The Slate's Take on Novice Runners
http://www.slate.com/id/2149867/?GT1=8592
As his title suggests, the author argues that people who are casual runners have somehow destroyed marathons for the real athletes by making them less competitive. I found it a bit disheartening, and wonder how exactly one can argue that there's less of a point in running a marathon just to finish than there is in running one for time--they both seem pretty arbitrary and one person's 3:30 is another's 4:20 as far as I'm concerned. It also mentions the growth of the marathon business, this being a down side to the popularity of marathon running (or walking, whichever the case may be), but fails to take into account races that promote certain good causes, such as the AIDS marathon. If anyone else has read it, let me know what you think.
In any case, I guess it's a good incentive for me to do more than just get across the finish line, to prove a point that all newbies and casual runners aren't necessarily slouches.