Bring back the stats meeting with parkrun

Do itb@Elebag

I restarted volunteering once this whole thing exploded into the open. I should really get a Save Womens Sport top to do it in.

I stopped doing it due to the ultra competitive runners yelling at you to get out of their way as they lap you, it's pretty narrow in places due to the geography so really is more for those who want to casual run than caring about seconds. The only other local one is really hilly and classified as a hard parkrun this really not suitable for the likes of me (and even more competitive I'm told). I like getting a time to a certain extent but wish it wasn't public so there's no reason for the rudeness of some

I thought the parkrun organisers came through so cocky, like they could make parkrun a success no matter who was supporting them. Have they forgotten parkrun is NOTHING without volunteers? It only takes a little shift in culture and how volunteering feels to make hoards of people stop volunteering altogether. I stopped volunteering because of their total disregard for women - and now there is disregard for older people because of the lack of age grading! They just come over as misogynistic old men TBH!

The group that wants to "hog" - if indeed there is one, is the one that wanted to push parkrun in to using the rules for competitive sort even though it was pretty clear that parkrun HQ's stance put participation well above that (and this latest statement puts it beyond doubt).

They have got what they wanted - some were definitely saying that "if it's not competitive, why have results at all?".

But timing might survive if the other steps they are talking about do end the idea that its competitive, rather than it being about challenging yourself.

I have noticed more begging emails for volunteers (and I've done some voluntourism recently as others nearby are also begging regularly). But volunteering isn't affected by changes to how they publish/aggregate results. They do say that one of the things they want to do is give greater prominence to volunteers in the results page - we'll have to wait and see what that means in practice. I think they made a mistake when they started to sell purple tshirts for runners too - before that it was a soft nudge that volunteering was prized as a thing in itself. I would have liked to see purple remaining volunteering only, and would have added new ones for 75 and 150 (probably in hi-viz pink and tail orange)

It just feels like parkrun have taken the toys off everyone rather than deal with the child that wants to hog them.

I appreciate that parkrun are in a difficult position against a small number of men who exploit their biological advantage and the trans movement to steal women's records, and it's considered that (over used word) transphobic to call out gender based cheating. I doubt parkrun would appreciate it if I identified and registered as a 10 year old in order to participate in junior parkruns...

Logistically I don't know what the practical and fair solution is, but the way parkrun has gone down this route quietly removing stats without explanation, then their sorry, not sorry press release and now digging down with the it's our playground and you're disposable response is not ideal.

Parkrun is what it is because people buy into a free, weekly, timed run/ walk event. That's the glue that makes the social benefits happen. It's not parkcoffee or parkchat. If it's just a social, you don't need the volunteers. The current attitude at HQ is in danger of forgetting what the core of parkrun is which allowed it to become so popular.

Parkrun is brilliant because it's flexible. I don't join running clubs because I can't manage that commitment. Parkrun is a chance to push myself against the person in front or have a leisurely bimble (running or walking), I'm also a director because I want to make that community happen. One of my highlights of 2021 was finally getting back to my parkrun.

It's pretty galling to here that chasing new participants is more valued than keeping old ones happy. When I put together volunteer rosters, the A numbers bias towards older numbers (the new ones tend to be DoE). Many people register and don't attend, or come a few times and fizzle or are slow burners. I was a slow burner due to family life. Changing what works to chase growth for the sake of it is very risky.

Personally I think even if they're not a "sport", women have a right to fair leisure activities too!

I think what parkrun is considering would meet those concerns. No published results (except perhaps directly to participant) and possibly the end to it being a timed event completely.

I was wondering, if it goes to no published results table, and just direct to participant, if they will still include the age gradings? I can't think off hand of another activity where you get those, or of a website/app into which you can put your time and it gives you your grading. Anyone know if there is one?

We need a second parkrun in our large town but they can't get a core team together, despite having a potential course. (Our town is a bit crap though).

I'm honestly not that convinced that there are a multitude of would-be-parkrunners who would take part if it wasn't timed

Me neither. The biggest barriers are lack of childcare and the Saturday morning start. I suspect having to work on Saturdays is another one.

And just not wanting to run. Which isn't a barrier, it's a desire to do something else. Which may involve staying in bed!

My DH was telling me yesterday that the £3 million funding from Sport England is to set up 200 new events in England. I have absolutely no idea where those 200 events are going to go. I'd have thought we were close to saturation point - there are areas where there are no parkruns, but that's because the population is small in those areas. And then there are plenty of parks which are simply not suitable, although they might work for a junior parkrun. And where events are close together they often struggle for volunteers.

They're a global organisation and gender ID rules are more liberal in other countries, so they have to be mindful of that.

BUT they could have resolved the issue by having an open category. OK some people might have still registered in the wrong category. Maybe some people lie about their age too - I don't know, but most people don't. So I think on the whole it would have resolved things.

Personally I think even if they're not a "sport", women have a right to fair leisure activities too! Even the other way round, it does seem ridiculous that I could tell parkrun this week I want to run as a man in future (until I change my mind again) and that's all that's needed.

Honestly I hear what they're saying about prioritising participation but I also agree that some of the events are large enough (borderline really disruptive to surrounding residents and other park users- ours is 1000+ most weeks) and secondly, I'm honestly not that convinced that there are a multitude of would-be-parkrunners who would take part if it wasn't timed (i.e. more than would drop out if it wasn't timed). It's not like everyone is also suddenly blind and it's not immediately apparent who is fast and who is slow.

