# Slow London Marathon Runners 3.5mph Abused.



## IanSmithCSE (2 May 2019)

Morning All.

There is an article on the BBC site https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-48125731 saying that the London Marathon organisers had a pace maker running the race in 7.5 hours in order to make the race more inclusive.

Those going at that pace were apparently insulted for going so slowly.

At first glance and and second and subsequent glances I just don't get the point of entering the London Marathon to walk it.

I certainly get those who jog it and find that it is harder than they thought and have walk breaks, I've only ever done half marathons. I just did them by myself during the week when I felt like it.

I find it hard to justify shutting down any town for a sporting event when those taking part aren't entering into the spirit by trying to do it properly. 

Fairly near to me there are a few sprint triathlons and park races, sure some people are very slow but they are all running, cycling and swimming at a hard level for them and not causing much if any disruption to others.

I would have thought a 5mph pace (jogging) would be a fair cut off, if you can't put the effort in to achieve this then we can't justify the chaos caused by closing the roads.

The council/ race organisers could easily make the route easy to download so that if you want to walk it you can do so at anytime.

Am I the only grumpy one that sort of agrees that the really slow ones were taking the piss out of the event and the volunteers that make up much of the marshalling and water station staff?

Bye

Ian


----------



## Fab Foodie (2 May 2019)

Are you human?


----------



## flake99please (2 May 2019)

Ian. How much money have you raised for good causes?


----------



## screenman (2 May 2019)

Ian, I hope you are the only one who feels that way, sounds like something a motorist would write.


----------



## alicat (2 May 2019)

I agree with Ian. I wouldn't condone insulting anyone, but I do think there has to be a cut off speed to justify the roads being closed. It could be set low and a bit of leeway given for someone who has run the race and hits the wall late in the rate.


----------



## Biff600 (2 May 2019)

Get a grip !!


----------



## Gary E (2 May 2019)

Isn't this similar to the argument drivers use when they moan about cyclists?

_"If you can't pedal at 60mph you shouldn't be on the roads"_


----------



## screenman (2 May 2019)

The roads are open in many places before the last person finishes.


----------



## T4tomo (2 May 2019)

Fir some people doing a marathon in 7 hours is an achievement. At least they have got their unfit arse off the couch and are doing something about it. 
The roads are closed anyway, leaving them closed a bit longer isn't a major issue.


----------



## screenman (2 May 2019)

Gary E said:


> Isn't this similar to the argument drivers use when they moan about cyclists?
> 
> _"If you can't pedal at 60mph you shouldn't be on the roads"_



Yes it certainly is. Cyclist should only be on cycle paths or they can use the roads when I am not on them.


----------



## lazybloke (2 May 2019)

There are good practical reasons for publishing times when roads will re-open.

Those reasons do not include being rude or mean-spirited.


----------



## screenman (2 May 2019)

alicat said:


> I agree with Ian. I wouldn't condone insulting anyone, but I do think there has to be a cut off speed to justify the roads being closed. It could be set low and a bit of leeway given for someone who has run the race and hits the wall late in the rate.



You are wanting to ban a good few people there, many with disabilities.


----------



## Fab Foodie (2 May 2019)

T4tomo said:


> Fir some people doing a marathon in 7 hours is an achievement. At least they have got their unfit arse off the couch and are doing something about it.
> The roads are closed anyway, leaving them closed a bit longer isn't a major issue.


Don’t try and explain it!


----------



## winjim (2 May 2019)

alicat said:


> I agree with Ian. I wouldn't condone insulting anyone, but I do think there has to be a cut off speed to justify the roads being closed. It could be set low and a bit of leeway given for someone who has run the race and hits the wall late in the rate.


There is a cut off. It's 7.5 hours. So the organisers need to stick to it. If you're ahead of the slowest pacer then you are part of the race and all the facilities should be available to you, not be packed up around you. And anybody connected with the event found to be abusing the participants should be whipped round the course in, say, winners time plus 10%?


