If you're going to Grandma's, leave your iPod at home

[Ryan]

USA Track and Field recently enacted that ban for all sanctioned
running events to increase participant safety. That means runners
entered in Grandma's Marathon, the Garry Bjorklund Half Marathon or
any other official race must comply. Violators will be
disqualified.

For the safety of all runners, I hope this is one rule that will be enforced. I've seen and been part of too many dangerous incidents caused by people wearing headphones not being aware of their surroundings.

ESPN.com article

[cameron]

my guess is that BOSTON is going to follow suit since it's USATF sanctioned as well.

[Ryan]

My guess is most major events across the country will be forced to follow suit and hopefully forced to enforce the rule. All for the better as far as I'm concerned. Blocking probably the most important sense when surrounded by thousands of runners is a very risky proposition to say the least. If one were only placing oneself at risk, I'd say they have the right to risk their own safety. However, I witnessed a headphone wearing individual cause an incident that resulted in another individual breaking a leg and I've witnessed and been part of other incidents, in races and not, where it was someone in the wrong place at the wrong time getting hurt because an individual wearing headphones was oblivious to his or her surroundings.

[RandyS]

Hasn't this rule been part of racing for years?

At every major (non-local) race I've run the rules stated "no head-phones". Yet the rule is ignored by a good percentage of runners (probably at least 10%).

It's not the lack of rules but the lack of enforcement!

Randy

[Ryan]

Randy, the rule existed at many races for a long time, primarily because many race insurers required the rule to be in place and because the RRCA recommended the rule. However, no governing body required the rule. That's the difference now. Any race that wants to be USATF sanctioned must include this in the rules. Hopefully, the next step is that the rules have to be enforced, at least by not giving finishing medals to headphone wearers at events where everyone gets a medal and recording the numbers of those seen wearing headphones and removing them from official results.

Jerry, this topic reminded me of an article that Jim Hage of the Washington Post e-mailed me last July (probably published around July 11 or July 12). As I reviewed it, I came across the following quote. Headphones are already banned in Boston. New York and Chicago, at least at the time of the writing, did not explicitly ban headphones (but will have to going forward if they want to remain sanctioned).

Both the Boston and Washington’s Marine Corps marathons lump a specific
mention of headphones along with their prohibitions against baby strollers,
dogs and roller blades in an answer to a FAQ on their Web sites.

“Headphones are not allowed on the Marine Corps Marathon course but it’s a
difficult thing to police, especially as headphones get smaller and
smaller,” says MCM public relations director Beth Cline. “I hope runners
are conscious of the hazard and will take it upon themselves to realize the
dangers of wearing headphones. To me, it’s like tying your shoes – you
won't get thrown off the course for untied shoes, but common sense says
it’s safer for you and those around you to have them tied.”

Perhaps common sense is the reason the New York City Marathon Web site
makes no mention of prohibitions of any kind. The Chicago Marathon Web site
explicitly prohibits pets, strollers, bikes and in-line skates but makes no
mention of portable music players; less surprising is the similarly
truncated verboten list at the more liberal Los Angeles Marathon: “We’re
trying to provide so much music along the course that there’s no need for
headphones!” laughed Chris Devine, chairman of Devine Racing, which runs
L.A.

[cameron]

admittedly i've been a scofflaw and have worn my ipod shuffle in 3 of my 4 previous races.  (a marathon, a 50K and a half marathon)

most, if not all, races do say that headphones are not allowed.  it comes down to the enforcement of the rule...which grandma's is taking seriously with the confiscation of the devices and removal from the official results.

i have to begrudgingly admit that it is for the best...especially with larger events.

[Anne]

With as small as these devices are getting it would be a difficult thing to enforce in large race like the ones mentioned.
If someone is intent on wearing one while running it would be easy enough to slip the ear buds in after the race started & remove them before crossing the finish line.


I too have witnessed mishaps on the course due to people wearing headphones, I'm all in favor of banning them. 

[Ryan]

Anne, it would indeed be difficult and possibly expensive to enforce in all situations. However, I think the hope is that the enforcement and discussion of why the enforcement is in place will spark a movement where people begin to recognize the risk associated with the headphones and that peer pressure will also affect those who want to wear headphones.

As the Hage article I quoted above noted about what a race director should do:

Last, foster peer pressure through education and rely on that and the
goodwill of the paying clients to police themselves. If the policy is
clearly communicated, runners will tend toward courtesy, cooperation and a
reluctance to adversely impact others. Of course, if a headphone-wearing
race participant on inline skates is pushing a dog in a baby jogger, take
all appropriate measures.

[r-at-work]

aahhh, were it that easy... while we're at it can we have people line up in the proper area for their intended pace...

okay, seriously... the MCM and the Army 10 miler might be able to 'draft' enough help to actually pull people off the course... I can see it now... you'd need two or three 'stations' where the flow of the race could be spilt "head phone wearers to the right please"... and then those people could be put on a bus, chips & bibs removed and taken directly to the family meet-up area... if anyone complained I'm sure an electronic copy of the release the participant signed could be produced... headphone = DQ

I've seen major accidents (with a wheel chair racer & a woman with headphones) and been in a few water stop fiascos with headphone wearers... and I REALLY hate the line "I keep it low enough to hear what's going on around me"... aaah, nope... maybe they can come up with a NEW division... I can see it now "headphone users will start 30 minutes after all other runners"... along with the people who want to walk holding hands, three abreast...