On reflection, I wonder if this is a public funding thing- possibly the funding is tied to certain participation targets and currently the target demographic (unfit people who would most benefit from an incremental 5k) isn't being reached- there's obviously (and rightly) no public funding available for "encourage people who already run 100 km a week at 3:30/km run 5k more". So to keep the funding it doesnt matter if the racing snakes leave so long as the couch-potato snakes join in. A similar thing happened with Surestart- everyone is v critical about the closures but actually the impact data shows that in the majority of cases it failed to reach the funded demographic- i.e. it was ineffective in addressing what it was funded to address.

It's not cowardly. Indeed I'd say it was bold. It's strapline is "free, weekly and timed" and they are prepared to ditch one of those aspects. And one that goes right back to its very inception as Bushy Time Trial.

They want to remain an inclusive event, and are prepared, it seems, to remove anything that leads people to think it is a competitive sports event. They are clear they want to be a community activity that is about participation, not results.

I've posted similar on parkrun threads before, and have been decried - on the general grounds that because some people thought it was competitive or that some runners behaved that way at events, ergo it must be competitive and should follow rules for competitive sports. They thought that the stance that parkrun cared more about community was misplaced, even naive. I think the outcome of this meeting is strong evidence that it was not. (One of the points on one of the threads was that, if they really cared most about participation - with implication that they did not - then they would remove all results. Now they say they are prepared to to move towards that. And I think that does show their priority)

Now it's just a case of how far and how fast they'll move along the range of options they have said are under consideration.

I’m astonished at the lengths mainly publicly funded sports organisations will go to upset their participants. It really is astounding. If I’m reading this correctly, parkrun have removed the stats to avoid dealing with the fairness in womens sports issue and have chosen a way which has upset the majority of people participating.
How utterly cowardly.

II went to an event last weekend where the event director had a word about behaviour, Though he said it wasn't just the faster runners being rude, it was slower participants who were hogging the paths by walking three abreast and then getting annoyed if someone asks them to give way.

I do think some events are getting too large and so it's a bit concerning that parkrun wants to double the numbers in four years' time.

I also think the results tables should stay so that people can see the spread of results and whether a particular event is likely to be too fast (or too hard - another reason to look at the results is that you can gauge its difficulty - if the fastest runner does 16 minutes on a flat course and 20 minutes on this one, you can assume it's quite hard! Even with a detailed course description it's not always easy to tell.

@parkrun500club yes sorry I don't think I wrote my post very well!

I agree that not scanning won't make a difference but there was a suggestion about running up to the line and then moving away to not be counted but to make a statement to the timekeepers? I think?

Anyway it looks like it's gone down a cul de sac now and parkrunners can either take it or leave it?

This is my experience too.

My local park run is laps, over the years it’s got more and more competitive, and with that comes very aggressive over takes and rudeness.

I don’t run it anymore. But my schedule means I have to walk along part of the route every week. And majority of the time I’m either physically nudged out of the way or aggressively shouted at. Despite always walking on the verge rather than the path and having a young child in the buggy with me.

I stopped doing park run because of competitive runners.
They were aggressive and had no problem nudging runners they were lapping out of the way.

Or roaring at us to move out of the way.

I run the route now outside of the park run times.

Hi- thanks for clarifying- no I always basically run on the other side of the path as I approach and don't look like I'm even slightly attempting to go into the funnel. You can see from a way back if there's a big queue. Not blaming them as it's a big park run but sometimes the funnel can be 10 mins or so and I can be a bit tight on time to get back.

@Trolleytoken

If you run up to the funnel and duck out, that's not good as the timekeeper might already have "zapped" you, but if you duck out some way back, that's fine. Equally it's fine to go into the funnel and not get scanned, but please take a token and then leave it in the bucket by the scanners.

@BovineUniversity

I disagree they look ridiculous - not scanning makes no difference to the volunteers as long as people take a position token and don't mess up the results. I can't see how as a RD you'd even notice. I only noticed a lady doing it the other week because she finished directly in front of me and didn't scan, but that could have been for any reason eg she just forgot her barcode.

And they did repeat the post about Nicky over and over again...and do they really think 100 people will step forward to replace her? Not many people would go to parkrun and junior parkrun most weekends for 15 years.

I don't really mind the high level stats going but I like the weekly results and if it wasn't timed I might not bother. I don't know. I guess most people can just time themselves anyway and occasionally if I'm in a rush and the queue is huge I don't go through the funnel (is that bad btw? I just assumed it's like you're not there- please tell me if I'm messing something up). I mainly go to Parkrun as a "sandwich" to break up a long run as less boring and I run a bit faster in a pack (possibly a wildebeest in a former life).

Thanks for posting. I set up a parkrun a few years ago and met both PSH & Russ (and Nick Pearson now disgraced )

Anyway I think they've been totally backed into a corner. I don't like the way HQ did it (and who did they interview?) but they're right that it's their playground so they can make the rules.

I think it's all rather sad tbh. It's got very nasty online. Nicky Clarke's v1000 kept being hijacked by the campaigners. I also agree that 25k signatures is indeed minuscule.

I thought it was a shame the stats were removed but I was over it fairly quickly. I think it's really tedious that the campaigners might double down and make more noise.

Anyone not scanning their barcode, not going through the funnel etc make themselves look ridiculous. I'm embarrassed for them. It's annoying as an RD having that kind of nonsense.