Parkrun..

py

Burkie1203 wrote: »

Its at a stage where there needs to be clearly defined starting areas. Walkers and those with dogs need to be at the back at the start.

I'd be more inclined to separate it out in to estimated finishing times, worked in 5 minute increments. I've seen those with buggies or dogs finish in the low 20s so they're not being hindered or hindering others from what I've experienced.

DeepBlue

Whoever said upthread that parkrun is like a cult with brainwashed adherants is clearly talking nonsense.

The reason I walked nearly 5 miles to parkrun this morning in -5 degrees was..................erm.........eh.............reasons!! Ok!

At least I got a new PB for my troubles. :pac:

ISOP

py wrote: »

I'd be more inclined to separate it out in to estimated finishing times, worked in 5 minute increments. I've seen those with buggies or dogs finish in the low 20s so they're not being hindered or hindering others from what I've experienced.

the big busy parkruns here in London spread them out using chalk on the path or flags into 2 minute mini starting pens as it were, starting at sub 18,20,22, 24 etc with everyone encouraged to start where they think they the will finish timewise, work very well

Burkie1203

ISOP wrote: »

the big busy parkruns here in London spread them out using chalk on the path or flags into 2 minute mini starting pens as it were, starting at sub 18,20,22, 24 etc with everyone encouraged to start where they think they the will finish timewise, work very well

A parkrun with an average of 150 runners just needs a few sensible tweaks.

Walkers at the back, especially dog walkers.

Lazare

Burkie1203 wrote: »

Parkrun success is almost outgrowing a lot of the parks they are held in. Its been happening at my local one lately

Today we had a walker with a dog on a 2m lead starting very near the front, updating facebook status and paying no attention to her surroundings. This has happened a few times lately.

Last week we had 4 walkers starting in a line about 2m from the front.


Its at a stage where there needs to be clearly defined starting areas. Walkers and those with dogs need to be at the back at the start.

No. You're wrong.

If you want a race, go to a race.

parkrun isn't a race. Yes, some of us treat it like it is, and that's fine.

We're not the important people there though.

parkrun is the new mass. It's a socially inclusive weekly event that welcomes all. Walkers, sloggers, joggers, people with kids, people with dogs. People.

People getting together on a Saturday morning and connecting socially.

Introducing ability based rules is anathema to that spirit.

Plenty of 5k races out there.

Burkie1203

Lazare wrote: »

No. You're wrong.

If you want a race, go to a race.

parkrun isn't a race. Yes, some of us treat it like it is, and that's fine.

We're not the important people there though.

parkrun is the new mass. It's a socially inclusive weekly event that welcomes all. Walkers, sloggers, joggers, people with kids, people with dogs. People.

People getting together on a Saturday morning and connecting socially.

Introducing ability based rules is anathema to that spirit.

Plenty of 5k races out there.

I never said it was a race. I'm talking about participant safety. I never once mentioned ability based rules. Allowing people who are walking with dogs to start near the front with dogs on 2 metre long leads is dangerous. If they aren't going to keep the dog on a short lead especially at the start then there needs to be some form of action. There is a reason why people are asked to keep dogs on short leads and it has nothing to do with ability

Some parkruns ban dogs now judging by previous posts and from talking to people at my local one about their experiences touring.

snailsong

Burkie1203 wrote: »

ISOP wrote: »

Walkers at the back, especially dog walkers.

Might not always be appropriate, we have an occasional walker who takes about 21 minutes. He's national champion at 5k race walk

I was rd at Westport today and unfortunately we had to call it off at 9. The course was fine on Friday night and the forecast dry but an early shower of hail immediately froze over and left it too dodgy to go ahead.
A big group from Leamington Spa parkrun turned up having flown over specially for an away day. Result about 30 people jogged or walked the course unofficially and all went for coffee afterwards. One of the most enjoyable non-parkruns yet.

Kaiser84

The last two weeks I've been at Oldbridge parkrun I've not been able to hear a word the director said before the start due to barking dogs.

Lazare

Burkie1203 wrote: »

I never said it was a race. I'm talking about participant safety. I never once mentioned ability based rules. Allowing people who are walking with dogs to start near the front with dogs on 2 metre long leads is dangerous. If they aren't going to keep the dog on a short lead especially at the start then there needs to be some form of action. There is a reason why people are asked to keep dogs on short leads and it has nothing to do with ability

Some parkruns ban dogs now judging by previous posts and from talking to people at my local one about their experiences touring.