I'm not fast and I would never think of lining up in the front... but unlike Jim Hage I am not sure we can count on people to self-police... some people think the rules just do not apply to them... some don't know the rules (even in the marathon as more people join '16 weeks from couch to a marathon' groups who SHOULD educate them and might not)... one year I tried one of those groups and the leaders DID say it every week for 16 weeks ("Don't block the trail", "no more than 2 abreast") and STILL there would be at least one incident each week...

sorry for the rant... one of my pet peeves...
-Rita

[Anne]

As a golfer I've often thought the European countries have a good idea, before allowing a player on the course they need to show proof that they've attended an etiquette class to learn the do's & don'ts.

While I don't suggest the same for runners, I would like to see more written about the topic for those new to the sport, even those who aren't new but for some reason are unaware.
I'm sure just those of us here could come up with a fair size list of what not to do on a race course.

It comes down to education- media, RD's, clubs, word of mouth to get the message out & hope that people listen. Of course, that means they'll have to remove their headphones so they can hear what's being said.   

[Ryan]

Rita, I don't think anyone is suggesting or considering pulling people wearing headphones off the course during the race. That would be more obstructive than them wearing the headphones in the first place.

However, there are things that can be done in order to enforce the rule. It sounds like Grandma's will have officials around the starting area confiscating any headphones they see before the race starts. Races such as marathons could also tell people handing out finisher's medals nobody with headphones gets a medal. Officials/volunteers who are already on the course could record numbers of individuals who are wearing headphones and those individuals could be disqualified in the official results. In fact, maybe the people handing out finishing medals could do that. If the person doesn't have headphones, they are given a medal. If the person does have headphones, you record their number and they will be disqualified.

There are ways that such rules can be enforced without pulling people right off the course, which could cause a greater obstruction to those who are following the rules than the people being there in the first place. That said, I don't think pulling people off the course during the race would be the wrong thing to do in all circumstances.

[Ryan]

Anne, a lot of this does come down to education.

Many headphone wearers don't realize how much of a hazard they are creating until something happens, which is too late. It would seem obvious to me, around hundreds or thousands of other runners who are all trying to find a path you need all your senses in order to know what's going on and account for it. However, it is apparently not so obvious. People need to be shown how hazardous doing such things can be.

Others say if headphones are so bad, why should we allow deaf people to run races? They have as much trouble hearing someone behind them as the person wearing headphones. That's true but the deaf person lives without that ability to hear things around them 24/7. They learn how to adapt to their surroundings and cope with not hearing what's going on around them. They know not to make sudden moves, they know how to use the rest of their senses to "make up" for their lessened ability or inability to hear what's going on around them. People who only stick things in their ears an hour or two per day at most haven't made such adaptions. These differences need to be explained so the excuses aren't accepted.

A lot of people say they can just turn the volume down and it isn't an issue. I'll second Rita saying that's not the case. The fact that you're covering your ear or obstructing your ear canal should make it crystal clear that you are obstructing your hearing even if the volume is off. An explanation or even demonstration of this could help people learn how wrong they are about this.

[r-at-work]

Others say if headphones are so bad, why should we allow deaf people to run races? They have as much trouble hearing someone behind them as the person wearing headphones. That's true but the deaf person lives without that ability to hear things around them 24/7. They learn how to adapt to their surroundings and cope with not hearing what's going on around them. They know not to make sudden moves, they know how to use the rest of their senses to "make up" for their lessened ability or inability to hear what's going on around them.

I would imagine a deaf person in a race (similar to what I've read about Marla Runyan's racing) is hyper-alert... that is they are REALLY paying attention to all the sight cues (in Marla's case I've read that she tries to breathe quietly so she can hear others running near her)... people who are in a race with headphone are doing exactly the opposite, they are trying to be distracted from the race, from the running...

when I read comments from people who say they NEED their music to get them through I want to tell them that if it's really that horrible, find a sport you can enjoy... I mean if there weren't medals, t-shirts, cheering fans and music I'd still run... it's the RUNNING I enjoy and I want to soak it all in... sight, sound, feelings(high 5s from the kids), taste too(except Ulitma), that beer at 22...

can you imagine a race where everyone HAD to wear headphones... you wouldn't need spectators or scenery, you could run in a tunnel or around the inside of an empty wharehouse...
-Rita

[Ed]

To play devil's advocate -

What if one were to wear only one headphone/earbud?

[sueruns]

I've gone back to using the headphone style on training runs vs ear buds....even at low volumes the buds plug out all outside noise, with headphones I can hear a car approaching from behind me.  (they also kept my ears warm this winter--on the few occassions I got outside ).   I am real surprised sometimes in a race that there are quite a few fast guys wearing headphones

[Ryan]

Ed, it's better than wearing two but I've still encountered people completely oblivious to their surroundings only wearing one. Besides, when running in a pack of thousands of runners, you need to hear what's going on all around you, not just on one side. Think blocking your hearing from one ear doesn't have that much of an effect? Next time you're having a conversation with someone, put your hand over your ear nearest them.

Sue, the ear buds are a big problem. First, they block your ear canal and pump the sound directly into your ear canal. Second, it's harder to see them so others around you may not realize you're wearing them. At least, with over the ear headphones, people coming up behind you stand a better chance of seeing them and knowing you may or may not be able to hear them.

[GTF]

To play devil's advocate -

What if one were to wear only one headphone/earbud?

Turnabout is fair play:
Why run if one does not really like running?
Why enter a race if one does not really like racing?

[Ed]

[/quote]
Turnabout is fair play:
Why run if one does not really like running?
Why enter a race if one does not really like racing?
[/quote]

What are you talking about?

