Oh . . . you're talking about Runners World. I didn't see your title and thought you MUST be talking about triathlete magazine! I recently noticed the same quote used at the beginning of their training section was used in two of their mags published a few months apart. Give me a break! They can't even find 12 months worth of inspirational quotes?

If you drop your subscription to Runner's World how will you know to P.R. your marathon by only doing 3 runs per week??

That magazine seems to be a reflection of lazy America - do the least work and expect the best results.

Face it...how many ways can you repackage the proven methods? I quit buying magazines years ago. These days any real news contained in them is months old by the time you read it in the mag. And I haven't gotten a good training tip or idea (or guitar method/technique, photography method/technique, etc., etc.) from any of them in many years.

The repackaging of Runner's World held me for about 3 pages...and then I got tired of its Ritalin-induced informationless flappery. I don't think a single article has more than about 500 words...and if you've ever written seriously, you know it is nearly impossible to say anything of substance in only 500 words.

But hey...this sort of drivel plays to the new market...

It's not coincidence that Rodale also puts out Men's Health (a.k.a. Men's Cosmo). It seems that every 3 or 4 months that have one pretty good feature that I'm actually interested in (like the Paula Radcliffe article after last year's Olympics/NYCM). The rest of the time they're telling me to drink green tea, buy whatever Nike is selling, and not worry about PRs. I'll probably let my subscription run out, but I need stuff to read on the train and "The Lore of Running" ain't too portable.

---

-------------
"Knowledge is good" - Emil Faber

Outside Magazine could be your 'train read.' It's the only magazine to which I still have a subscription, maybe because they cover so many outdoor sports that there is little repeat factor. Some of their feature articles are still mesmerizing, highest-quality journalism. (It's as commercial as the others, though, for sure!) Oleander

Honestly, what are you hoping for? What would you like to see that they're not printing?

It's not rocket science. To run faster, run more and faster. Anything else is a shortcut that could be adequate, depending on your goals. There are no great new breakthroughs in shoe or gear tech, so new kicks or shorts are merely iterative. We know basically what foods are good, what foods are bad - there's some conflict on the fringes, but for the most part it's set.

Any genuinely new or controversial info will be on the internet long before it's on the newstand.

Again, what are you expecting to see?

It's not coincidence that Rodale also puts out Men's Health (a.k.a. Men's Cosmo).

I will probably get flamed for this, but a lot of times Men's Health has more usable info than Runner's World. I don't have a subscription, but if I am in an airport or something I will pick it up. They have about 5 pages devoted to research being done on exercise and nutrition and they do a decent job of siting the studies as well. Maybe this research has been published in journals already and is old news for you experts out there, but I am not reading those journals and find the info somewhat relevant. Sure there is BS about "6-pack Abs" and all that, but as I said, they have some good info and pretty recent research as well as some practical nutrition info (not something like chew on tree-bark) but decent recipes you can use or tips on ordering out. More info thant Runner's World can claim to offer lately. Anyway, just my $.02.

---

---

Portside Athletics Blog

Well...I can think of some areas to explore...that would require more than a 500 word vomit to cover...

The mind-body connection...too much lip-service paid here...lets get below the surface here.

Document athlete's training and racing in more detail...don't slap a 7-day sample of so-and-so's training and tell me that's how they won such-and-such race. I know damn good and well Lance didn't "ride six hours a day" to win the TdF. What did he and/or his coach plan...why...and how did they shift fires when necessary? What were the day-to-day thought processes that went into getting to the goal? This would take a lot of lead time, and commitment, though...and its hard to line all that up, I'm sure...so we'll keep getting the "sound-bite" training articles that are worthless.

Bottom line...dig deeper...find the second and third order information and thought processes.

Sounds awesome, except we are in no way shape or form Runner's World's target audience. It was great when I first took up running and didn't know jack. Before I started reading Daniels, Noakes, Pfitz, etc. Now it's that one decent feature every 3 months ... oh and I did have my picture in it for one of the races they covered yee-haw. What I really need for the train is wireless Internet so I can cruise ST all day!

---

-------------
"Knowledge is good" - Emil Faber

Runner's World lost a key editor a few years back and its gone downhill ever since. The guy retired and you could see the magazine content degrade almost immediately in the following issues. I dropped it.
Also thinking about dropping Triathlete Mag because they put a motorcycle in their gear review. How helpful is a kids dirt motorcycle review to a triathlete? It made me realize the obvious, that these magazines are biasing their reviews towards their sponsors and not providing objective reviews which consider all gear available on the market for even triathlon related gear.

Men's Health would be okay if not for the damn perfumed ads.

I used to have a subscription to Men's Fitness, and canceled it because I thought the "improved your sex life" articles were getting to be over the top & more and more targeted to alternative lifestyles. Not that there's anything wrong with that, just not what I'm paying $15 a year for. That was about 10 years ago, no idea what its like now (it was published by Joe Weider of Muscle & Fitness fame).

I picked up a Men's Journal at a doctor's office and found it to be the fitness magazine for the Malboro Man.

I agree that magazines repeat content far too much to be very useful compared to internet resources, but I need something to have handy to look at away from the computer. I wish I could find one I liked.

Ever notice how the shoe reviews only include shoes from the manufacturers who advertise there? Same for the bike reviews. Those reviews aren't for the benefit of you and me, they are for the benefit of those who pay their bills.