----------



## IanSmithCSE (2 May 2019)

Good morning,

Did everyone read the BBC article? :-)

The key point of the article was that the participants were complaining that the race organisers and volunteers manning the water stations (disputed) were not prepared to wait for them. 

_runners on Tower Bridge had also had "dodge round sewage collection lorries" and run through chemical spray used to clean the streets._

_as early as the three-mile mark, water stations had been packed away_

It was this sense of entitlement that I thought worth talking about.

Bye

Ian


----------



## screenman (2 May 2019)

Ian, it did not come across like that in your original post.


----------



## winjim (2 May 2019)

IanSmithCSE said:


> Good morning,
> 
> Did everyone read the BBC article? :-)
> 
> ...


They were running at the pace of the official pacer. That's not a sense of entitlement, that's being part of the event. Of course the organisers and volunteers should be prepared to wait for them.

Edit: unless it was made absolutely clear in a pre-race briefing that they wouldn't.

Edit2: I can see the argument for scaling things down at a certain point but the organisers should be aware of how many people are still out on the course and make sure that appropriate facilities are still available.


----------



## lane (2 May 2019)

Audax has a cut off time so not totally unreasonable to consider one. Extremely poor that they suffered abuse though - no excuse for that. 

If you turn up towards the end of an Audax they can by tidying up around you. Normally still get a cuppa and cake though and newer suffered abuse.


----------



## Fab Foodie (2 May 2019)

lane said:


> Audax has a cut off time so not totally unreasonable to consider one. Extremely poor that they suffered abuse though - no excuse for that.
> 
> If you turn up towards the end of an Audax they can by tidying up around you. Normally still get a cuppa and cake though and newer suffered abuse.


Why beat a man when he’s already down....


----------



## Gary E (2 May 2019)

I took part in a 65 mile sponsored ride a few years ago. I finished in about three and a half hours (I did say it was a few years ago), got showered and changed and then stood at the finish line with all the other riders cheering and applauding the people that were still coming in. The odd thing is that the later people came in, the bigger the cheer they got because, for these people the ride was harder and took more effort than it had for the people that finished in front of them. I'm honestly more impressed by a fat bloke (like me) dragging himself round on a bike than a racing snake on a TT bike doing twice the speed!
Basically, what I'm trying to say is that, if anything, the stragglers deserve more respect


----------



## steveindenmark (2 May 2019)

Ian. once you have gone out and walked 26 miles. You may then have the experience to criticise.

I am riding the Transcontinental Race at a slow pace. Its only 4000km. If you want to join me, instead of being an armchair critic. You would be very welcome. .


----------



## JhnBssll (2 May 2019)

My wife completed it a few years ago in a little over 7hrs. She walked a large chunk of it after suffering a stress fracture in a half marathon a month earlier. She was determined to get round the course regardless of the pain and was eventually caught by the sweepers, but not overtaken  I was immensely proud of her and still am, whilst I love cycling the thought of running that distance doesn't sound at all appealling to me


----------



## alicat (2 May 2019)

screenman said:


> You are wanting to ban a good few people there, many with disabilities.



I hadn't thought of people with disabilities. In that case, 7.5 hours seems a reasonable cut off. 

I was thinking of people who do need to get on with their lives and have a reasonable entitlement to use the roads, like women in labour and people going to visit/care for friends and relatives.


----------



## fossyant (2 May 2019)

Morning grumpy !


----------



## screenman (2 May 2019)

alicat said:


> I hadn't thought of people with disabilities. In that case, 7.5 hours seems a reasonable cut off.
> 
> I was thinking of people who do need to get on with their lives and have a reasonable entitlement to use the roads, like women in labour and people going to visit/care for friends and relatives.



I think you will find even with the road closure measures are in place for emergencies and most roads are open after 7.5 hours. So you think somebody disabled who might take twelve hours should not be allowed to enter, sorry but I totally have to disagree with you on that one. The event should not be and is not just for elite athletes.


