Marathon Winner Disqualified for Using iPod
The Lakefront Marathon winner has been stripped of her title by officials because she listened to her iPod during parts of the race.
Whether you've experienced it first hand or not, it's pretty safe to run with the assumption (unintentional jogging pun for you there) that completing a marathon is hard work. Aside from the fact that you're running 26.2 miles, it takes hours and that seems like the hardest part. You start running and you know it's going to be between three and four hours before you get to stop and do something else. In short, music helps to pass the time and stops you focusing on the fact that your legs are screaming at you to pack it in.
CNet reports that runner Jennifer Goebel had her iPod along for the ride for that very reason. "I wasn't listening to it earlier in the race. I wasn't going to put the music on unless I thought I needed it," she told her local paper. After a 19-mile slog, Goebel decided she needed it and listened to her iPod from the 19th to 21st mile. Unfortunately, because Goebel was running with the elites, she has to abide by the rules set out by USA Track and Field. The USATF recently relaxed its ban on the use of iPods and PMPs during races, leaving it up to race directors to decide whether or not to allow runners listen to music. Organizers of the Lakefront Marathon in Milwaukee decided that most people running the marathon could carry iPods but the elites could not.
The craziest thing about this story is that Goebel actually came second but was bumped up to first after the actual winner (who completed the marathon in a mind-blowing three hours, two minutes and nine seconds), Cassie Peller, was disqualified because she accepted a drink from a friend she saw at the 20th mile. Peller was notified that she had broken the rules after she had been told she had won.
Read the full story here.
- There's No Hiding with GPS Shoes
- BMW 3-Wheeler Concept Car Needs Lasers
- Windows Phone TV Ad is a Little Confusing
- Woman Faces Jail Time for Poke on Facebook
- ecoATM Pays You to Recycle Old Gadgets
- Yamaha Displays 1mm-Thick Cloth Speaker
- Enraged Starcraft Player Stabs Random Girl
- Results of NASA Moon Bombing to Take 2 Weeks
- Another Code for the Big Bundle Cancer Charity
- First Look: WikiReader, Wikipedia In Your Pocket
- Blogger Denied Benefits Because of Ad Revenue
- DVDs Are on Their Way Out
- Apple to Unlock iPhone's/Touch's FM Radio
- New Firefox Will Use Accelerometers
- Modern Warfare 2 Goggles Are For Perverts
- Dyson Bladeless Fan Still Really Blows
- Internet Addiction Leaves Man Homeless
- iPhone 'Pwnage' Jailbreak Software Out for 3.1.2
- God is Watching: Cinema Warns Torrenting Pirates
"The craziest thing about this story is that Goebel actually came second but was bumped up to first after the actual winner (who completed the marathon in a mind-blowing three hours, two minutes and nine seconds)."
Gotta love them Tom's editors.
What a lame way to ref a race. Just let the people run
ACDC Highway to Hell >
OMG.....talk about silly details....
RETARDED ppl have too much time.
Hmm.... had to disqualify the top two competitors for minor rule infractions? Sounds like the need to loosen up the rules. After all, what was her friend handing her, liquid steroids? Doubtful.
Hmm.... had to disqualify the top two competitors for minor rule infractions? Sounds like the need to loosen up the rules. After all, what was her friend handing her, liquid steroids? Doubtful.
Well, I can see the reasoning for disqualifying the runner that got the drink as there could have been something added to said drink to enhance performance by replenishing minerals and the like. The iPod, however, is just stupid to disqualify someone for.
What a bunch of garbage. Stupid stupid rules!
Who makes all these crappy rules? Disqualified from using ipod??????? Disqualified for accepting drink from a friend??????
Absolutely stupid.
As long as they aren't using drugs or being assisted mechanically in any way then who cares.
Agreed
They do use safety reasons as an excuse for both this and for cycling. . .but you're not looking for traffic while in a race and what about just using one earbud? It's what I do while on my normal rides - I do want to hear traffic or even talk with my buddy. . .
Not allowing a friend's drink is justifiable as balister said.
But I'm tired of being told I can't listen to something while cycling for 4 hours. . .
Run for fun and forget them, and be happy, all. Let's see them with 2 persons running
I say screw them she still won.PMP's/Ipod's do NOT enhance physical performance in anyway so its messed up to be disqualified for that.I punch someone in the face for that after running 26+ miles.Aslong as the person that disqualified me wasnt a woman.I would go to the nearest dude ref and punch him.
I could understand this to a degree that it gives an advantage for helping to keep a rhythm or jog to a beat. Maybe I am missing something here, maybe I'm not, but it seems that there is a large gray area here as to being able to use one or not. There should be a flat rule stated clearly as opposed to "you can if you are a standard runner, but cannot if you are an elite" - what?
Next up, disqualification for wearing too comfortable of a running shoe or wearing clothes that are too aerodynamic or wind resistant (only if you are an elite - I guess).
PMPs are banned because you can use them to force yourself to keep an even pace. Being able to maintain your own pace for a marathon, 26.2 miles and several hours, is part of the competition. You guys think running is just hurdur running but this is a mental challenge against your body and they've trained most of there life to accomplish. Its a big deal to actually win since it can mean a qualifier to other marathons such as Olympics.