You said 'parkrun's success is almost outgrowing a lot of the parks' then followed that up by complaining about walkers, ie, slower people, starting too near the front. That they need to be made start at the back.

That's a valid argument if it was a race. It's not a valid argument for parkrun. It's exclusionary and against the spirit of it.

Your point about the 2m dog lead is a fair one though.

RayCun

The standard run director speech already says dogs must be kept on short leads.

I think people realize themselves after a few weeks that they should start further back if they are going to walk.

Lazare

https://twitter.com/parkrunIE/status/1092030845383249921?s=19

DeepBlue

Lazare wrote: »

You said 'parkrun's success is almost outgrowing a lot of the parks' then followed that up by complaining about walkers, ie, slower people, starting too near the front. That they need to be made start at the back.

That's a valid argument if it was a race. It's not a valid argument for parkrun. It's exclusionary and against the spirit of it.

Safety trumps everything else imo. Maybe it depends on the particular parkrun but the one I've run at the most has a pretty tight first 400 metres bounded by fencing on one side a sharp drop off on the other and is that standard park path width - something like 3 metres? And currently there's about 400 - 500 runners all trying to squash into that space with the possibilty of other park users coming against them from the other direction.

If walkers, dog owners and buggies feel excluded about being asked to start at the back then.....well........that's just too bad!

The Black Oil

Lazare wrote: »

parkrun is the new mass.

Good for the soul too?

Lazare

The Black Oil wrote: »

Good for the soul too?

Moreso than mass anyway.

cjt156

Bless me parkrun for I have sinned; it's been 8 days since my last parkrun...

cjt156

Speaking of dogs at parkrun; about bears. Polar Bears, to be exact...

Book Face Link

Lazare

DeepBlue wrote: »

Safety trumps everything else imo. Maybe it depends on the particular parkrun but the one I've run at the most has a pretty tight first 400 metres bounded by fencing on one side a sharp drop off on the other and is that standard park path width - something like 3 metres? And currently there's about 400 - 500 runners all trying to squash into that space with the possibilty of other park users coming against them from the other direction.

If walkers, dog owners and buggies feel excluded about being asked to start at the back then.....well........that's just too bad!

Of course safety trumps all but that's not the argument here.

Sure, in that situation a rule would make sense. It's an outlier though.

I've an issue with people demanding walkers don't interfere with their pb chances.

Burkie1203

Lazare wrote: »

You said 'parkrun's success is almost outgrowing a lot of the parks' then followed that up by complaining about walkers, ie, slower people, starting too near the front. That they need to be made start at the back.

That's a valid argument if it was a race. It's not a valid argument for parkrun. It's exclusionary and against the spirit of it.

Your point about the 2m dog lead is a fair one though.

I'm not talking about slower people. I'm talking about more specifically people walking with dogs who refuse to control their dogs properly less then 3 minutes after the RD specifically requested them to do so. Having a dog on a 2m lead on a path approx 5m wide in the middle of 150+ people about to set off, mostly running, brings unnecessary danger.


A lot of parks have narrow paths and my own local event had grown it's normal numbers by about 20-25% in the last while. We already had one person suffer a minor injury as a result of a fall a few weeks ago because the start area layout allowed people start out wide and try squeeze into the main field.

Lazare wrote: »

Of course safety trumps all but that's not the argument here.

Sure, in that situation a rule would make sense. It's an outlier though.

I've an issue with people demanding walkers don't interfere with their pb chances.

I'm not talking about PB chances being harmed. If I wanted to go for PB I would start right at the front. There is no excuse for a walker with a dog on a 2m lead starting in the first few metres of the line especially if they aren't going to pay attention to their surrounds.

My local event, we have a few hundred metres drag until we come to a twisty bit. On one side of that drag we have a succession of metal benches recessed just off the pathway with the first two in the first 20m off the start line. Any sort of collision with one of them would be very unpleasant.

I don't want to see any sort of exclusion. I also dont expect me or any other person in attendance having to jump over a small dog just to avoid a collision at the start line when it is totally avoidable.

I understand the whole inclusion policy but common sense has to prevail too. And if people just ignore the requirements with dogs then it will need to be addressed because from speaking to regulars at my event who do tour a bit it had become an issue of sorts elsewhere too.

We have a 3 lap route. The issue is pretty much a start line issue only.

Lazare

I'm with you on all of that, totally agree. A 2m dog lead is ridiculous, and obviously a safety issue. I've never seen it mind.