----------



## Dogtrousers (2 May 2019)

JhnBssll said:


> My wife completed it a few years ago in a little over 7hrs. She walked a large chunk of it after suffering a stress fracture in a half marathon a month earlier. She was determined to get round the course regardless of the pain and was eventually caught by the sweepers, but not overtaken  I was immensely proud of her and still am, whilst I love cycling the thought of running that distance doesn't sound at all appealling to me


Kudos to your wife.

I discovered after completing my one and only marathon nearly 20 years ago that the ankle problem that I was doing my best to ignore was actually a stress fracture. It was the end of my running career. The tedium of marathon training had taken all the fun out of it. I had time off for my ankle to recover and never started again. I enjoyed it for a few years and did a fair few half marathons (much more civilised distance) but that was the end.


----------



## alicat (2 May 2019)

screenman said:


> The event should not be and is not just for elite athletes.



Whoever said it was?!


----------



## screenman (2 May 2019)

alicat said:


> Whoever said it was?!



The fact that people want a cutoff of 7.5 hours.


----------



## tfc03 (2 May 2019)

I think you are all being a bit hard on Ian, his principal point was, "I just don't get the point of entering the London Marathon to walk it". And I wondered the same thing watching them on Sunday morning. They walked off the start line. Maybe they ran bits later on, maybe they got injured in the lead up/ couldnt train etc, maybe its just ok, but I think it a reasonable question to ask, if only to understand better. Doing a charity 26 mile walk is brilliant; Ive cheered people over the line taking 2+ hours for a 10k, where its been mostly walking for them, but I do think its an odd choice of event if they just walked.


----------



## lane (2 May 2019)

Fab Foodie said:


> Why beat a man when he’s already down....



I was not suggesting we beat anyone - although if I were slow marathon competitors would not be on my list. I guess the audax time limits are partly for practicality so the organiser can clear up and go home. I have never been too bothered having turned up at the end of an audax and they are clearing away around me because I am slow. I certainly would not expect to suffer abuse as I made clear in my post and it is disgraceful behaviour.


----------



## Milkfloat (2 May 2019)

I have been trying unsuccessfully for years to get a place in the London Marathon it would be my first and only one. I should feel a bit of animosity to those who plan to walk the whole route. However, I don't, for many of these people just getting around the course is a huge achievement, just think of the likes of Michael Watson the boxer who took six days to get around. Abuse of entrants, no matter if they are in front of or behind the cut off time is frankly vile and should not be tolerated, especially so if it is from those employed by the organisers.

Having said that, I wish more runners could take part so that people like me (someone keen to run a marathon, but only in London) has a decent chance of getting in, perhaps closing the roads for longer with a more staggered start. I do get very envious when watching it on tv.


----------



## Fab Foodie (2 May 2019)

lane said:


> I was not suggesting we beat anyone - although if I were slow marathon competitors would not be on my list. I guess the audax time limits are partly for practicality so the organiser can clear up and go home. I have never been too bothered having turned up at the end of an audax and they are clearing away around me because I am slow. I certainly would not expect to suffer abuse as I made clear in my post and it is disgraceful behaviour.


They're usually about to lock-up when I arrive....


----------



## screenman (2 May 2019)

Milkfloat said:


> I have been trying unsuccessfully for years to get a place in the London Marathon it would be my first and only one. I should feel a bit of animosity to those who plan to walk the whole route. However, I don't, for many of these people just getting around the course is a huge achievement, just think of the likes of Michael Watson the boxer who took six days to get around. Abuse of entrants, no matter if they are in front of or behind the cut off time is frankly vile and should not be tolerated, especially so if it is from those employed by the organisers.
> 
> Having said that, I wish more runners could take part so that people like me (someone keen to run a marathon, but only in London) has a decent chance of getting in, perhaps closing the roads for longer with a more staggered start. I do get very envious when watching it on tv.



My kids managed to get in because they had done marathons in other places beforehand.


----------



## Fab Foodie (2 May 2019)

Dogtrousers said:


> I'd thought up some really creative abuse to shout at you at the end of @smutchin's 200km last year, I even had a box of rotten fruit, but I got bored waiting.




