Bring back the stats meeting with parkrun

If timings aren't that important, I could have had a nice lie in yesterday and left 500 people to get 59:59.

I'm concerned that HQ are in danger of forgetting what the point of parkrun is- a timed run/ walk. If they ditch that principle you lose the point that brings the community together. The volunteers choose to give up their time to facilitate that.

At the finish line yesterday there were so many paces and motivations, and people chose to go to that venue and not just hit the pavements for 5k which they can do themselves. That sense of event, and timing is critical to creating parkrun.

Pissing off your regular runners/ walkers and volunteers isn't a great base for growth, and it's taken parkrun a few years to creep back to their pre-pandemic numbers. Those regulars got it going again after 16 months off, and people's relationship with parkrun shouldn't be taken for granted.

We've been appealing for an additional RD for juniors for a year. You'd think it would be easier as it's not sacrificing runner credits, but getting people to commit to making events happen is easier said than done.

I do think that the Run Britain rankings should scrub all parkrun results - not just to reinforce the non-competitive aspect, but also because the timings are not necessarily that accurate

I think this will happen sooner or later - if only because it's a backdoor to seeing the results if they only want you to see your own.

I have seen people running as eg C Smith, you don't have to use a complete name either.

To be fair, I have seen people posting (maybe on MN) that they don't like public results because they don't want people to see how slow they are. But I've never seen anyone complain about the age graded or course records!

I was just coming to post this as well. I am very disappointed. I think getting rid of the timing will kill it off, if they go that far, but the thing I was particularly shocked about was their disdain for their volunteers, and indeed runners who they say should go off and join running clubs. Many already are, and many events have been part funded by running clubs, my own home parkrun included.

It's a sad day.

All this so that males can get their kicks running in the female category? SMDH

"If people are v concerned about their security (something the article mentions), I wonder if parkrun could instead look at encouraging pseudonyms? Some people use these anyhow already"

You can do this. I asked HQ about it and was told you could change your name. But you couldn't for example use something like Donald Duck or initials; it had to be a proper name.

They do sound like wankers tbh. The stats and men running as women don't affect them.

The stats were quite warped anyway, the womens ones were useless

This doesn't surprise me at all.

I think it's been extremely clear for many years that what parkrun values participation above all else. I am not surprised that they intend to reduce and perhaps eventually remove elements that are leading people to conclude that it is competitive.

You can still see an age grading if you want to compare your result to your cohort.

I don't think I'd like it if they did away with timing completely, but it was interesting to see that they would consider going that far.

And the proposed further changes to how event results are displayed is not something I'm sure I would support. Being able to see what's happened during the event you've just run as a whole is something I value - because eg I won't be following the random tourist I was talking to that day and so my idle curiosity in how they did would have to remain unsatisfied. I like to see how others in my club have done, but wouldn't necessarily want to follow them all individually. I loved seeing the results when a junior was first finisher at our event - not because of the time or even the winning, but because it was an amazingly good performance for someone that age. Marking the little achievements is good - like when the woman I knew had a fairly medical issue got round in under an hour for the first time.

If people are v concerned about their security (something the article mentions), I wonder if parkrun could instead look at encouraging pseudonyms? Some people use these anyhow already

I do think that the Run Britain rankings should scrub all parkrun results - not just to reinforce the non-competitive aspect, but also because the timings are not necessarily that accurate.

But the idea that parkrun HQ is the boss is far from new. It's always been autocratic. And I don't think that will change

And if they say inclusive and lose the idea that it's in any way competitive, then that's the way it'll (continue to) go.

You can report the thread and ask MN to edit the title