Not competitive

VestanPance

purpleshoes wrote: »

I'll also say that having run a half marathon around 15 years ago with a group of young folks who lived in the homeless hostel I worked in, some of them got up the morning of the race, having done diddly squat training and completed the course in ridiculously quick times.

You can't tell only from someone's end time how seriously they've taken it.

I might complete a 10k an hour slower than someone who has done half the training as I have, there are too many factors to take into account than just the end figure that might make it look like someone has taken training for the event seriously when they've actually done nothing.

I never mentioned time, so nice try but epic fail.

I'm talking about effort. I'd rather see a two hour half runner who trained hard and gave it their best than a 1:30 runner who should be a 1:10/15 but never tried.

tea_lover

Yes, it's not about finish time at all. You could take a week to finish a triathlon (it'd take me longer than that!) but still have put some effort in.

I really don't see why you (general you there, not any poster in particular) would do something they're just not bothered about. There's a pretty much limitless number of hobbies to try, why even take part in something that you can't even be bothered to try at?

And to be clear - 'try' to me doesn't mean win necessarily. It's like reading the same few pages of the same book time after time.

purpleshoes_2

VestanPance wrote: »

I never mentioned time, so nice try but epic fail.

I'm talking about effort. I'd rather see a two hour half runner who trained hard and gave it their best than a 1:30 runner who should be a 1:10/15 but never tried.

How would you know the difference just from seeing someone run a race?

purpleshoes_2

VestanPance wrote: »

I never mentioned time, so nice try but epic fail.

I'm talking about effort. I'd rather see a two hour half runner who trained hard and gave it their best than a 1:30 runner who should be a 1:10/15 but never tried.

My point was that these young people didn't train hard but still managed very good times.

Id doubt very much anyone watching a race would be able to look at the runners and go, he clearly trained hard, she clearly didn't.

VestanPance

purpleshoes wrote: »

How would you know the difference just from seeing someone run a race?

Very easily over a half. No natural genetic ability sees you through that distance. Their form will be horrific and their pace will have dropped relative to finish time in the later few miles.

VestanPance

purpleshoes wrote: »

My point was that these young people didn't train hard but still managed very good times.

Id doubt very much anyone watching a race would be able to look at the runners and go, he clearly trained hard, she clearly didn't.

You don't know what you're talking about then.

purpleshoes_2

VestanPance wrote: »

You don't know what you're talking about then.

Well, when it comes to myself, given that running is a discipline I struggle with, I would hazard a guess that if anyone saw me run they'd think I did no training for the triathlon or any other event I did, which isn't actually the case.

But seeing as I don't know what I'm talking about and you clearly know everything about everything, I'll leave you to your superiority on the matter.

VestanPance

Well running is one of the disciplines I train for and work to improve in, and as a multiple marathon and long distance triathlon finisher yes I can see the training in somebodies performance.

Genetically we're all different and have different natural strengths, but lack of training or bad training is always visible and if you enter something then why not train to be the best you can be at it? If you can't be bothered putting the training in then why bother entering in the first place?

Rambosmum

This is obviously getting some very different opinions.

For the person who mentioned horse-riding, I do actually enjoy horse riding and have done it for many years, but never competitively - I enjoy hacking, the feel of the horse under me, the relationship we have, the motion etc.

As for board games, I play by the rules, make moves which get my piece further along the board but I very rarely consider other players strategies which OH does - he's always looking at what others are likely to do and try and block them to prevent them winning- I just don't think like that.

I do climb higher than 2 meters. I'm not a fan of heights so I rarely get to the top of the wall, unless it's a really short wall such as the low walls at the indoor climbing centre. I also boulder, which is more my height. But the effort I put in is not related to how high I go. And for me, the effort required to get me higher than I am comfortable with is in no way worth the feeling at the top, which has not sense of achievement in it, just abject fear and resentment at myself for climbing that high. But I still love it, I stop loving it when I push past my comfort zone.

I'm very much on the side of 'sport is to be active' I rarely feel a sense of achievement beyond getting out the house, regardless of how far I push myself, and the getting sense of achievement diminishes the more out my comfort zone I go. But I do feel happier and more 'alive' for having participated.

My OH feels differently he is very type A.

I hadn't considered he might be cheating, I'll need to investigate that one. I hope not. We've only been married 3 months.

Georgiegirl256

lostinrates wrote: »

Let's take rock climbing and give another analogy.


The majority of uk horse riders ride at a competitive novice or just above stage. Should they all give up? Most just pootle about a lot of the time together. Many manage a social element whether they pursue it as a sport or not, some never get on a horse, just like being near them.

Take a non sport....gardening.

Some might say that if you cannot produce a garden worthy of appearing on a tv show, a magazine or entering a competition or at least appearing very pretty there is no point cutting the lawn, or having one, Others enjoy wild flower meadows or japenese style gardens.

Track events use the same facilities for different points...running fastest over a different lengths, and different people do them best.

If someone is enjoying what they are doing, being active, not disproportionately impeding other users of a facility then what does it matter if they do things differently to the majority and their point is not the majority point?

As the OP was talking about rock climbing, that's what I was commenting on.

Your examples of horse riding and gardening for example, I get where you're coming from but those are things that you can if you so wish just happily potter away with. The overall goal of rock climbing is to reach the summit, it isn't something that you can continuously potter away at the same level IMO. When you're first learning then obviously you might be wary and not want to go too far off the ground, but after that surely you'd want to try and reach the top?

Like I say, just mho.