Born To Run

So, I was fairly contented with my 1:01:07 time, which, despite being gallingly ever so slightly in excess of the 1 hour I was aiming for, can't be bad for a first 10K road race.

I was pleased. I was the fastest person with my Christian name (out of, um, 4) and I ran the second 5K in a record (for me) 26 minutes.

Or a "PB", as I understand you're meant to call it.

And here's my problem: Other People.

I made the mistake a few weeks before the race of joining a chat forum (which will remain anonymous) for said race, and within minutes I was reminded of everything I hated about sporty people at school, and, by extension, why I hated sport and assumed I wasn't very good at it. This site seemed to largely be a place where people go to inflate their egos, and in doing so, crap on everybody else's. Hoping to find lots of words of encouragement from seasoned runners, I instead found the likes of "Looking forward to the 10K. Will be a nice relaxing warm-down after the marathon." A fellow first-timer had innocently asked the question "What is a good time to aim for?" and probably wished she hadn't, having elicited such responses as:

"Well, let's just say I'd be very disappointed if I was anything over 50 minutes." (No, mate, let's NOT just say, hmm?) and

"I'm aiming at 45 minutes." (Let's read the question, shall we? Did she ask what time YOU were going to run it in? Do we even care?)

"Anyone in reasonable physical shape should be aiming at under 55 minutes." (That told me, then.)

"The world record is around 27 minutes." (Er... and?)

There then followed an impressive tangent where people tried to out-modest each other in that awful ironic way where they say the exact opposite of what they mean:

"Well I've done hardly ANY training this year as SO busy at work. Just about managing a couple of 10-15K runs each week." (Translation: I'm trying to make you feel inadequate about the level of training I've done. And by the way, my job is far more important than yours. And I'm a wanker.)

"I have been suffering with a ligament injury so am having to come to terms with the fact I probably won't beat my current PB of 48 minutes, though I hope to do it in under 50." (Translation: I am super-human and/or probably don't have a ligament injury. And either way, I thought I'd drop in that I'm faster than all of you lot. And a wanker.)

"I was disappointed last year as I ran it with flu and managed a pitiful time of 45 minutes. My PB is 42 so I hope to beat that this year." (Translation: see above.)

"Training going OK. Got a PB of 51 minutes last week so shouldn't complain. Will be disappointed if I don't break 50 on the day, though." (Translation: I'm already faster than you most of you lot, and just want you to know that, even if you are happy with your efforts, I shall be sneering at you. Oh, and I too am a wanker.)

Other discussions included such topics as: "Look How Much Money I Spent On My Shoes" and "What's The Furthest Distance You've Run? I Bet Mine Is Longer".

So by the end of reading all this I was convinced that unless I ran a half marathon every week and spent my savings on a pair of shoes that looked to the untrained I like space boots I wouldn't get round at all, and even if I did finish I would do so shamed by the overwhelming averageness of my time, not to say shamed by the fact that I was running a mere 10K not just because it was something to do on a bank holiday Monday when there were no marathons on. I started to forget about piffling detail such as the fact I was raising money for charity and this was a Nice Thing To Do, and none of my sponsors would say "Eee an hour and one minute, you say? I think I'll be having me fiver back, then..." Funnily enough, few people on said chat forum actually mentioned things like charities, and those who did were ignored. ("It's my first 10K and I'm doing it in memory of my brother who died of a heart attack last year", wrote one woman, which elicited no response.)

Now, the day after the race, I have plans. I plan to run in my City shirt (that's the kind of classy chick I am) for the Bradford Burns Unit next year. And maybe I could "smash" my "PB" (if you're allowed to use that term for a time of over an hour.) Looking at the chat forum, people are announcing their times to one another, even though I don't think any of the people there have ever met, which begs the question: why are you telling us this? "38 minutes. Not too bad." writes one "I took 10 minutes off my PB with a sub-40 time" boasts another. (Well GOOD for YOU.) But the winner here: "Came 331st overall, 269th in my age catagory. Not bad considering I ran an abysmal time by my standards. We were stuck in the pen at the starting line far too long with no water so I must have got dehydrated." (The fact that you're better than, what, 95% of participants rather than 96% of participants is terrible, isn't it? I think you should sue the organisers... Go on... I dare you...)

All I can say is thanks to the person who wrote this:

"My first 10K. Very happy with 1 hr 15 mins, and reckon I can take a couple of mins off that as I stopped for a piss after 7K."

Nice.