active network espn
Click to view Spiridon's profile Amateur 21 posts since
Nov 21, 2007
120. Dec 5, 2007 9:17 AM in response to: 951runner

USATF Motto: "A Sport for Everyone ... For Life!"

What ever side of the argument you are on, I think we all would agree that, if ipods are deemed unsafe by the USATF that the organization should state the reasons why. Ethically, whether by society standards, religious theology or individual conscience they should not hold back information that has an impact on our safety. If ipods are not safe for runners then make the information public.

Also, The USATF code of conduct should be held to be the authority in matters of right and wrong, in the competition to win. Again, I think we all can agree that the reasons the USATF has deemed the use of iPods an unfair advantage should be made public as well. It appears that the USATF is side stepping the public philosophical study of the organizations moral domain or applied ethics.

Click to view DaveVause's profile Community Moderator 690 posts since
Jul 9, 2007
121. Dec 5, 2007 10:53 AM in response to: Spiridon
As I noted before, the ban is posted on the web: http://www.usatf.org/about/rules/2007/2007USATFRules_Article4.pdf.

It occurs under Rule 144, Assitance to Athletes.

Paragraph 1 defines "competition".

Paragraph 2 says that a competitor receiving assistance from any other person may be disqualified by the Referee. It then defines assistance and includes "technical devices" and unofficial pacers.

Paragraph 3 (a) allows verbal or other communication from individuals not in the competition area and the athlete, and defines it not to be assistance.

Paragraph 3 (b) bans electronic devices.

Paragraph 4 bans competitors in the race who are there to coach another competitor.

The rule continues in the next many paragraphs to ban other forms of assistance.



Dave Vause
08 MC Historic Half
07 Frederick Marathon
05, 06 MCM
blog: //community.active.com/blogs/DaveVause
personal web site: www.vause.name
Click to view kama1's profile Rookie 4 posts since
Nov 28, 2007
122. Dec 5, 2007 10:48 AM in response to: wilmpete
Hmmm.... interesting
Click to view gcggirl71's profile Rookie 1 posts since
Oct 10, 2007
123. Dec 5, 2007 11:26 AM in response to: NERunner
I could not have said it any better!! Took most of the words right out of my mouth!!!
Click to view Ohiorun's profile Rookie 1 posts since
Dec 5, 2007
124. Dec 5, 2007 12:23 PM in response to: DaveVause
Why the USATF bans electronic devices? Not do they ban electronic devices. That is the question Spiridon is asking I think. If not I am asking for the reason why.
Click to view molasses_jct's profile Rookie 5 posts since
Aug 19, 2007
125. Dec 5, 2007 1:10 PM in response to: JR007

No real offense taken. After thinking about it, I was more sad that you can't revel in the accomplishments of others, even if they don't compare with yours. Must make it tough on those around you. My neighbor just completed the Ironman in Hawaii - and not once did she ever make me feel that my marathon completion time was any less worthy of congratulations than her top 15 (age group) finish in the Ironman. I even said at a party one night, "compared to you at the Ironman, my thing's nothing." And she said, "It's huge. Not one other person in this room would even sign-up for a marathon, much less finish it. I don't care if you crawled across the finish line, you did it."

I find motivation from within, from songs on my iPOD, from friends/family, and not from people who think saying, "it's just me, but I'm not proud of running a 9-minute pace" when really they mean, "I must have higher standards than you because what you did isn't much to be proud of." I know I'll never compete with runners like you - with our without music/headphones. I just want to get out there and do something better than I did the day before and stay active so I can hopefully see my young kids grow up. It was something I did to prove that turning 40 didn't mean I was too old to challenge myself. For me, the run is less about speed (although improvements there are always a secondary goal) - and more about getting out there and finishing. For some, that may not be good enough. For me, and the 30+ people since who said, "Holy $@#&!, you finished a MARATHON?!?!" it was good enough, an accomplishment to be proud of, and something that made me feel great. Not one of them asked me about my time. I've actually "inspired" (or suckered) seven other people to do the MC Half in May! Me! Slow runner who sometimes walks! Six of those people will probably cross the finish before me by a LOT.

BACK TO TOPIC: Unfortunately, my iPOD doesn't improve my running time (maybe I should put "the Chicken Dance" on it so I speed up with the song), it just helps me enjoy all this mediocrity I'm so darned proud of. So, I know using headphones is a rule infraction, but is it cheating if it gives you no discernable advantage? And, while everyone's at it: what is the meaning of life? Maybe a USATF person can chime-in and give a supportable reason for the rule. I'd love it if we could wear headphones legally, but until I'm the one making the rules. . .well. . .so be it. I'm typically a stickler for the rules, but this is one I've broken with some trepidation each time I start a race. Knowing this, if I were to be pulled off a course when wearing my iPOD, I wouldn't argue. My fault. Rules are rules.

Click to view bizzydizzylizzy's profile Rookie 2 posts since
Nov 11, 2007
126. Dec 5, 2007 1:16 PM in response to: JR007

I don't belong to a running club, and I agree name calling is uncool. Let's stick with arrogant and narrow sited.

My husband is dying of ALS (Lou Gehrig's disease). It is a vicious, fatal neurological disease. I run races with my ipod because

1) I don't want to talk to anyone.

