Sole Searching: Don’t Knock The Marathon

I read Jeremy Gordon’s piece ‘The Marathon: A Mirage of Fitness?’ on The Stand recently. There were some interesting thoughts there, but I felt I had to defend the discipline of marathon running. I’ll get my credentials out on the table first. I’m now an alumni of St Andrews (yes, I don’t even go here) but used to run with St Andrews Cross Country. I’ve run five marathons, and my best is 3:09:59 – safely within the four hour boundary that Jeremy recognises as meaning you “have done pretty well”.

I’m sorry if I’ve missed some of the nuances, but the two main contentions seem to be:  1) running a marathon is no big deal, and 2) the fetishisation of the marathon and promotion of running is counter-productive to public health, as interval training is more effective. After a period of careful reflection, I’ve decided that both claims are odd.

To start with number one: Is Jeremy right to say, “the basic marathon itself I do not find that impressive, or at least not as impressive as I think that marathon runners […] wish me too”? Well, of course there are events that are tougher than a standard marathon. There are events that add more distance, events that are a series of marathon distance stages, events in the desert, the arctic, the jungle, the Ironman where the marathon is but one part of a mammoth triathlon.

Compared to these the ‘basic marathon’ looks easy, something everyone could complete. True, you could walk it, but this doesn’t really count. Some people, often charity runners, enter a marathon with the explicit intention of walking the entire event from the start. Amongst ‘walkers’ are those for whom walking that distance alone is an achievement due to a physical disability. Others who walk part of the way, often toward the end, have expended a supreme effort, and are physically or mentally unable to continue the pace, often both.

Just because lots of people finish marathons doesn’t mean they are easy. For the countless medalled finishers, there are countless more who will never attempt the distance, but also there are many who drop out. I ran the London Marathon this year as a pacer, running a sub 4 hour time with a flag on my back. There was a female runner who had run with us right up until 15 miles. All of a sudden, I heard a yelp next to me. A muscle must have torn, and she disappeared as the crowd surged remorselessly on. I never found out whether she finished. She had obviously trained really hard to go under four hours, but the cruel reality of the marathon is that anything can happen, even to those who are most prepared.

But isn’t completing a marathon a matter of determination versus physical fitness? Although things can go physically wrong – very wrong – finishing alone isn’t much of an achievement. Finishing as fast as you personally can is a big achievement, something that can only be done with a lot of training and a sensible, determined performance on race day – whether that is under three hours or over four hours. One person could put in no training, booze it up the night before, finish a lot slower than their personal best. Another could take up running, train hard all winter, finish in a time they are really proud of, but slower than the first person. Which is more of an achievement? Ultimately, achievement  is a spectrum. Finishing is not a monolith, each achievement is individual to the person and is relative to their goals and improvement from previous results.

As mentioned, Jeremy says those who finish in under 4 hours “have done pretty well”. Well, kind of, as he also says “this is basically twice as slow as those who are actually good at marathons”. Where to start? This begs the question of why we should recognise any sporting achievement. Say the University cricket team goes unbeaten for the entire season – I’d still wager they’d struggle to score double figures against England. That isn’t to say we can’t and shouldn’t congratulate them. Refusing to acknowledge that a person has achieved something is harmful to inclusion. Why should someone get up off their arse and get involved in sport, if even after hours of training they will be derided for being an also-ran, a fun runner, nowhere near the elites? We need to be praising people for achieving something; they deserve to take pride in achievement and should, whatever form it takes.

The second and more baffling claim is that the fetishisation of the marathon is counter-productive to public health. According to Jeremy it “fails quite significantly to deliver […] as effectively as is popularly perceived” and that the baffling reverence we give to the marathon is harmful to society’s view of fitness.

Why did I not think of this? What we actually need to drastically improve public health is an ombudsman to go around saying “Stop that physical exercise! It fails to deliver as effectively as is popularly perceived!”. With all due respect, that simply isn’t the problem. The larger problem, and this is an entire other article, is getting people doing something in the first place.

Sure, distance running can be harmful to an extent. It is tough on the knees, but training in a sensible way with running on grass or trails and cross-training can negate this. Also, your knees are going to fail eventually, so you may as well use them and achieve something while you can. The stresses on the heart during the race can lead to deaths, although these are uncommon compared to the number of finishers. On balance though, the health benefits of running outweigh the health benefits of, er… not doing anything.

There are a lot of social pressures surrounding people getting involved in sport. People are concerned about their body image, about being rubbish either physically or technically, by financial restraints. The reason running has undergone a massive boom in recent years is that it offers a simple way for people to get involved. People can run on their own, a free and easy way to unwind and exercise without worrying about how you look, whether the gym is open, or whether you can get together a group of people. Running clubs cater for all abilities and provide a reassuring social environment. And though there is a baffling array of running accessories, all one really needs is a good pair of running shoes. Oh, and socks, shorts and a top. And although I don’t have to worry about this, I hear sports bras are fairly essential for the ladies.

The fetishisation of the marathon is a positive force in society. The marathon is achievable. That’s the point. It isn’t a lottery where only a few have the ability to complete it. It is the people’s challenge. It shows that if we put some work in, get involved with a sporting challenge, we can achieve something. There are problems with sport, participation and public health – getting more young people involved in sporting activity, the objectification of women in sport – but overly regarding the marathon is not one of them.

Photo © of streamuk.com