People that like music cannot like running?  You make no sense.

[GTF]

Turnabout is fair play:
Why run if one does not really like running?
Why enter a race if one does not really like racing?

What are you talking about?

Needing tunes for running or racing.

People that like music cannot like running?

No, why would you ask that? 

You make no sense.

Likewise. 

[Ryan]

What are you talking about?

People that like music cannot like running?  You make no sense.

I think GTF is talking about the point that nearly all people who use headphones, especially in races, say they need them to run. They say running without headphones is too boring. If it's that boring, find something else to do.

[Ed]

So -

GTF ASSumed that I can only run IF I am listening to music.   

I use music for fartleks, pacing and sometimes I listen to radio to keep up with news and happenings.

I also use music to keep my mind from wandering - it helps me to focus at times.

I fail to see GTF's point that music magically makes some one suddenly like running. 

[GTF]

Why invoke "devil's advocate" if one completely fails to comprehend and recognize it?

So -

GTF ASSumed that I can only run IF I am listening to music.   

No, wrong, and an unfortunately hypocritical pointing of the finger.  It would be best to ask rather than exhibit sanctimony on this point, if genuinely interested in an honest discussion.  Is there any confusion over what a question mark indicates?

I use music for fartleks, pacing and sometimes I listen to radio to keep up with news and happenings.

A non sequitur.

I also use music to keep my mind from wandering - it helps me to focus at times.

Another.

I fail to see GTF's point that music magically makes some one suddenly like running.

Where was that ever mentioned as a "point" outside of the above asinine message post?   Ryan is correct and the questions still stand - stated merely in the same vein of devil's advocate - unanswered.  If uninterested in providing honest and direct answers then it would be best to just disregard the question(s).  Further attempts to disingenuously misdirect will continue to be laughed off.

[Ed]

How does listening to music while running have anything to do with one's like or dislike of running?

I love to run and sometime I like to have music whith me while I do it.

[sueruns]

I love running with music.   That said, I think I'd be a better runner if I never had.  I was more disciplined and intune to my breathing and body without music.  It's hard to go back.  To be honest, I can't believe I've ever done 20+ miles on a treadmill without tv or music in the past.   I think it's one more thing to have to "deal with" on race day and I hope I never cross that line.   I thinks the adage "don't do anything that you don't want to do every race day" applies.  I'm afraid that I can't do speedwork without listening to Aerosmith cranked up. 

[GTF]

How does listening to music while running have anything to do with one's like or dislike of running?

I love to run and sometime I like to have music whith [sic] me while I do it.

If one acknowledges a need for music to run (and even race/run well) then it is safe to say that such an individual does not really like running, that the music is being used to cover-up or distract from some intrinsic aspect of the task itself.  Logic would dictate that one who does not need music to run does truly enjoy running and thus would not have a desire to cheapen the experience with distraction and likely would not bother with superfluous stuff to carry while running.  Similarly, it would make no sense to wear music-emitting headphones in a race if one truly enjoys racing (as essentially defined) for its own sake, nevermind that any responsible adult who really likes running should recognize that it would be in violation of a statute intended to minimize liability and thus be in the best interest of the race and its organizers to avoid either the prohibited behavior or the race in question.  Ipso facto.  What that could have to do with the choices of any individuals who have yet to confess a need to have music in order to run or race is a mystery, as is why such individuals would respond to this pair of questions in a personal manner:

Why run if one does not really like running?
Why enter a race if one does not really like racing?

[Ed]

I do not need music to enjoy running - most of the time I do not listen to music.

I have never and will never carry music when I race.

Thanks for pointing out the typo - I don't often proof read posts on the internet or check other people's spelling and grammer but to each their own.

Again, I rarley use music when I run - which is why I started my post with TO PLAY DEVIL'S ADVOCATE.


At the begining of this thread there was no mention of any one's NEED to have music with them.  So this discussion of need is irelevant to my point.  Which was a reduction in the "dangerous" aspect of headphones if only using one.

[GTF]

What typo?  This displays ignorance of the meaning and application of the term "sic" and possibly the term "typo" as well.  Again, if anything is confusing it would be better to ask (though such questions need not - and perhaps should not - be asked openly on a dedicated running forum) than to benightedly assume.
It was clear that the device of devil's advocate was being used, there is no need to repeat that, and it should have been clear for those who read and comprehend English well that it was being turned around and used in response.  Why a personal response was made to a devil's advocate type of query is still a mystery.  If the questions do not apply on a personal level then why respond on a personal level?  That makes no sense at all.   A possible need is certainly implied in advocating for weaseling around the concept of a headphone ban.  Two != none, one != none.  Seems like an incredibly simple concept to understand.

[Ed]

I never argued for trying to get around a ban - I was trying to see what others thought from a safety stand point of a single ear bud.


You seem to be shifting that focus.

As Ryan pointed out one is better than two but none is the safest, I agree with that. 

[GTF]

It unfortunately must have been misunderstood, then, regarding its relation or relevance to the original point/focus of this thread. 

[rehammes]

If one acknowledges a need for music to run (and even race/run well) then it is safe to say that such an individual does not really like running, that the music is being used to cover-up or distract from some intrinsic aspect of the task itself.  Logic would dictate that one who does not need music to run does truly enjoy running and thus would not have a desire to cheapen the experience with distraction and likely would not bother with superfluous stuff to carry while running.