I was soooo knackered I didn't finish my food or my beer!!!


----------



## Fab Foodie (2 May 2019)

Fab Foodie said:


> I was soooo knackered I didn't finish my food or my beer!!!


To be fair I blame @Salty seadog :-)


----------



## Milkfloat (2 May 2019)

screenman said:


> My kids managed to get in because they had done marathons in other places beforehand.



I am not that committed, Milton Keynes does not not have quite the cachet.


----------



## Dayvo (2 May 2019)

In response to the OP: in that case, why should anybody be allowed to run unless they have a genuine chance of beating the world record?


----------



## glasgowcyclist (2 May 2019)

IanSmithCSE said:


> Good morning,
> 
> Did everyone read the BBC article? :-)
> 
> ...



I have to wonder whether *you* read the article.

The key point was not that the marshals and water station staff weren't prepared to wait, the key point was that, despite Ms Ayres running at the pace stipulated by the event organisers, the cleaning up and the removal of water stations began ahead of schedule and the slower-paced runners were being verbally abused by marshals and contractors. As far as that latter point is concerned, I don't care whether the runners were over their allotted time or not, it is wholly unacceptable to mock and fat-shame people.

From the article:

_But, she said, *despite running at the requested speed*, the clean-up operation had begun around her and other runners and they had been "told to hurry up".

She added that abuse had also been directed towards them by official marathon representatives, such as cleaning contractors and marshals.

This included comments such as: "If you weren't so fat, you could run," and: "This is a race, not a walk."_

It's likely that within this slower group the will be many for whom this was not only a physical challenge but also mentally and emotionally. There will have been those who were overweight, perhaps struggling with problems of self-confidence, anxiety, low self-esteem, yet they have made an effort to overcome these obstacles in a very public way. For you to have ignored all of that, to instead misrepresent this as an issue of 'entitlement', tells me you're as heartless as the ignorant oafs who shouted at those runners.


----------



## Salty seadog (2 May 2019)

Fab Foodie said:


> To be fair I blame @Salty seadog :-)



Well I did insist on a leisurely lunch at Pevensey.

It's not often you get to find and dine at a 4 star BP service station although thinking back that could have been the petrol not the food.


----------



## Slick (2 May 2019)

I honestly didn't think I'd come across that attitude on a cycling forum. Shame


----------



## Hacienda71 (2 May 2019)

I have marshalled a number of half marathons and 10k's and I would not imagine abusing the slower runners. If anything we encourage them more than the elite runners who we still clap. The London marathon organisers want to take a look at who they are using to marshall. IMHO wholly unacceptable.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (2 May 2019)

The roads are effectively closed to pedestrians 364 days of the year. Why not allow them to be closed to tin cans for a bit longer one day a year. They could even open up the early roads of the marathon as presumably they keep track of where the back markers are. Also it took some an hour or more to actually get across the start line. So opening times should not be based on projecting the slowest time allowed from the official start time. Besides they should allow for delays and no run the road opening times so damned close when you have 40,000+ plus participatents.


----------



## Fab Foodie (3 May 2019)

Salty seadog said:


> Well I did insist on a leisurely lunch at Pevensey.
> 
> It's not often you get to find and dine at a 4 star BP service station although thinking back that could have been the petrol not the food.


I certainly had one too many Unleadeds....


----------



## Shortandcrisp (3 May 2019)

Personal perspective. Suffered a spinal cord injury 3 years ago. Hasn’t really affected my cycling but, because of the residual spasticity, running is an entirely different matter.
I would however, like to run an event such as the London marathon partly for the sense of personal achievement it would represent, but mainly to raise money for spinal cord charities.
I’d be very slow. Following the seven and a half hour pace setter would be my upper limit, I reckon. The thought of being abused, heckled and told to hurry along in that situation would set my blood boiling. Most likely, I’d give plenty of abuse back in return and, and probably end up taking a swing for someone, and making a complete fool of myself; unless I actually connected, its more than likely I’d fall over.
As an organiser, if you’re aware of the time someone is likely to achieve and, knowing that, you take money from them to enter, then tell your staff to give them the respect they deserve.