What I took issue with in your OP was you suggesting that walkers should be made start at the back. You complained that there were a bunch of them abreast near the start. My 'it's not a race' line was referring to that particular comment.

Burkie1203

Lazare wrote: »

I'm with you on all of that, totally agree. A 2m dog lead is ridiculous, and obviously a safety issue. I've never seen it mind.

What I took issue with in your OP was you suggesting that walkers should be made start at the back. You complained that there were a bunch of them abreast near the start. My 'it's not a race' line was referring to that particular comment.

That is a slightly different bug bear, a line of 4 or 5 people on a 5m wide path is dangerous and it contributed to a fall 2 or 3 weeks ago. I started in middle and people having to take avoiding action led to a few heels getting clipped and one faller

Maybe not a hard and fast rule but a suggestion from RD for safety purposes.

Lazare

It's kinda moot anyway, as Raycun said upthread, most people in most cases will naturally start where their ability suggests.

I think it's a really bad idea to even suggest it. I remember one time in Griffeen offering to run out and pick up the direction signs and being firmly told no, not to do it as there were still people out on the course. Idea being that you don't want to do anything to suggest to people that they're too slow.

It's why tailwalkers were introduced. Nobody's last.

I love that.

skyblue46

Lazare wrote: »

It's kinda moot anyway, as Raycun said upthread, most people in most cases will naturally start where their ability suggests.

I think it's a really bad idea to even suggest it. I remember one time in Griffeen offering to run out and pick up the direction signs and being firmly told no, not to do it as there were still people out on the course. Idea being that you don't want to do anything to suggest to people that they're too slow.

It's why tailwalkers were introduced. Nobody's last.

I love that.

I understand your point C but is it not a bit of a contradiction to have age grading percentages and PBs recorded if it's purely for participating in and not competitive?

Lazare

No, that's simply another example of it catering for everyone.

pc11

Lazare wrote: »

No. You're wrong.

If you want a race, go to a race.

parkrun isn't a race. Yes, some of us treat it like it is, and that's fine.

We're not the important people there though.

parkrun is the new mass. It's a socially inclusive weekly event that welcomes all. Walkers, sloggers, joggers, people with kids, people with dogs. People.

People getting together on a Saturday morning and connecting socially.

Introducing ability based rules is anathema to that spirit.

Plenty of 5k races out there.

Hold on. Lots of parkruns have slots for estimated time. Nobody complains and the sky doesn't fall in. It's a perfectly reasonable and sensible thing to do. Nobody polices it as a 'rule', it's a request or suggestion and it's not in any way 'anathema' to anything.

Let's not get too melodramatic.

skyblue46

Lazare wrote: »

No, that's simply another example of it catering for everyone.

Catering for everyone can become difficult when different people are looking for different things from the event.

muddypaws

Burkie1203 wrote: »

Lazare wrote: »

No. You're wrong.

If you want a race, go to a race.

parkrun isn't a race. Yes, some of us treat it like it is, and that's fine.

We're not the important people there though.

parkrun is the new mass. It's a socially inclusive weekly event that welcomes all. Walkers, sloggers, joggers, people with kids, people with dogs. People.

People getting together on a Saturday morning and connecting socially.

Introducing ability based rules is anathema to that spirit.

Plenty of 5k races out there.

I never said it was a race. I'm talking about participant safety. I never once mentioned ability based rules. Allowing people who are walking with dogs to start near the front with dogs on 2 metre long leads is dangerous. If they aren't going to keep the dog on a short lead especially at the start then there needs to be some form of action. There is a reason why people are asked to keep dogs on short leads and it has nothing to do with ability

Some parkruns ban dogs now judging by previous posts and from talking to people at my local one about their experiences touring.

When park run started to grow in the UK, there was talk of banning dogs completely. The short lead compromise was reached, with a UK company making special park run dog leads. 1.2 metres when fully stretched, with a grab handle at the dog end allowing the dog to be pulled in really close when necessary. This is what we use, getting them from the UK so that we comply with the rules. The rules actually used to specify the maximum length, but it was taken out last year or the year before.

Some venues are not suitable for dogs, common sense should be used by runners to work that out, when I'm doing tourism, I look on the page at the course to see if it is suitable.

I'm hoping to do Queens to get my Q, it says that dogs are welcome on the event page but I will message them to double check, as it's run on a university sports grounds, I can understand if dogs are banned. I appreciate that park run is for everyone and if we all just show each other some respect and empathy everyone will enjoy the experience.