At first, I intended to disagree with you wholeheartedly.  The use of the words NEED and WELL changed my mind, however.  If some one NEEDS music to run, perhaps they should find another cardiovascular activity which they find more stimulating.  If someone cannot run WELL without music, might I suggest that they show up for the event better prepared.  I don't think it can be denied that there is a motivating element derived from music and some people may in fact run better while listening to it.  I have no problem with anyone who sports the headphones to get through a workout on a day where they just aren't feeling it. (Ryan would probably say that is your body telling you to take a day off)  But, to hear people at the start line of a marathon say, 'Are you kidding?  I couldn't get through this without my Ipod.'  I have to wonder why they are there in the first place.
     This is all a moot point because of the rules of most races.  No headphones.  I'll abide whether I like music while running or not.  How did it get to this point, though?  I did not enter many races during the explosion of portable digital music.  I assume that there were several incidents and the 'only' course of action was to ban the root cause.  I have never been a fan of this sort of knee-jerk reaction.  Ban the music because some people can't run with headphones.  That is not fair to all the others who can run responsibly with music.  Many of us have pointed out incidents where someone drops an Ipod at the start and gets trampled or causes someone else to fall.  I have never seen anyone post anything about the majority of other runners who don't cause any problems.  So is it the music or the person?  With the increased popularity of running, I think there are more people running races that know nothing about the etiquette of a road race (mainly referring to starting according to ability and the use of headphones).  I would guess that there are far less problems with Ipods in the back of the pack because things don't happen as quickly.  For that reason, I could be convinced to support an Ipod corral at the very back of the starting area.  That would put the impetus on the user to navigate traffic responsibly, or just choose not to use at all because of the immediate disadvantage.  Or just stick with the status quo, except enforce it. 

[Ryan]

Ryan would probably say that is your body telling you to take a day off

Not by default. Some days, you have to push through difficulties to get the training in.

But, to hear people at the start line of a marathon say, 'Are you kidding?  I couldn't get through this without my Ipod.'  I have to wonder why they are there in the first place.

Precisely my thought.

How did it get to this point, though?  I did not enter many races during the explosion of portable digital music.  I assume that there were several incidents and the 'only' course of action was to ban the root cause.

Actually, it doesn't seem like a knee-jerk reaction to me. This is something that has been building momentum for quite some time, first due to the potential of problems and now due to the actual problems.

Last year, I e-mailed an RRCA officer in response to the article I referenced early in this thread. She informed me that the RRCA has been encouraging headphone bans since the 80s due to the recognized risk. Insurers caught on to the idea when they had to start paying out liability claims that were headphone related. Finally, USATF got into the act. In my opinion, this was anything but a knee-jerk reaction. If anything, they were dragging their feet on the issue. It's about time they see what the RRCA and race insurers have recognized for many years.

[GTF]

If some one NEEDS music to run, perhaps they should find another cardiovascular activity which they find more stimulating.  If someone cannot run WELL without music, might I suggest that they show up for the event better prepared.  I don't think it can be denied that there is a motivating element derived from music and some people may in fact run better while listening to it.  I have no problem with anyone who sports the headphones to get through a workout on a day where they just aren't feeling it. (Ryan would probably say that is your body telling you to take a day off)  But, to hear people at the start line of a marathon say, 'Are you kidding?  I couldn't get through this without my Ipod.'  I have to wonder why they are there in the first place.

Indeed, this is a highly appropriate interpretation and response to the query in question.  It could also be said that if the supposed (I have never found it) "motivating element derived from music" is what is needed to do a run or to run well then, as you suggest, those people would probably be better off finding an activity that interests them more or using a stationary cycle if it is supposedly impossible to do any aerobic activity without headphones.  It seems more believable from the mouth of one Sebastian Coe when he offered something along the lines of: if you are paying attention to the music then you cannot possibly be working as hard as you should be.

This is all a moot point because of the rules of most races.  No headphones.  I'll abide whether I like music while running or not.

It definitely still happens despite clear rules.  I have seen statements on the topic from individuals who visit such fonts of ignorance as the forums attached to the Gallowalker's Earth and Jogging Journal websites.  This attitude (to which is what the initial pair of questions was a response) is not imagined, it is real (unless said forums are rife with disingenuous trolls, which they may be) and all too common. 

How did it get to this point, though?  I did not enter many races during the explosion of portable digital music.  I assume that there were several incidents and the 'only' course of action was to ban the root cause.  I have never been a fan of this sort of knee-jerk reaction.  Ban the music because some people can't run with headphones.  That is not fair to all the others who can run responsibly with music.

I could own an AK-47 responsibly, but there is no way I would be comfortable with my idiot neighbors having easy, legal access to such ordnance.  They cannot even handle a stereo appropriately and thoughtfully.  It got to this point because the notion of 'what I want, when I want, wherever I want' became widespread enough that when confronted with "can I do it?" the progression to and truly thoughtful consideration of "should I do it?" became rarer and rarer.  It can frequently be seen borne out in people driving poorly while clearly holding one hand to an ear, this despite hands-free headsets being commonplace and despite even laws that were enacted to discourage such willful disregard for the safety and lives of others.

Many of us have pointed out incidents where someone drops an Ipod at the start and gets trampled or causes someone else to fall.  I have never seen anyone post anything about the majority of other runners who don't cause any problems.  So is it the music or the person?  With the increased popularity of running, I think there are more people running races that know nothing about the etiquette of a road race (mainly referring to starting according to ability and the use of headphones).