----------



## screenman (3 May 2019)

We need to go no further than this forum to see name calling, such as weekend warriors, lycra clad, mamils, more sense than money, all insults.


----------



## IanSmithCSE (4 May 2019)

Good morning,

Thank you for the replies.

I suspect that we have exhausted this topic and as I started it I will, possibly, close it. :-)

To the replies of the ilk of armchair critic, sounds like a motorist, shame to see such an attitude;

When I was a schoolboy my local club had a time limit for the club time trials of 30 minutes for a 10 mile TT and 75 minutes for a 25 mile TT. Anybody slower was actively discouraged from taking part but plenty of help and advice was on offer to get faster so that you could meet these limits.

The idea was that if you couldn’t meet these limits then you hadn’t really done much preparation and you were being disrespectful to the people who had given up time and made the effort to organise the event.

This was in the mid 1970s and many of the younger members were riding the bike they went to school/work on, I used a 5 speed Raleigh Shadow which could have had a sticker saying “Guaranteed built with gas pipe plain gauge tubes, forks and stays”.

I know from the replies that this notion is not going be agreed on, but I can’t get away from the respect the event idea especially as to enter the London Marathon you have had a year to train or possibly more as they event is over subscribed.

This notion of preparation for the event applies to the argument offered that I was suggesting that only elite runners should be allowed to run.

Anybody who can run a 3-4 hour marathon has clearly put a great deal of time and effort into preparation, to see how fast they can go given the time constraints of being a non professional athlete is not disrespectful to the event.

A number of replies have stated that they have been quite happy with the organised aspect of an Audax being wound down after the stated end of the event, although there is some room for interpretation as to when the LM ended.

I understand that a number of the replies take the view that completion at any speed is an achievement worthy of the entry.

After reading the replies I get the impression that the respect the event idea, as I express it, is is not one that has a great deal of support here.

Bye


Ian

Edit: Added this link, London Marathon Trust Accounts https://lmct.s3.amazonaws.com/live/...d-62d38b560d1a/reports_statements_30sep18.pdf makes interesting reading.


----------



## Milkfloat (4 May 2019)

@IanSmithCSE When you start invoking morals and attitudes from the 70s about inclusivity then it really shows how out of touch you are from the modern world. Have you considered that the people participating at or over the Marathon cut off time could have put in far more time and preparation than those running significantly faster? Perhaps they have medical issues, a last minute injury, running as support with a friend or even in the case highlighted running as an official pacemaker. 

I don’t think my local running club has a unique attitude, so when this topic was being being discussed I was not surprised that the overwhelming feeling was of outrage and sadness that *anybody* could be made to feel excluded and the more people running the better. Incidentally, the same my cycling club feel about getting people on bikes. Many people experience enough barriers to prevent them getting into activities without the small mindedness of others, particularly of those who would not participate themselves.


----------



## winjim (4 May 2019)

IanSmithCSE said:


> I suspect that we have exhausted this topic and as I started it I will, possibly, close it. :-)


Because nobody agrees with you, you are threatening to shut down the discussion? How about if you've nothing more to say and don't wish to discuss things further you just put the thread on ignore and let other people carry on the conversation? There are some interesting points of debate and others may feel they want to contribute.


----------



## Slick (4 May 2019)

Thankfully we have moved on from the attitudes of the 70's and there are now lots of good people looking to remove barriers to sport despite the odd failings this thread highlighted.


----------



## Andy in Germany (4 May 2019)

IanSmithCSE said:


> When I was a schoolboy my local club had a time limit for the club time trials of 30 minutes for a 10 mile TT and 75 minutes for a 25 mile TT. Anybody slower was actively discouraged from taking part but plenty of help and advice was on offer to get faster so that you could meet these limits.



I see the logic here, for most people. In the 70's the idea of inclusion for people who had physical disabilities or illnesses wasn't really there, of course.




IanSmithCSE said:


> The idea was that if you couldn’t meet these limits then you hadn’t really done much preparation and you were being disrespectful to the people who had given up time and made the effort to organise the event.
> 
> I can’t get away from the respect the event idea especially as to enter the London Marathon you have had a year to train or possibly more as they event is over subscribed.
> 
> ...



You then appear to make an assumption, that a person with a physical disability who can't run as fast as someone without, would not have put in as much preparation as one who was able bodied. I'd suggest this is a false assumption. in fact that the opposite could be the case. In fact having worked with people with disabilities I know how much extra effort they have to make to be included.

Anyone with a pacemaker or other impairment has clearly thought vary carefully about joining something as gruelling as a marathon, and would have had to overcome a lo of extra physical and psychological barriers to even turn up at the starting line. To then abuse them or demand they 'hurry up' is highly disrespectful to them and to the many people who will be supporting them.

It goes against everything we are told 'sport' should be about. I thought it was all about inclusion and doing your best, setting personal goals et c?*

It seems a number of people now feel it's socially acceptable to make assumptions and use abusive language in a public place towards people who aren't as strong as they "should" be, who don't quite make the grade and are a bit slow. Why is someone taking 7.5 hours assumed not to have put in a lot of time and preparation? How do we know how much preparation they need or have attempted? How do we know they haven't trained all year? Who are we to assume we know?

This attitude seems to be becoming generally acceptable, not just towards people running slowly in a Marathon: it can be applied to anyone with a disability, or who is unemployed, or has psychological issues such as depression. It can be applied to the deaf teenager who wanted to join a theatre company I was part of, meaning we had to change the whole way we worked on stage in order to allow him to be part of our work, or the kindergarten teacher with Narcolepsy who needs to sleep for an hour at midday, meaning the other teachers have to work around this, or the plumber with severe depression who has to fight to get up and work for four hours in a therapy unit.

These people aren't 'entitled': they just want to live their lives like the rest of us, to be included in what the rest of us do.

What concerns me is that the incidents at the London Marathon are the tip of a much bigger iceberg: a rather unpleasant attitude of exclusion and a lack of understanding, or empathy.

*_Not according to my sport teachers who were very much of the "If you're too slow you're a waste of space" school of thought, which is probably why I now have no interest in any organised sports. Well done teachers._


----------



## DRHysted (4 May 2019)

Year before last I followed on Twitter a person training for the London marathon who suffered from MS. His training was hard and all over the place depending on how his body reacted. I don’t remember what time he finished but the very fact he did is one hell of an achievement and I would never think about caustic comments. 
I have completed a marathon (not London) and dispite over a year of training everything went wrong on the day, resulting in a lot of walking from mile 19 and an unplanned lay down at mile 22 (finished at 4:27). Anyone who completes something as gruelling as a marathon has my respect.


----------



## glasgowcyclist (4 May 2019)

IanSmithCSE said:


> I suspect that we have exhausted this topic and as I started it I will, possibly, close it. :-)



Exhausted it? Your contribution has been limited to just two posts digging yourself into a deeper hole, with no attempt to discuss the real issues described in the report.

You've rightly been given a roasting for your outdated attitude and wilful misreading of the article and that's why you want to close this down, to save yourself from further embarrassment.


Instead of scuttling off back under your rock, why not address the real key points in this story and your misinterpretation of it:

1. The runners were too slow.

This is clearly a lie, as the article you quoted makes clear.

2. They displayed entitlement.
How, by expecting the agreed support to still be in place as they reached the feeding stations within the officially set pace?
They were properly entitled to expect that but you use the term as a pejorative.

3. They were disrespectful of the fast competitors.
Another falsehood, as they were accepted on their abilities by the organisers who even arranged a pace setter for them.

You have not made a single criticism of the abuse levelled at the runners, why is that?
Do you agree with it or condemn it? It was the main thrust of the story so it seems strange you wouldn't comment on that aspect.