I had some exciting park run news today, which hopefully I can talk about after it's happened.

Lazare

pc11 wrote: »

Hold on. Lots of parkruns have slots for estimated time. Nobody complains and the sky doesn't fall in. It's a perfectly reasonable and sensible thing to do. Nobody polices it as a 'rule', it's a request or suggestion and it's not in any way 'anathema' to anything.

Let's not get too melodramatic.

I think they're wrong too.

Have a look at the tweet from parkrun Ireland that I linked to earlier. They're proud of the fact that the average finishing time is increasing. Rightly so. It shows that people are being encouraged to take part.

I'm forever proselytizing parkrun, I'm on board with the cult, it has changed my life.

Every single sedentary person I try to encourage to go along asks me the same question. "I can't run, will I not look like an idiot?'

If they rocked up on a Saturday morning and were told to stay at the back, they wouldn't rock up the following week.

Stark

Lazare wrote: »

Of course safety trumps all but that's not the argument here.

Sure, in that situation a rule would make sense. It's an outlier though.

I've an issue with people demanding walkers don't interfere with their pb chances.

Do you not think it's a bit rude to deliberately form a line at the front to block everyone behind you from passing? Not having rules is nice but it assumes a bit of common sense and courtesy from everyone.

Lazare

Stark wrote: »

Do you not think it's a bit rude to deliberately form a line at the front to block everyone behind you from passing? Not having rules is nice but it assumes a bit of common sense and courtesy from everyone.

That's hardly what happened. C'mon now.

RayCun

Stark wrote: »

Do you not think it's a bit rude to deliberately form a line at the front to block everyone behind you from passing? Not having rules is nice but it assumes a bit of common sense and courtesy from everyone.

People don't do it deliberately, they don't know any better. If they keep coming back, they'll realize they should start further back, or maybe it will come up in a chat. But it's important to keep things friendly and relaxed so they do come back.

Stark

Last week we had 4 walkers starting in a line about 2m from the front.

I'm assuming given the width of most the paths on most Parkrun routes that having 4 people in a row made it very difficult for people behind to pass. If they realised the mistake and pulled in to the side to let people pass then fair enough.

Lazare

Stark wrote: »

I'm assuming given the width of most the paths on most Parkrun routes that having 4 people in a row made it very difficult for people behind to pass. If they realised the mistake and pulled in to the side to let people pass then fair enough.

Maybe they did, maybe they didn't.

Doesn't matter either way. It's not a race.

Anyway, I doubt there's more than a single figure amount of parkruns that start so narrow that that's an issue.

ionapaul

My wife and I were in Belfast for the night on Friday and walked to Ormeau parkrun on Saturday morning - it was cold but a nice welcoming crowd made up for it Lots of kids, very nice to see; we had the buggy with our almost one year old, who was wrapped up very warm and fell asleep as usual. My 25th different parkrun location in the bag, I spent one full year only running two different events, but in the last two years have been completely bitten by the tourism bug, absolutely love it!

Burkie1203

Stark wrote: »

Do you not think it's a bit rude to deliberately form a line at the front to block everyone behind you from passing? Not having rules is nice but it assumes a bit of common sense and courtesy from everyone.

Maybe rules is the wrong word but a suggestion from the RD in the interests of safety is required. I literally had to step right to avoid a dog 3-4m past the start line and nearly caused the person behind me to collide with a metal bench.

Two weeks ago one person had a minor fall as a result of the start being poorly managed (which has been addressed) but also a group of walkers causing people who wanted to RUN (not race) all trying to get around them into the one bit of space.

This woman held the lead in her right hand with her arm extended outwards. The dog was over to her left and as everyone moved off the dog shot across in front of me on her right hand side. This woman was also using her phone at the time. That should not be happening.

Lazare wrote: »

If they rocked up on a Saturday morning and were told to stay at the back, they wouldn't rock up the following week.

If people who want to run have to constantly take evasive action especially of dogs on 2m long leads they might give it up too.

I am all for inclusion. But as numbers grow and start areas become more congested then there will be a greater need for safety.

Burkie1203

Stark wrote: »

I'm assuming given the width of most the paths on most Parkrun routes that having 4 people in a row made it very difficult for people behind to pass. If they realised the mistake and pulled in to the side to let people pass then fair enough.