Certainly, I have been party to a similar conversation elsewhere (I will go grab the appropriate quote and paste it below).  As soon as there is a way to weed out and eliminate thoughtless people from the starting line then that problem will be solved.  Nearly a year ago I was running a large (entrantwise) 10K race and twice I had thoughless/senseless people cut me off because they did not turn a head to check before making a sudden lateral move across the macadam directly in front of me.  I am certain that they did so without having even one of their senses blocked except voluntarily from within.

I would guess that there are far less problems with Ipods in the back of the pack because things don't happen as quickly.  For that reason, I could be convinced to support an Ipod corral at the very back of the starting area.  That would put the impetus on the user to navigate traffic responsibly, or just choose not to use at all because of the immediate disadvantage.

Which might work for most cases, though races exceeding even a mile in length would likely see several thoughtless, deliberately hearing-impaired individuals work their way up into the middle of the field and cause the same old problems. 

Or just stick with the status quo, except enforce it.

What status quo would that be?
Anyway, while race directors might indeed be pleased to see problems caused by people who deliberately impair their ability to hear go away, it is likely insurance liability concerns that drive such bans.  If a headphone-wearing numbskull causes major injury to another participant, the race management and its insurance company can point to their attempt to have prevented the situation.  If there is no such ban, there could be culpability found in the race management for not doing all that they could to prevent the circumstance from occurring.  Those addicted to the headphone teat, however, have been used to getting their way on the issue and consider it unfair and an unnecessary restriction.  There will always be those who are too selfish/immature to accept any change, no matter how trivial, that might benefit the greater good.

"Is it a headphones thing, or a people thing?"

Regarding the question at hand, it's probably some of each, though the roots are certainly in the latter and the former is merely a vehicle used to deliver the attitude. As a society, we westerners are spoiled and really don't consider all the consequences of all our actions, we want to believe that we're rugged individualists and any action can be justified if it serves to get us ahead. Win at all costs, in a sense. This very well could be an era of decline for western civilization -- but I digress.

[rehammes]

She informed me that the RRCA has been encouraging headphone bans since the 80s due to the recognized risk.

I had no idea the issue went back that far.  I suppose 'knee-jerk' was a poor choice of words.

What status quo would that be?

I am referring to the current ban on the use of headphones at most races.  For enforcement, I would settle for a simple announcement before the gun reminding runners that the use of headphones is a violation.  I can't say that I've ever heard one.  I would be curious to find out if those in violation are aware of it. 

[sueruns]

I know someone that has headphones and pushes a double stroller.......
the local newspaper always interviews him, so where's the incentive to stop?? 

[Ryan]

I would be curious to find out if those in violation are aware of it.

I can't speak on how many know it but some most definitely do because, whenever the topic comes up, they will let everyone know how strongly they feel about it and say they will continue wearing headphones no matter what the rules state, usually actually challenging race directors to do anything about it.

Given that attitude displayed by some of them, I say the race directors should take them up on the challenge. If they catch someone with headphones in violation of the rules, disqualify them.

[Ed]

As a society, we westerners are spoiled and really don't consider all the consequences of all our actions, we want to believe that we're rugged individualists and any action can be justified if it serves to get us ahead. Win at all costs, in a sense. This very well could be an era of decline for western civilization -- but I digress.

I agree with GTF the "it’s all about me" attitude = ruinous. 

In a race I would never carry any music device with me.  I just hope that (since I am a middle pack runner) those around me can hear me.  I know I can get loud enough but I do not want to expend that energy or get frustrated and throw my game. 

Yes I like to run with music on rare occasions but only on a treadmil or alone on the Ozaukee County interurban trail.

[GTF]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20070724.LIPOD24/TPStory/?query=abarbanel


RECKLESS RUNNING?: MUSIC IS MY RADAR
Sounding off
Race organizers say running to U2 is dangerous, but some competitors insist they can't live without their tunes. David Andreatta reports.

DAVID ANDREATTA

July 24, 2007

Tracy Abarbanel runs to her own soundtrack. Every step along the Rideau Canal is fuelled by a steady stream of U2 and Bruce Springsteen and myriad eighties artists pulsing through the white snake-like cords of her iPod earphones.

"For me, having music for running is right up there with having a pair of shoes," said Ms. Abarbanel, 33, a psychologist and recreational road racer from Ottawa. "Not having my iPod for a race would be like breaking a lace at the starting line."

Road races are loaded with legions of runners like Ms. Abarbanel, whose devotion to the sport runs second to their love for the gadgets they say keep them going.

But music-dependent runners are increasingly running smack into opposition as race organizers discourage or ban electronic devices from their contests.

New regulations quietly adopted this winter by USA Track and Field, the governing body for the hundreds of long-distance running races held in the United States each year, prohibit digital music players and cellphones from road races.

While enforcement is left up to organizers of individual races, runners stand divided between iPod lines. Attempts at some events to confiscate music devices at the starting line have hit a sour note with some participants, while at the same time earning quiet adulation from purists who view the gadgets as a hazardous distraction.

Regulations previously recommended that headphones not be used during races for safety reasons, but a USATF spokesman said the language was strengthened at the request of race organizers, who complained that runners ignored pleas to shed their iPods because the rules were not explicit.

"You can't be fully aware of your surroundings when you've got music blaring into your ears," said Jim Estes, who oversees long-distance running programs for the USATF.

"A car could be coming up behind you and you'd have no idea."

Athletics Canada, which sanctions some road races here, does not prohibit electronic gadgets in its contests and has no plans to do so, according to spokesman Mathieu Gentès. "It's not an issue for us right now," he said.

Some Canadian races, however, have taken matters into their own hands.

One of the country's largest races, the Toronto Marathon, which is expected to draw as many as 12,000 runners this October, strongly recommends against the use of music devices. It provides live musical entertainment along the 42-kilometre route to fill the void.

"It's difficult to hear what's going on around you, and we're running on city streets where, if there's an emergency vehicle going by, you're not going to hear it," said marthon director Jay Glassman. "When we see runners wearing [headsets] we ask them to remove them."

But the exploding popularity of both iPods and recreational running in recent years makes enforcing a no-iPod rule difficult. The effects of the ban in the United States are only now beginning to reverberate through the running world like the pounding of rubber soles on concrete.

Attempts to confiscate headsets at the starting line of a marathon in Duluth, Minn., last month sparked outrage among competitors. Runners in Florida are reported to be planning to circulate petitions over plans to ban music players at upcoming marathons in Miami and Palm Beach.

"Music is a necessity for me," griped one recreational half-marathoner recently on a forum hosted by Completerunning.com. "There is no freakin' way I'd make it through 2+ hours of pounding the pavement without a soundtrack!"

At the same time, purist runners are singing the praises of the prohibition.

The above post was immediately followed by this: "Hurrah for the ban! In my [recent race] I made a point to try to talk to three different runners that wore iPods. Not one of them ... heard me speaking right next to them. They certainly wouldn't hear a race official or vehicle, either."

Racing enthusiasts say there is also a question of whether electronic devices enhance performance among elite runners who make their living from road racing. Using a cellphone or music player during a race could be interpreted as getting assistance, which is also against the rules.

Many runners use particular tunes and GPS units to calibrate their pace. Lance Armstrong, the seven-time Tour de France champion, ran last year's New York Marathon wearing shoes equipped with sensors that sent data about his pace to his iPod.

For some runners, music provides a spiritual lift. Others use music to keep from getting bored on long runs. But most serious runners believe that music players have no place in races, or even in training.

"When I'm running, I want to be aware of what's going on, to listen to myself breathe," said Ken Parker, 65, a founder of the Ottawa Marathon who now coaches Ms. Abarbanel and other women on a club team.

"Now it's almost like some people are looking for a distraction somewhat," Mr. Parker said. "They want to do the exercise but have their head in another dimension. I don't understand it personally, but I appear to be in the minority."

For Mary Jane Middlekoop, an Ottawa lobbyist who runs with Mr. Parker, the random thoughts that swirl through her head on training runs are music enough to her ears.

The former University of Tennessee distance runner tried to embrace running with music a few months ago by using her fiancé's iPod on a run.

"I just couldn't stand it," Ms. Middlekoop said. "You don't need a watch, or a heart-rate monitor or music to go for a run. You just need to grab your shoes and run out the door. I'm creating my own soundtrack of thoughts when I run."

[Ryan]

Interesting article. Also, interesting timing of posting the article as I've just today noticed the topic make a comeback elsewhere as a few people are reporting that they are now getting notes in the mail from Grandma's telling them that they have been disqualified. Reportedly, two individuals refused to give up their iPods at the starting line and about 40 were spotted crossing the finish line with headphones. Bib numbers were recorded and those individuals have now been disqualified.

A couple of notes about the article.

First, it's using the loaded term "purists" to describe those of us who support the ban. This is a term that those who support headphone use like to use in an attempted disparaging way to suggest that we simply don't want new technology showing up at races. Basically, they seem to like to use this angle as a way to shift the focus away from what most of us are actually concerned about, the safety issue.

Second, the article reports that "Attempts at some events to confiscate music devices at the starting line have hit a sour note with some participants". I would note that the only race that has been getting any notice for confiscating headphones at the starting line has been Grandma's and every report I've heard from there was that runners were very cordial and accepting of the ban. Yes, two refused to give up their iPods and some others managed to sneak their music players past the check point. However, how about mentioning that these were a distinct minority, apparently less than 50 of over 13,000 runners? I'm sure a few others complained but reports from the race at that the complainers were far outnumbered by those who were accepting or even appreciative of the rule and enforcement.

Third, the article also didn't mention the positive side of the ban at Grandma's and only mentioned the reason in passing. Reports from Grandma's are coming in that emergency vehicles were able to get where they were needed much more easily this year than in years passed, when headphone wearing runners would not hear them and get out of the way. Sounds to me like the rule and enforcement improved the safety of the event.

Finally, one more note. Grandma's may have been the first to practice such enforcement but don't think they are going to be alone. Already, organizers for Chicago, Twin Cities, and Marine Corps have stated that they will this fall be implementing and enforcing headphone bans and organizers for New York, while still being on the fence a bit, seem to be leaning that direction.

[Ryan]

An interesting article just posted online about the Grandma's iPod ban: You Can Stop the Music! Grandma's Proves Enforceability of Headphone Ban (pdf)

An interesting segment:

On race day, several volunteers, one of whom dubbed himself an "iPod Cop," stood at the entrance to the start corrals, looking for runners with headphones. According to that volunteer, only two runners at the start had been stopped and refused to surrender their music players.

In addition, the usual cadre of course marshals were instructed to watch for and note the bib numbers of headphone-wearing runners, as were workers at the finish line. The finish line workers' task was made easier by Grandma's use this year of single-use timing Chips; not having to collect Chips in the finish corral freed workers to watch for headphone violators.

In the end, they didn't find many. Out of 13,248 finishers in the marathon and accompanying half marathon and 5K, less than 40 were caught wearing headphones. These runners were sent notices saying their performances would be removed from the results, and were given a chance to appeal that decision. It is not known if any have chosen to do so.