----------



## roadrash (4 May 2019)

so you want to close the thread because its lonely up there on your high horse, ...just how does one close a thread anyway, wouldn't be much of a forum if people could just close threads at random because people don't agree with them.


----------



## stephec (5 May 2019)

roadrash said:


> so you want to close the thread because its lonely up there on your high horse, ...just how does one close a thread anyway, wouldn't be much of a forum if people could just close threads at random because people don't agree with them.


It's his ball and he's taking it home.


----------



## Mo1959 (5 May 2019)

Just as an example, although I was never a good runner I regularly trotted round half marathons in 1 hour 52ish. Roll on several years and lumbar disc herniations and sciatic episodes. I went out this morning and did just over 13 miles and it took me 2 hours 27 minutes. So much slower than I used to be and possibly outside a half marathon cut off time, but I have been putting in as much, if not more effort than I used to. It's all relevant as you don't know what trials and tribulations, injuries people have gone through to even make it to the starting line.


----------



## stephec (5 May 2019)

Mo1959 said:


> Just as an example, although I was never a good runner I regularly trotted round half marathons in 1 hour 52ish. Roll on several years and lumbar disc herniations and sciatic episodes. I went out this morning and did just over 13 miles and it took me 2 hours 27 minutes. So much slower than I used to be and possibly outside a half marathon cut off time, but I have been putting in as much, if not more effort than I used to. It's all relevant as you don't know what trials and tribulations, injuries people have gone through to even make it to the starting line.


At 2:27 there's going to be a lot of people behind you in a typical half, just looking at a few running groups on Facebook proves that.


----------



## DRHysted (5 May 2019)

Just read the woman’s blog. 
The fact that the water stations had been removed is not only worrying but dangerous. 
I believe my unplanned lay down at mile 22 was due to dehydration and lack of fuel. 
The rest of it was absolutely disgusting, changing the cut off whilst there were people still out there!
Really stresses the point that I don’t want to take part in the London marathon.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (5 May 2019)

Indeed if you have a 7.5 hour pace maker you respect that. The last ones on the course should have just as good an experience (as the those first on the course) from the organisers .


----------



## Dogtrousers (5 May 2019)

DRHysted said:


> I have completed a marathon (not London) and dispite over a year of training everything went wrong on the day, resulting in a lot of walking from mile 19 and an unplanned lay down at mile 22 (finished at 4:27). Anyone who completes something as gruelling as a marathon has my respect.


Sounds uncannily like my marathon although I never actually physically lay down. If I had I would never have finished. I was a pretty experienced runner in terms of halves and 10ks at the time but the marathon was a whole new level. I think the trick is to accept that you'll mess up first time and improve in your next one. ... Or just say "never again"


----------



## DRHysted (5 May 2019)

Dogtrousers said:


> Sounds uncannily like my marathon although I never actually physically lay down. If I had I would never have finished. I was a pretty experienced runner in terms of halves and 10ks at the time but the marathon was a whole new level. I think the trick is to accept that you'll mess up first time and improve in your next one. ... Or just say "never again"



It was a day of errors and not all of them were mine. 
To start with the car park I was directed to was 15 minutes walk from the start. I started in a group too slow and got bogged down trying to make my way through. I found that we were sharing the closed roads with walkers, horse riders, cyclists, and cars. The temperature was too hot and the water stations were too far apart. On the day they changed from their advertised gels to an energy drink which I couldn’t use as I didn’t know if my digestive system would react or not. Due to it being rural there was very little crowds to support you. At the end after almost getting physical with a helper who couldn’t seem to understand that I didn’t want a banana, I slowly walked back to my car to get some money, got there (it took longer than 15 minutes) and just didn’t have it in me to return to the race village so drove home (via a drive through). 

I vowed that I’ve done the marathon and don’t ever need to repeat it, my physiotherapist agrees!


----------



## screenman (5 May 2019)

I have been involved with cycling clubs for over 50 years, I have never had the experience Ian did.


----------

