Quote Originally Posted by ba-ba View Post
There definitely should be space for articles on shorter stuff, and proper race reports when we get back to it - as mentioned the Fellracer section seems the best home for this. One of the problems with these first-person reports is they can get a bit hackneyed (people fall into the trap of "my legs were pumping battery acid and I could taste blood") and they can all sound the same. That's not to say the long distance ones can't (and don't) do something similar, though IMO most of these long distance articles have been kept interesting and avoided the 'shopping-list' trap they can fall in to.

Some articles submitted could, I imagine, be of a quality more befitting a blog, suitable for sharing around a few chums or maybe the club, but not befitting of The Fellrunner. There have a been a couple of articles in the last year or so that I found to be not particularly 'worthy' (whatever that may mean; it will mean different things to different people) though these have been a tiny minority.
Yeah. I didn't think my submission was that bad, i spent a lot of time just telling the tale, i like to give an account of the whole day- even the conditions in the car parking field. I just don't understand what anyone is to practically do about it if short distance submissions are knocked back the way mine was.

NB. The fell racer section reports are authored by race organisers only. They get requested to submit a short summary to precede the results, and i don't organise any.

Quote Originally Posted by Graham Breeze View Post
Well if I never read another BGR account I will still die happy but:

i) the editor relies on voluntary contributions

ii) every editor is different and they change things. I have submitted pieces to eight of them and while I might think some editors have been "better" than others there isn't a huge market for articles about fell running so you have to bear with it until matters improve

iii) The Fellrunner is a broad church. I once casually commented to one editor that I found one writer's contributions to be unreadable and was told - quite rightly - that some readers thought his articles were the best thing in the magazine. So that was me told!

iv) A good editor should believe they are trying to serve the broader interests of the membership - and not think the magazine is a vehicle for personal vanity - and fortunately most of them have

v) I have written elsewhere about changes in content over the last 50 years. There really wasn't much coverage of ultra-running events etc 40 years ago because there weren't many such events; and there is a limit to how many articles can be published on, say, races over Pendle; and anyway Bill Smith has already written them.

So, I am just grateful that for 50 years someone has always been willing to take on such a demanding role in which Neil Denby edited 29 issues (ie over 9 years), Britta Sendlehofer 21 issues (7 years) whereas the last three editors have only managed a total of 18 issues between them.

Things change.
One of the best articles i've seen in the fellrunner was Alan Greenwood's write-up of Causey Pike. It started with him being bored and in the area, just a tale of a day in the life.