Are Park Runs Destructive ?

[Danbert Nocurry]

This is correct Witton - parkrun gets its insurance cover for free whilst we the clubs have to chip up. Also Local Government is putting up the costs and reducing the assistance it offers to us the affiliated clubs (who in many cases develop youth athletics) whilst giving subsidies to Park Run. It's not a level playing field and to be honest it's p*ssing me off :angry:

General - from what I can make of it, it seems that Local Councils are under pressure to show that they are promoting healthy lifestyles (there is funding involved.) Parkrun would argue that they are helping them do that, that's why they get funded.

The issue for me (and by the way, i love parkrun) is that my own club Rochdale Harriers (on every Tuesday and Thursday night) arrange training for more athletes across a much wider age range than any of the individual Greater Manchester Park Runs and unlike parkrun our members get structured training and specialist coaching. Parkrun however is free because it is subsidised by the council yet our members have to pay subs to cover the costs that the Council ask from us. How can that be fair and equitable?

[Joe]

Look at the results (and the depth of the field) from 1993 there are a few forumites amongst the 270 runners too :thumbup:

http://www.ukresults.net/1993/sal5k.html

This weekend's Bramhall Park Run was won in a time of 18:06. From those 1993 results that would have earned 119th place out of 270 runners! If it's attracting runners away from the big 5Ks then it's not the fast ones.

[Richard Head]

This morning there were 85 runners in Salford Harriers 'traditional' 5K in Heaton Park


Yesterday Parkrun had the following attendances in Greater Manchester

Bolton Leverhulme - 107 runners
Stockport Bramhall - 367 runners
Manchester Heaton Park - 260 runners
Oldham Alexandra Park - 65 runners
Leigh Pennington Flash - 41 runners
Manchester Platt Fields - 210 runners
Stockport Woodbank Park - 75 runners

Sale Water Park parkrun starts soon too.


Parkruns destructive, pernicious, harmful and damaging to our club events or a welcome addition to the calendar?

I'm not sure why Parkrun 5K on the Saturday should affect the numbers at a 5K the following day.

Only done a couple of Parkruns because there are not any in North Lancs but if there were i would be a regular. I dont see what the problem is really, the majority of club organised road races seem to be on a Sunday anyway

[Witton Park]

Danbert - it can be argued that the Clubs do get Council funding anyway. The tracks lose money so we would be on dodgy ground to complain about the Council supporting Park Run.
That is not my beef.

My beef is that UKA/EA are the umbrella organisations for athletics. They take money from Clubs in affiliation fees and permitting and then are using some of that money to give cover to Park Run.

Joe and Richard Head:
Similar to my above point, I do not have an issue with Park Run - but I have made the point before that they have to be affecting numbers. I had this debate on here last year and also on 8lane.
There were runners I know going down to Heaton Park last year that would normally have been running the local XC race or road race previously. Due to Park Run they were at races less.
Danbert is perhaps a very good example of this.

Now that would be all fine and dandy if Park Run was standing on it's own 2 feet ie. not receiving financial support from the clubs by the back door.

The claim is made that it is bringing new people to athletics, that it is good for the sport. I would perhaps be able to accept that if Park Run had a policy of leafleting all the runners with details of all the local clubs within a 10 mile radius (for example)

Unfortunately the UKA/EA are in the pockets of the big sponsors, the NGO Funders and the large organisations such as FLM / Great Run.

What next - will they be assisting the Ramblers Association because it might attract people in to race walking :/

[Witton Park]

Just have a look at the results for the Chorley and Horwich Wednesday night races and you will see the numbers are down quite significantly, with them struggling to get to a 100 runners now.
www.race-results.co.uk

These races would have been often over 200 when I started in 2004 / 5 and some of the old timers at our club talk of 300+ in the old days and times of 21 mins for 4 miles only just getting in the top 50!

Clearly there's more issues than just Park Run - but I do think the expanse and regularity of the Park Run events has got to impact on race attendance, particularly the short distance ones such as these.