Grandma's did a great job of educating runners before the fact, then gave people the opportunity to surrender their headphones at the start line or get disqualified. I would say that about 40 violations and resulting DQs out of 13,248 finishers would suggest the education/enforcement process worked. It also sounds like other RDs are already looking at this and planning to follow suit with education/enforcement procedures.

[GTF]

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080501/SPT/305010047

Some choice quotes:

“The music gets my mind off running long distances,” said Hartwig, 24, of Hyde Park.

“Really, they’re not allowed?” Hartwig’s friend Elizabeth Yoke asked last Saturday before a training run, a look of anxiety suddenly transforming her face. “I don’t think I’ll be able to run without my iPod.”

“It’s almost become an unenforceable rule,” said Fred Finke, chairman of the long distance board.

“So it would be a failure of my leadership if we don’t address this in the next month or two because right now it’s a rule that’s just not working. Still, it’s a safety issue because if you have headphones in, you can’t hear directions from a course monitor if there’s an emergency.”

“If they rescinded the rule, it would be a lot easier for us,” Simpson-Bush said. “We don’t feel it’s appropriate to put ourselves in a position of policing this.”

The Flying Pig’s policy of discouragement without enforcement aligns with most marathons but is at odds with the Twin Cities Marathon in Minneapolis, where 176 runners were disqualified in October. Ten pairs of volunteers were stationed throughout the course to watch for runners with iPods.

“I thought there would be more enforcement by other marathons,” Twin Cities director Virginia Brophy Achman said. “When you’re training all those weeks on trails or open roads, it’s dangerous to have headphones on.”

serious runners don’t wear headphones in either training sessions or races.

“Part of running is being able to focus on how you’re feeling. The iPod brings in so many distractions to that process.”

Those distractions are exactly why Woodlawn’s Joe Gast Woodlawn will be wearing an iPod in the half marathon, running with encouragement from Eminem and Pearl Jam.

“I want to be distracted,” Gast said. “I find running to be boring, and without an iPod, it hurts a lot.”

Michael Fecher will consider both sides of the argument Sunday when he is running the full marathon, listening to artists like Big & Rich as well as passing traffic.

“I’ve got two ears,” Fecher said. “But I’m only going to have headphones in one of them.”

Which is great so long as he keeps all of the other runners and all of the race officials on the side with the removed headphone.  Somehow marathons in Minnesota have figured out workable ways to enforce the rule so why would it seem so tough or even impossible to other marathon organizers and bureaucrats?  Are they simply unwilling?

[r-at-work]

“The music gets my mind off running long distances,” said Hartwig, 24, of Hyde Park.

so take up tiddly-winks  ... geez...or scale back to a 5K... no one is forcing these people to run long distances, no one is forcing them to run marathons, or at least marathons that enforce the rules... I must be getting old as I am so much less tolerant of people saying stuff like this... there are SO MANY OTHER SPORTS, why do something you don't like, something you have to take you mind off of?
-Rita

[Ryan]

“The music gets my mind off running long distances,” said Hartwig, 24, of Hyde Park.

“Really, they’re not allowed?” Hartwig’s friend Elizabeth Yoke asked last Saturday before a training run, a look of anxiety suddenly transforming her face. “I don’t think I’ll be able to run without my iPod.”

So take up another sport. If you dislike running so much that you need an iPod to distract you to such a degree that you forget you're running, then why are you running in the first place?

“So it would be a failure of my leadership if we don’t address this in the next month or two because right now it’s a rule that’s just not working. Still, it’s a safety issue because if you have headphones in, you can’t hear directions from a course monitor if there’s an emergency.”

Out of all the things in the article, the last sentence from that quote is the key. No matter what anyone says, it is a safety issue. I've seen it with my own two eyes (and heard it with my own two ears). Plugged in people, no matter how much they insist they can hear everything around them, do not hear instructions from race officials or warnings from other runners. They are a hazard on the course. No matter what these people say, their actions speak volumes and those actions make it clear that this is a safety issue.

[BirdDog]

even with as small as these devices are getting, who the hell would want to carry one for that far?!?!?!  i sweat too much and would drown a pair of earbuds or headphones.  Besides, on training runs & races, I like to enjoy the sights and sounds as much as the running.  It's part of the entire experience.

[KD]

YEA!  Geez...took long enough.  I am not an iPod w user on the road...that is my freedom from all things connected to the social world...ANyway...will all marathons be implementing this rule? i am running my first on in San Fran this August?

[Ryan]

will all marathons be implementing this rule?

No. Check with the marathon you are entering on whether or not the rule is being enforced. Some are not USATF sanctioned and, as a result, have no requirement placed on them to enforce the rule. Some USATF sanctioned events are blatantly ignoring the requirement that they enforce the rule and saying they will not. Unfortunately, instead of standing up for themselves and for the safety of the runners, the USATF as a result is going to consider repealing the rule.

[cameron]

admittedly i'm a part-time ipod user.  normally i use it for those g0d-awful training runs in the de@d of winter here in WI.  on occasion i've raced with it as well.  i can see both sides of it...the safety issue and the personal liberty to do so.

to me, if someone races in a USATF race with them...they shouldn't be covered under the race insurance...and the race mgmt shouldn't be held responsible for their well being.

[GTF]

to me, if someone races in a USATF race with them...they shouldn't be covered under the race insurance...and the race mgmt shouldn't be held responsible for their well being.