In this case its her own fault for not reading and understanding the rules.
I wonder what the rules are for watches or heart monitors, very little interest in looking up those rules, but the only performance enhancement as Matt_B suggested would be rhythm, beat or pacing ability, all of which can be accomplished on a watch... Otherwise the officals are just making rules that have no effect on the outcome of the race. Local laws and ordances in many cases don't allow for the wearing of headphones by drivers (duh...) or cyclists, but thats an understandable safety concern...
The runner who accepted the drink was an idiot, of course thats going to disqualify you.
We used to use devices to help keep a steady pace.
Next up, disqualification for wearing too comfortable of a running shoe or wearing clothes that are too aerodynamic or wind resistant (only if you are an elite - I guess).
Pay any attention to the recent swiming rules... including not being allowed to use some of the new super streamlined suits?
RACE COORDINATOR FAIL
What happened to worrying about drugs and steroids? Its all iPods and Pepsi now
What a lame way to advertise ipod.
Are you people kidding?
1) This was "elite" level. Best of the best, not fun-running.
2) This is a published rule that everyone must abide by.
3) Part of the stupidity of running 26+ miles in a row is the mental anquish, not just the physical. Listening to music reduced the mental angquish/challenge of the race at arguably its most difficult poing, in a way that NO other elite member was allowed to do.
4) This is a published rule that everyone must abide by.
5) Haven't you ever seen the movie Iron Eagle? If listening to music makes you fly better, it most certainly makes you run better.
6) This is a published rule that everyone must abide by.
She ran a race in the highest bracket of competitors and did not obey the rules set forth beforehand. In doing so, had an advantage that nobody else did ... because they followed the rules that she ignored.
I would change my family name if it sounds like Goebbel, Himler, Goering or Hitler.
BTW, who'd carrying an iPod during a Marathon race? after a few miles that thing, however light it is, would start to feel like an M14.
actually carrying an ipod is a disadvantage, theoretically you're carrying a load, and you're more careful to run more smoothly as you don't want to jog the chips inside the ipod out of their sockets. so who's more stupid: the people making these stupid rules or the judges who implement these stupid rules? boycott the stupid race next time around!
BTW, who'd carrying an iPod during a Marathon race? after a few miles that thing, however light it is, would start to feel like an M14.
Ever heard of the iPod Shuffle or the dozen similar devices from other manufacturers?
If music (or whatever was playing on the iPod) is a "performance enhancer" then all distance runners should have to wear noise canceling headphones to prevent crowd noise and other "environmental" factors from affecting their performance.
Yes, the rhythm of the music can help pace you, and it can help distract you from the discomfort of you body, but so can humming, thinking about a specific topic, counting your footsteps, etc. Playing audio on your PMP doesn't give anyone an unfair advantage, even if other runners aren't using one.
That's an even more ridiculous rule than the (now revoked) rule disqualifying athletes who took pseudoephedrine (e.g. Sudafed) to treat congestion due to allergies or cold. Anyone who has ever taken it can tell you it doesn't enhance performance above "normal" levels. In fact for many people, it may make it difficult to concentrate, which is a distinct disadvantage. Even though reducing the congestion will help improve performance, someone who is taking it for allergies or cold will definitely not perform as well as when they're healthy and not taking PSE, so at best it simply gets them back to near normal performance.
Thats plain stupid, i would agree if it was clearly decided on beginning that ipod is not allowed to use, which was not clearly in this case.
Personally i would put race director out of job for at least 2 years for this for not making rules for race on beginning.
I still don't get why music will disqualify you. Even with the rhythm argument. People can choose whether or not to carry a music player.
If it is a matter of cost. You may as well require everyone to run naked and barefoot. As quality of shoes, clothes and other apparel can also effect performance.
hmm, wonder who the 3rd place winner was boning?
velocityg4 wrote:
"You may as well require everyone to run naked and barefoot."
That's how the ancient Greeks did it
pathetic rules
Dang, I couldn't run a half marathon with some head-banging Metalica. Give the gal a break!!
The person who came in third was disqualified because she quietly hummed "eye of the tiger" to herself between the 10th and 11th mile.
The fourth place finisher was disqualified for an illegal undergarment adjust during the 5th and the 17th mile. She claimed it was "riding up", likely story...
Banning music or listening devices from running events is IMO an unwarranted rule, which also, I asume, is why USATF has now removed this rule. While it seems pretty clear to me that music devices are performance enhancing for long distance running, there's really not anything wrong with that. This is just a mental help. It's not some experimental drug with short&long term consequences for health.
However, it was a rule in place in this race. So the judges did just right in disqualifying her. That is first of all their job. And if you want a motivation: You see,.. her competitors abided by that rule! And since she didn't, through ignorance or intent, she won by an unfair advantage.
As for the outside drink, that should be obvious to anyone... (maybe not on THW comment section though. It often seem even more stupid than YT)
So the judges were not "stupid". They did just right. The rule is stupid though, hopefully it will be completely gone soon.