                            I think the only reason for the third category is it just is a compromise and it doesn't impact biological women. I am really thinking about a lot of this at the amateur level to be fair, not pros. It also follows my general philosophy on a lot of this stuff, which is "as long as what you're doing doesn't impact me or my family, I don't care." The third category fits that group. I guess in theory it could take away "prize" money from local road races as it's split into a third category, but that stuff is more just for fun. Nobody is living off their $100 first place prize at their Lucky Leprechaun 5K race today.

                             

                            I think history has shown that if you cede the Sudetenland someone eventually wants more, almost regardless of what individual/group we're discussing.

                             

                            I am curious as to your arguments about my "fair shot" point, if you don't mind. Perhaps something about people having different innate abilities, or some adaptation/genetic quirk that leads to a big advantage? Like Michael Phelps (using him again) having super-long arms and short legs that would be a big hindrance running, but a massive benefit to swimming?

                            5k: 17:58 11/22 │ 10k: 37:55 9/21 │ HM: 1:23:22 4/22 │ M: 2:56:05 12/22

                             

                            Upcoming Races:

                             

                             

                            JMac11


                            RIP Milkman

                               

                              I think history has shown that if you cede the Sudetenland someone eventually wants more, almost regardless of what individual/group we're discussing.

                               

                              I am curious as to your arguments about my "fair shot" point, if you don't mind. Perhaps something about people having different innate abilities, or some adaptation/genetic quirk that leads to a big advantage? Like Michael Phelps (using him again) having super-long arms and short legs that would be a big hindrance running, but a massive benefit to swimming?

                               

                              I don't think sports are necessarily organized to give everyone a fair shot. The Michael Phelps argument to me in this whole thing was always silly, so no, not that.

                               

                              The masters division of running is a perfect example of something that is not organized to give everyone a fair shot: it is almost exclusively dominated by the youngest eligible people. How is it fair that we have this special carved out division that clearly is really just a 40-49 year old bucket? That does not happen in the general running pool. That, to me, is the same as placing men and women together and saying "hey, the women have a fair shot of winning too!"

                               

                              Age splits at younger ages are also not split to give everyone a fair shot. We just use age as a good metric to split people, but we all know a 13 year old boy who has gone through puberty is going to dominate the 14 year old kid who hasn't (ETA: at most contact sports I meant, not all sports)

                               

                              But, again, it may be semantics around what the definition of "fair" is, that's why I said it's not worth it.

                              5K: 16:37 (11/20)  |  10K: 34:49 (10/19)  |  HM: 1:14:57 (5/22)  |  FM: 2:36:31 (12/19) 

                               

                               

                              CommanderKeen


                              Cobra Commander Keen

                                 

                                I don't think sports are necessarily organized to give everyone a fair shot. The Michael Phelps argument to me in this whole thing was always silly, so no, not that.

                                 

                                The masters division of running is a perfect example of something that is not organized to give everyone a fair shot: it is almost exclusively dominated by the youngest eligible people. How is it fair that we have this special carved out division that clearly is really just a 40-49 year old bucket? That does not happen in the general running pool. That, to me, is the same as placing men and women together and saying "hey, the women have a fair shot of winning too!"

                                 

                                Age splits at younger ages are also not split to give everyone a fair shot. We just use age as a good metric to split people, but we all know a 13 year old boy who has gone through puberty is going to dominate the 14 year old kid who hasn't (ETA: at most contact sports I meant, not all sports)

                                 

                                But, again, it may be semantics around what the definition of "fair" is, that's why I said it's not worth it.

                                 

                                I'm in complete agreement that age groups are completely arbitrary.

                                It does give some people a decent shot at getting some type of award, though, which can mean a lot to them. A 45 y/o is hardly ever going to win the open division of a race, but chasing an AG win can give them a little something else to go for.

                                5k: 17:58 11/22 │ 10k: 37:55 9/21 │ HM: 1:23:22 4/22 │ M: 2:56:05 12/22

                                 

                                Upcoming Races: