This has been bugging me since I got my issue of RW a couple of weeks ago. I don't know why I can't just let it go. On two separate topics, I think RW did a big disservice to our running community.
Revisionist Drinking: New Rules On Hydration
The whole article could be summed up in this quote: "If you come up to a water station and you're ambivalent about downing a cup, you're not thirsty and you don't need to drink. But if you see the water at the station and crave it, then you're truly thirsty and should have a drink."
1. It's not that black and white. Everyone already knows what to do if you're either bloated or dying of thirst. So what are you supposed to do in between?
2. It doesn't say how much to drink, a sip, a few sips, the whole cup, chug the Gatorade bucket?
3. It doesn't account for how far apart the water stations are. Are we supposed to keep passing each station, getting progressively thirstier until we really "crave" a drink, and then the next station is a killer to get to?
Personally, I'll keep drinking a few sips to half a cup at every station, unless I feel like drinking more at any one station.
The Marathon Experiment: How We Turned A Slacker Into A Finisher
This guy wasn't just a slacker, he was a non-runner! WTF again!
1. Seriously folks, do we really want to encourage first-time NON-RUNNERS to go for it in 18 weeks to run a marathon? Is this how we want to get people started with a lifelong love for running?
2. How many RW readers do you think are closet non-runners? Who's in this non-running customer segment that RW is trying to reach with this article? Are we in that slow a news month?
3. Anyone know of a good swimming magazine for non-swimmers? I've always wanted to swim across the English Channel ... can I still do it before Thanksgiving?