This is the thing. When being lapped they all have the cop on to leave room. Dogs are kept in check etc. The first 200m though is getting a bit too messy as numbers in 2019 are 180 175 155 compared to the normal numbers of about 100-110

muddypaws

Burkie1203 wrote: »

Stark wrote: »

I'm assuming given the width of most the paths on most Parkrun routes that having 4 people in a row made it very difficult for people behind to pass. If they realised the mistake and pulled in to the side to let people pass then fair enough.

This is the thing. When being lapped they all have the cop on to leave room. Dogs are kept in check etc. The first 200m though is getting a bit too messy as numbers in 2019 are 180 175 155 compared to the normal numbers of about 100-110

January is always really busy, just like gyms, the numbers start to drop back to normal levels from February on

TaurenDruid

Lazare wrote: »

You said 'parkrun's success is almost outgrowing a lot of the parks' then followed that up by complaining about walkers, ie, slower people, starting too near the front. That they need to be made start at the back.

That's a valid argument if it was a race. It's not a valid argument for parkrun. It's exclusionary and against the spirit of it.

Your point about the 2m dog lead is a fair one though.

This.

I'll bitch about starting a race a few dozen meters back from the start and having to dodge around walkers and slower runners on a crowded course, who decided they'd like to start at the front, as I had to do at the Raheny 5 and Trim 10-Mile.

I won't bitch about it at a parkrun because it's not a race (except against myself).

Absolutely valid point about a person with a dog on a 2m lead starting at the front, though, and if I was the run director there, I'd have had a quiet word with that person and asked them to either shorten the lead, start from the back, or both.

robinph

Someone starting out of position at the start line isn't normally causing any issues at all for the speedsters right at the front, they can see the person is there and will take avoiding action before the run actually even starts and move well out of their way before the b of bang. It's the people in the pack further back who can't see the obstacle that they are unexpectedly about to mow into who will have a problem. All very well saying that you need to watch where you are going, but the nature of running along in a pack of over excited runners at the start of an event is that you can't see where you are going, you just have to trust that the person infront runs in a straight line and keeps going forward without stopping.

Lazare

pac_man wrote: »

My parkrun suggests that people running sub 20 get themselves forward to the front.It's
intention is purely down to safety. It's hardly exclusionary to be making such a suggestion.

That's fine. There's a big difference though between telling sub 20 runners to start at the front and telling slow people to start at the back.

skyblue46

Lazare wrote: »

That's fine. There's a big difference though between telling sub 20 runners to start at the front and telling slow people to start at the back.

At least 30 yards!

Burkie1203

skyblue46 wrote: »

At least 30 yards!

At my local parkrun it's really only 3 yards.

skyblue46

Burkie1203 wrote: »

At my local parkrun it's really only 3 yards.

Poppintree? The benches are the clue...

Sunny Dayz

pac_man wrote: »

My parkrun suggests that people running sub 20 get themselves forward to the front.It's
intention is purely down to safety. It's hardly exclusionary to be making such a suggestion.

At my regular parkrun when something like this is suggested (faster runners to the front) - you nearly see everyone taking a few steps back, a few comments of "up there John to the front". Quite a bashful bunch. But luckily there isn't really a problem at the start with fast/slow runners, people have a fair idea where to start.

py

Not sure if this was the park were the dog issues arose or that it's been pushed from HQ

https://twitter.com/Tymonparkrun/status/1092847009873231872

Burkie1203

skyblue46 wrote: »

Poppintree? The benches are the clue...

Yup

vargoo

People had more than 1 dog + pushchair & dog?

robinph

vargoo wrote: »

People had more than 1 dog + pushchair & dog?

You still see multiple dogs on occasion, but back in the day there was a very fast female canicross runner in the UK who had two fast dogs. They didn't cause any issues as far as I remember, but there were certainly other instances of multiple dogs being an issue back in the crowd of "normal" people so they made the rule about one dog per parkrunner. Think the buggy OR dog rule came in around the same time, but I wasn't paying attention to such things back then.

Lazare

Can you run with a dog in a buggy?

crisco10

Lazare wrote: »

Can you run with a dog in a buggy?

As long as you keep the child on a 1.1m leash ? ;-)

adrian522

I'm not sure why parkrun do everything via facebook. I've been trying to volunteer for the local one this week. I've sent two emails to the email address mentioned on the website as well as selecting the "opt-in" for this parkrun but have heard nothing back from them.

Yet today I see them posting up on facebook and twitter looking for volunteers, doesn't make any sense to me.