Friday, 19 October 2012

10K races should be K distance marked!

The weighing scales I have by the shower are set to stones and lbs. I regularly see I am about 10 stone.  My garmin is set to miles. I monitor my training in miles per week and per year.  Thats' my choice.
 When I was younger, the change in my pocket was "tanners" (six old p..2.5 new p)  3 penny bits,  a "shilling" 5 new P. A guinea was 21 old shilling. But now of course there's no choice: money went metric.
 I still think that sugar comes in 2lb bags.  But times change....
  And so of course did many race distances as the 10k distance grew in popularity from the early '80s.
For example, the Salford 7 became the Salford 10K. Yet  for many years the distance markers remained imperial, in miles, until changed a couple of years ago. Nagging sometimes works!
 It's now 2012 ; yet still some race organisers seem to insist on putting race distance markers denoting MILES when the distance is METRIC! 
 Now you might say it's just "old farts" of my generation but that's not always the case.  The Lancaster 5K series races were mile marked  and the race organiser appeared  to be half my age! Last Sunday's Fylde Coast Running event , the Autumn Breaker 10K was mile marked but then again  Ron Mc A. is about my age!  Still no excuse in my opinion.
 I feel it very frustrating and puzzling but have come to expect it happening. 
 I don't know about you,  but personally I find dividing by 10 to be so much easier than dividing by 6.2!

E.G.  I want to run 40 minutes for a 10K......4 minutes per kilometre.  Mile pace...look it up!
         I want to run  43 minutes for a 10K....4.3 minutes...4mins 18 seconds per K. Mile pace...look it up!
         I want to run  50 minutes for 10K.......5 minutes per kilometre.  Mile pace....oh I give up!!
I think you get the point.  But how come so many race organisers don't?!
  I posed the question on my facebook page and an overwhelming 80% felt that 10Ks should be K marked NOT mile marked. (That was Steve, Tim, Mary W., and me) whilst 20% (Bill Fox ) was a staunch imperialist!     OK not exactly a massive sample but conclusive ,don't you think?
 If YOU think 5K and 10K races should be K marked NOT mile marked please add a comment on this blog or my facebook page and if you run a metric race which is not K marked have a bit of a nag with the race organiser.  
                   You'll find him at the refreshments stall trying to pay a "tanner" for a cup of tea.


  1. Terry,

    I disagree. I'm in my early 30s, but think in 'miles'. I think of my training runs in miles, my Garmin is set to miles, and I always think of my pacing in mins/mile, even when doing a 5k or 10k.

    I see your logic of dividing by 10 being easier, but a bit of mental arithmatics during a race goes a long way to taking your mind off the pain.

    One advantage of the km markings is that they are ticked off much quicker!

  2. For Km races 5k & 10k then the markers should be in km if it is a 10mile or half then more than happy to have mile markers but they should keep it the same as the race distance - logical as a certain Spock would say. All the best Paul (Wetherby Runners)

  3. Sorry I am almost a month late to this post but I agree that markers for a 10K should be in K and markers for an Imperial race should be in miles.