Except that when entrants sign their name to the waiver, they are agreeing to not only abide by race rules and instructions given by race officials but also to release the race and its sponsors from liability regarding circumstances and incidents while on the race course that the race officials have paid the local municipality/ies to use.  The USATF insurance is not for the coverage or safety of the entrants, it is to cover/protect/minimize the liability of the race organizers and sponsors.  Signing that waiver is an agreement to restriction of "personal liberty."  If they are unwilling to play by the rules (all of them, not just the ones they like) that the race organizers set forth then they should not enter the race, period.  Those who sign their name (or the electronic equivalent online) at the time of registration and agree to abide by the rules (which may or may not include a headphone ban) and then knowingly and willfully break the rules are, in effect, liars.  Most of the people who enter races, like the ones quoted in the articles posted on this thread, are supposed to be adults -- it is time they figured out how to act like adults.

[Ryan]

Not only are they liars, they signed what is considered a legal contract when they want to sue the race about something. They are in breach of contract.

Besides, the problem is that it's not just themselves that are being harmed by their use of headphones. Sure, it's fine to say that they shouldn't be covered by the race's insurance but what about when their negligence results in someone else being hurt?

If they violate the agreement that they signed on to, they should be kicked out. Bottom line, they shouldn't be allowed to enter the course in the first place. Whatever RDs do to keep them off the course, whether not allowing them on the course with headphones or disqualifying them later if evidence of headphone use is found, is perfectly warranted.

[sueruns]

I use an ipod on many training runs, I'm responsible for my own safety.   But rules are rules...I'd never wear them in a race.   

As I watched our local marathon last year, I couldn't believe the women's winner was crossing the line wearing her headphones.  I'm further discouraged that the race is using her photo finish in their advertisement for this year's race.

 I have to wonder in what direction we are going with what we allow.  Years ago I ran a half that I almost got DQ'd because I accepted water from someone that wasn't a volunteer.  I assumed the person was, as he was handing bottles to anyone that wanted one, not just me.   I was told that I should know the course and aid stations are a part of knowing it.   This was a mere 10 years ago.  Now I see friends on bikes pacing, headphones, friends hanging gu, etc.  and RD will say "well, no one issued a complaint.

[cameron]

my father had a rule...only two cookies for dessert.  as an adult, i willfully disregard that rule at each and every opportunity...especially if he's having dinner with us.   

[sueruns]

you only eat one, right?   

[GTF]

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=504849

[RB]

I use an ipod on many training runs, I'm responsible for my own safety.   But rules are rules...I'd never wear them in a race.   

As I watched our local marathon last year, I couldn't believe the women's winner was crossing the line wearing her headphones.  I'm further discouraged that the race is using her photo finish in their advertisement for this year's race.

 I have to wonder in what direction we are going with what we allow.  Years ago I ran a half that I almost got DQ'd because I accepted water from someone that wasn't a volunteer.  I assumed the person was, as he was handing bottles to anyone that wanted one, not just me.   I was told that I should know the course and aid stations are a part of knowing it.   This was a mere 10 years ago.  Now I see friends on bikes pacing, headphones, friends hanging gu, etc.  and RD will say "well, no one issued a complaint.

A couple of years a go I got blasted on a message board because I thought runners that peed in peoples yards along a marathon course we breaking the rules (which they were). Other runners seemed to think that was ok, and also hard to enforce....

[sueruns]

I use an ipod on many training runs, I'm responsible for my own safety.   But rules are rules...I'd never wear them in a race.   

As I watched our local marathon last year, I couldn't believe the women's winner was crossing the line wearing her headphones.  I'm further discouraged that the race is using her photo finish in their advertisement for this year's race.

 I have to wonder in what direction we are going with what we allow.  Years ago I ran a half that I almost got DQ'd because I accepted water from someone that wasn't a volunteer.  I assumed the person was, as he was handing bottles to anyone that wanted one, not just me.   I was told that I should know the course and aid stations are a part of knowing it.   This was a mere 10 years ago.  Now I see friends on bikes pacing, headphones, friends hanging gu, etc.  and RD will say "well, no one issued a complaint.

A couple of years a go I got blasted on a message board because I thought runners that peed in peoples yards along a marathon course we breaking the rules (which they were). Other runners seemed to think that was ok, and also hard to enforce....

I just found out that in triathlons, you can't pee on the course.    what do you do when there's no port o potties.  The answer was "pee on yourself".   sorry i asked. 

[Ryan]

Sue, that's not as abnormal as one would think. I had a friend quite a while ago who was a budding elite runner. He asked an elite runner from Wisconsin (whose name will not be mentioned in case someone would think differently of him due to this) what to do if running a race and feeling the urge. The response: grab a cup of water from an aid station, pour it out on your shorts and legs, and let it fly. People will think you're just cooling your legs off and won't have any idea what's actually going on.

Next time you see an elite pouring a cup of water over his or her shorts/legs...well, let's just say you'll never watch a race the same way after finding out about this tidbit.

[GTF]

grab a cup of water from an aid station, pour it out on your shorts and legs, and let it fly. People will think you're just cooling your legs off and won't have any idea what's actually going on.

Indeed, this is an old strategy among marathon runners.  It is likely that nobody would be watching you when you do this, anyway.  I would only stop for a toilet break during a race if I had to throw a deuce.

[Ryan]

Likewise, I wouldn't stop during a race for nearly anything. I'd take that advice if I had to go during a race (though I never have had to...yet). Of course, I sweat heavily enough that I could probably pull it off without the cup of water.

Have we hit the TMI stage with this topic yet?