[john doe]

Just have a look at the results for the Chorley and Horwich Wednesday night races and you will see the numbers are down quite significantly, with them struggling to get to a 100 runners now.
www.race-results.co.uk

These races would have been often over 200 when I started in 2004 / 5 and some of the old timers at our club talk of 300+ in the old days and times of 21 mins for 4 miles only just getting in the top 50!

Clearly there's more issues than just Park Run - but I do think the expanse and regularity of the Park Run events has got to impact on race attendance, particularly the short distance ones such as these.

I did 21.53 for Chorley 4ml back in '91 ,got me 74th place.........back then a big gang of us made the trip over.Now youd be lucky to see anyone from my club there but it aint because of Parkruns,they just don't seem interested.
To be blunt in the 80s and 90s the standard of running was a lot stronger at the top end,some of the guys who were down in the 20s in the results back then would have been winning today.

[Danbert Nocurry]

I did 21.53 for Chorley 4ml back in '91 ,got me 74th place.........back then a big gang of us made the trip over.Now youd be lucky to see anyone from my club there but it aint because of Parkruns,they just don't seem interested.
To be blunt in the 80s and 90s the standard of running was a lot stronger at the top end,some of the guys who were down in the 20s in the results back then would have been winning today.

I completely agree with everythig you say there john doe.

Witton I also find it interesting when looking at 'current' race results how the numbers are massively proped up by the large number of
veterans of all categories. These athletes more often than not finish very high up in the field too. The question is - is this an indicator of the poor standards of races overall or is it an indicator of how our generation were imbued with a different attitude towards running and training
hard?

[Witton Park]

I completely agree with everythig you say there john doe.

Witton I also find it interesting when looking at 'current' race results how the numbers are massively proped up by the large number of
veterans of all categories. These athletes more often than not finish very high up in the field too. The question is - is this an indicator of the poor standards of races overall or is it an indicator of how our generation were imbued with a different attitude towards running and training
hard?

Certainly a different attitude to racing. I feel like a freak encouraging the kids I coach to have a go at something different, get some variety and avoid getting stale. So where I try and direct juniors to have a go at the odd 5K - 10K road / trail race and dabble with the junior fell, you look at the rest and they're down at Trafford for the track time trials over 800 - 3000m chasing rankings & PBs.

I've made the point on 8lane in a discussion about the dearth of marathon talent these days, that the ranking for 10K and upwards are almost devoid of U23s.
http://www.thepowerof10.info/ranking...ex=M&year=2010
The 10K road rankings from last year have the first VET well above the first U23.

Go to the HM and it's far worse
http://www.thepowerof10.info/ranking...ex=M&year=2010
9 Vets to 3 U23s in the top 50.

The women fare better and perhaps that's why they tend to be more competitive on the international scene at the moment - U20s are even figuring in the 10K rankings and the U23W are almost double the guys in the the HM rankings for 2010.

Are the guys going soft?

[Rob Furness]

I know that my club captain was looking back at previous results from years back and most of our top runners nowadays wouldn't even have made the top twenty back then. Apparently we had several 2:30 marathoners and these days most of the top lads are trying to get sub 3, never mind 2:30

[Keswick_Krumble]

why pay an extortionate fee to run an organised road race when you can have a jolly good run around the local park for free with like minded people though?

you surely cannot have it both ways-either you want people to enjoy running and get fit for the goodness of their health or you want to put your own event above that.

a friend of mine was heavily overweight and started doing park runs and has lost 4 stone. she's never going to want to run 10km races but is happy to do park runs. where's the harm? why should she feel bad about it?

im glad to be out on the hills away from the Nova internationals charging rip off fees for road races who fill their events by bringing charities on board? a minister once told me that you shouldnt pay for anything in this day and age. he obviously didnt mean it literally but his words were echoed by a south african visitor who said "there is no limit to the good we can do if we dont mind who gets the credit". we should be doing things for the good of people and for the love of doing it in the first place not out of obligation or due to tradition

im so glad to be out of the rat race.

kk