2) I run in races because it affords me a reason to hire a babysitter for my 3 small kids and let's me run in a part of town that I wouldn't normally get to or know well enough (safety in numbers).

3) Music takes me back to happier times. We all have those songs from college or the memory of a cute guy/girl, or in my case when times were healthy and uncomplicated. Also, on my angry days, Metallica is just the ticket.

4) Sometimes, given the number of times I have been to the hospital/doctor/neurologist, my new race shirt is the only clean thing I have to wear.

Yes, my crappy 10-11 minute miles are not earth shattering, but in terms of performance, I got out of bed, put on my shoes and took the first few steps. Dude, I beat you hands down.

Click to view DaveVause's profile Community Moderator 690 posts since
Jul 9, 2007
127. Dec 5, 2007 3:39 PM in response to: Ohiorun
Since they're banned under a rule about assistance to athletes, I think its a pretty good bet that they think electronic devices are an assistance to athletes. I thought it was clear, sorry that it wasn't.



Dave Vause
08 MC Historic Half
07 Frederick Marathon
05, 06 MCM
blog: //community.active.com/blogs/DaveVause
personal web site: www.vause.name
Click to view NERunner's profile Amateur 8 posts since
Nov 16, 2007
128. Dec 5, 2007 4:23 PM in response to: Ohiorun

Jay Silvio posted the following message on November 30th, which links an article by Dave McGillivray, Race Director for the Boston Marathon. This is the top, it's at least in the top two, marathon in the country. Dave refers to a conversation with a USATF member who explains the reasons for the rule prohibiting iPods. None of the reasons outlined in Dave's article have anything to do with a competitors advantage using an iPod during a race. Rather, the article explains the devices are prohibited for safety reasons. I don't see how on this earth if this rule was meant for any other reason or reasons that the USATF member would not have included that or these reasons in their conversation with Dave.

Here's another active article on the topic:

http://www.active.com/running/Articles/To_iPod_or_Not_to_iPod_.htm

Click to view JR007's profile Expert 50 posts since
Nov 18, 2007
129. Dec 5, 2007 4:34 PM in response to: bizzydizzylizzy

Sorry to hear about your husband, I wouldn't wish that one anyone. I actually saw an Ironman special on TV about John Blaze who ran the triathalon to raise money to fight the disease before ALS took over his body too much. Pretty inspiring stuff that made me feel like anything that I ever accomplish will pare in comparison. When I see someone like that doing something Great it really makes me think how good and easy I have it (and a lot of us out there). It also makes me think how hard it is for him to get out of bed and exersise much less train for an Ironman. It's actually pretty easy for me as I don't have many issues weighing me down.

I'll take arogant and narrow sighted. I perfer confident and always right, but more than a few disagree. It's only an opinion and I don't belong to a run club either.

Maybe you got me beat hands down. Running isn't that hard for me (I got two good knees). I was wrong to think that it was that it wasn't that hard for most people. Did I say that I was dropping the subject? Darn!!!!

Click to view NERunner's profile Amateur 8 posts since
Nov 16, 2007
130. Dec 6, 2007 5:52 AM in response to: NERunner

This link contains an article about how the "nanny state" of Massachusetts (regrettably I live here) wanted to ban American flags and other patriotic displays for our military from highway overpasses for safety reasons. The reasons seem so similar to those of the USATF regarding the iPod ban. :0

http://www.eagletribune.com/punews/local_story_339095353

Click to view Missileman's profile Rookie 1 posts since
Dec 3, 2007
131. Dec 6, 2007 7:16 AM in response to: wilmpete
On a marked marathon course, it's not a "Safety" issue, so let's forget that argument, now. As for an official wanting to talk to me...okay, maybe so, but among 11,000 runners, why would I be stopped during my 10 minute mile pace to talk to an official? Really, an offical might want to talk to me? Wow, at my pace, I'm lucky to see an official! LOL Social aspect? If I choose to spend my own time and money to race and I CHOOSE to not take in the scenery or environment, you don't have to approve my life style, OR my reason for running. I prefer you run your own race and let me run mine. You don't have to agree with me, like me, or approve of my listening device, BUT since when do you have the right to tell me what I can and can't do when I put on a pair of running shoes and go out for my own enjoyment. You run your way and I'll run mine. My listening device doesn't bother you, so leave me alone.
Click to view Bonusmarch's profile Rookie 1 posts since
Dec 6, 2007
132. Dec 6, 2007 10:16 AM in response to: NERunner

I think that the State of Massachusetts is correct in banning free advertising for causes either political or commercial. The signage stays in place until it blows on to the road and then the tax payer pays for its removal. And banning iPods from racing is a good thing regardless of the USATF reasons. I like the ban because of the loud **** I have to hear as I pass the mindless runners that passes and slows down and passes again and slows down. We see them on the road training as well running with their backs to the traffic, volume on high. :|
Click to view clubchick's profile Rookie 2 posts since
Jul 9, 2007
133. Dec 7, 2007 11:16 AM in response to: reneerunz
yay and amen! i kept going in chicago because i knew i was fine and could withstand the humidity. the inexperienced and just plain stubborn runners suffered. i didn't wear headphones during that race, but i didn't fault those who did.
Click to view vfsellers's profile Amateur 36 posts since
Jul 14, 2007
134. Dec 7, 2007 1:37 PM in response to: JR007
Personally i don't run races to be social. I run races to run...