I always miss the deadline, i'm very articlelateOriginally Posted by Swoop
Would that be an article, some articles, any article or a definite article?
I always miss the deadline, i'm very articlelateWould that be an article, some articles, any article or a definite article?
an article.. so you could start off with an advice column for the young fell runners of today after all you have helped AllanT with his various female problems
To clarify the comment was not directed as a direct criticism of Britta and her work which was acknowleged in a post after my original post but before your response.yet again someone who seems to know what im posting about
trundler i didnt like the posts from antisocial and johnny foreigner
the line in antisocials post that reads the magazine looks good but editing required was the bit that made me post on the thread
if thats not directed at britta i dont know what is
in fact sod it
why bother
Absolutely right! To me, it's not about the 'long distance' aspects, it's more to do with a move away from what is admittedly my own, personal, 'purist', grass-roots view of what constitutes fellrunning - or even 'proper' mountain running. Joss's exploits have always been about fellrunning, and so is, say, the Butter Crag (at the other end of the spectrum). Even the Buff Sky Races hold true to the same "Over The Tops" ethos - even though they take place in a different environment.
My misgivings are more to do with the increasing focus on trail running - and sorry but I even put the Everest Marathon in that category (!!) even if it is at extreme altitude. My view is that if it doesn't get on the summits it's not a fell or mountain race.
In Graham Breeze's article on Angela Mudge, he mentions conquering Everest - well (with respect Graham) doing the Everest Marathon is not "conquering Everest" There's a trend at the moment which is a bit like the cycling anomaly where crossing a pass or just being in the vicinity of a peak is regarded as 'conquering the summit' when it really isn't.
Fell races/challenges, and proper mountain races/challenges, TO ME, involve ACTUALLY treading the summits (Studmarks On The Summits!!). Anything else is just trail/approach/cross-country... call it what you will but it's not fell or mountain running.
And before someone says "why bother distinguishing...blah blah" .. if we don't then we might as well just call ourselves the 'Runners Association' and lump ourselves in with road and track & field...
To be honest I can't actually believe some of the comments made on this thread.
The underling points are of course perfectly valid, but (and in such a public forum) I haven't read anything that sounds like constructive criticism. I thought Britta's reply was very kind to several comments just moaning about the fact they don't like reading about LD articles. Where's the constructive bit - what would you like to read instead, and who do you think fellrunner should be aimed at then?
If someone wrote comments like that whilst we were editing a publication at work, well yes you don't like it, but you haven't told me anything about how you think it could be made better?
I thought this is edition definitely had some improvements on the past ones - nice info on the championship races - pictures and images seem to be getting better and better.
The only suggestion I'd make is to see more articles on some of the classic races, bit of the history and stories.
Well done Britta, you've done a fantastic job with what's given to you. I know of several professional societies that cost hundreds of pounds to be a member and their publications don't even come close to ours.
exactly
I have read this thread with interest and not posted till now as I didn't want to get involved in negative comments made about a publication that people do for free.
I was asked to write one small piece that was included within a bigger piece for the Woodheads. I can tell you now, that even though it was a short piece it took a great deal of time to complete. I wouldn't want to be writing longer articles on a regular basis like some do and do so very well.
The magazine brings a joy when it drops through the letter box. I don't read it cover to cover. Like so many others I look if there are any picture of me in it. Then I read about races I did, look at results from other races and then over a number of weeks dip in and out of it during quiet times in the day. I don't rush to read the articles on the long distance running, but might one day get round to reading them, especially if on long trips or flights.
On the whole a bloody good magazine for the yearly price. Keep up the great work because I really do value the effort that you all put in to it. I might even go for a long run this Easter and write about it during the holidays from work. I might write about how running on the moors helped me make the Wold XC team!*
*This is a might, and knowing my mights and other things that take place in my life it might never happen.
Bleaklow, I think if you re read my posting on page 13 (#127) you'll find I was quite constructive and made suggestions as to how WE can improve The Fellrunner.
I must admit I get a bit irritated when people who are obviously perfectly happy with the status quo start having a go at those of us who think it could be better.
We have the right to comment and Britta (like any good editor) welcomes comment - good and bad - as it provides guidance on what the audience wants. There is absolutely no need to get all precious and defensive about it.
Yes, The Fellrunner is far better than the vast majority of club or association rags. Yes, we should be grateful to the people who contribute to it's production. Yes, I (like most members) enjoy reading it and look forward to it's arrival. Can it be improved? Yes. Do we have the right to voice our opinions without certain people getting all shirty about it? Yes.
Last edited by Fellhound; 22-03-2008 at 09:41 AM.
Personally speaking, I enjoy the mag on the whole and we're lucky (as a group) to have such a diligent editorial staff to produce it. Not to say that I necessarily like all the articles that are presented but I just skip over those, so what's the big deal?
Better the Fellrunner mag than one of the generic running mags that don't cater for anything offroad at all.
Re: Fellrunner Magazine
To finish my contribution to this debate, I broadly agree with Trudlers comment above. I have also emailed Britta directly with more in depth views.
Though admittedly membership is cheap we do pay in part for Fell Runner through our subscriptions and it is advertised as part of the membership it is not free as some have suggested so we have a right to comment.
However I don't agree with Trundlers previous post that the content should be purely about fell running, I think that editorial policy and who Fell Runner is aimed at should be determined by the FRA committee and the editorial team, however I would be interested in seeing a statement as to what this is. If it is to accept articles from a broader church so be it (though will a lot of the broader church audience miss out if they are not members of the FRA)If the membership do not agree with this they can comment in a targeted way rather than through light hearted comments similar to the ones I made at the start of this debate. (Still stand by them though).
To close - whatever I think of the content thanks must go again to Britta for producing such a professional and classy looking magazine. Given the low subscription cost I can only assume this is through the advertising revenues especially those paid for by Axar sport (for more info go to www.trailrunspain.com) who often contibute adverts several pages long (2 this issue) about trail running in Spain, it must cost them a fortune.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote