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

[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.