I know this for a fact because as the communications director for my company, I do all our media buys. I spend more than anybody in my industry and I get more editorial ink than anybody too.

Contrary to what they taught you in journalism class, there is a very direct link between editorial and advertising.

I bought "Men's Fitness" from a kid selling mag. subscriptions to raise money for a school trip. Much to my relief I just recieved my last issue yesterday. I was embarrased everytime I got an issue, I wanted to tell my mailman that I'm really not squirrely. I thought about subscribing to "Muscle Car" or "Guns & Ammo" just to even things out. I also may right a letter to the editor-in-chief to tell him how bad this rag is. Between the lifestyle/sex advice telling you to go ahead and bone the married woman thats flirting with you at work, and the GET LEAN articles that rate the best potato chips, ice cream,hotdogs. Their isn't much info on fitness in Mens Fitness, it's the usual race to the bottom.

That's not where RW is meant to be read ... hence the short articles.

I think Runner's World is head and shoulders above Bicycling. If I read more article that contains the word "hammerfest" I may have to take an assault rifle to their offices.

I keep my subscription to read Ed Eyestone's monthly column, and for the occasional substantial article, like the one on Paula Radcliffe. For $2 an issue (subscription), it's OK. They're doing a lot more running human interest stories - the Coatman this issue, the Columbia shuttle pilot, &c. Oddly enough I'm enjoying them.

---

"It is a good feeling for old men who have begun to fear failure, any sort of failure, to set a schedule for exercise and stick to it. If an aging man can run a distance of three miles, for instance, he knows that whatever his other failures may be, he is not completely wasted away." Romain Gary, SI interview

Hi guys,

Since you're all sitting around ripping into the magazine for which I used to work (as sub-editor on the UK edition) I thought I should just chime in.

1) Sorry to say, but you are not RW's main target audience. It is certainly the case for the UK edition that the greater proportion of the RW readership is direct mail subscriptions, 'lifestyle' rather than competitive runners and, increasingly, younger female 'fitness' runners. Very little in it is aimed at the serious, experienced athlete, laregely because the serious runner is such a creature of habit that he'll buy the magazine simply because that's what he's always done. The growth market is the 'beginner runner', so that's why the content is often 'soft' in a 'do less get more sort of way'. The year-on-year growth of the readership (in line with mags like GQ in the UK) and the high level of reader loyalty tends to argue for the editorial team knowing what they are about (and I say that EVEN THOUGH I often disagreed with the direction of the mag).

2) The shoe reviews are done as they are because of two things. First: the shoe companies bring out new shoes on a seasonal basis, which is why you get a big shoe review every 4 months. If you didn't there'd be a lot of shoes out there that people didn't know about (running shoes change a LOT more from season to season than you might think), particularly when you consider that for the target market RW is the main source of wisdom on kit. Second: the shoe companies are possibly the second (after car manufacterers who do a group deal with Rodale) biggest source of ad revenue for the mags. It's wise to pay attention to their products (though never in the UK did we favourably review at the behest of a manufacturer).

3) The motivational quotes are always rubbish. They always have been. I suspect they always will be.

4) The guys who have been phased out were Amby Burfoot and George Hirsch. Both scholars and gentlemen. Though both still do occasional work for the mag, their absence has had, in my opinion a detrimental impact on the quality of the US mag.

5) For what it's worth, single-page articles (Eyestone, Penguin, Galloway, and in the UK the black-humoured Andy Blackford) have a rough word count of 700 words, Warmups articles and fitness bits of 200-300 words, and features of 1500-2000 words.

Finally, while it may not be your cup of tea, there is no doubting the fact that the level of journalistic skill at RW is much higher than in other specialist soprts and fitness magazines. You may prefer the articles' topics in Outside, but some of the writing is appalling, similarly the UK editions rivals Running Fitness (guess the nickname!) and Athletics Weekly are shockingly poor.

Please remember, I don't work there any more, but I have no axe to grind.

---

Stuff I like:
PBscience Triathlon Coaching and Lab Testing

Clearly, everything you wrote goes as understood. I think we're wishing that, in 2006, there is a huge unfed mass that this RW is NOT tapping into. We understand you can't turn it into some peer-reviewed academic piece of boredom...but the splash and dash cuts us out of the picture. That approach is pandemic amongst all the mainstream activities rags...

We may wish, but the truth is that there isn't that huge unfed mass out there.

This is going to sound very harsh, but the truth is the only thing that RW (and indeed almost any publication) is really guilty of is pandering to the interests of its readership.

You, me and others like us are not a hugh, unfed mass for one simple reason:

We have grown to the point where we are capable of feeding ourselves.

---

Stuff I like:
PBscience Triathlon Coaching and Lab Testing

Men's Health is a joke. Men's journal is much better. Yeah there is some fluff but it's not full of viagra ads and 50 ways for pork a 5 ton slut with beer goggles on like MH is.

I subscribe to National Geographic "Adventure" and think it's pretty darn well done.

Karma

---

Dave Stark
dreamcatcher@astound.net
USAC & USAT level 2 certified coach

NG Adventure is certainly one of the better examples, but then it doesn't really provide the same service as the likes of RW.

If I may suggest, the best solution to what to read on the train is a good book.

---

Stuff I like:
PBscience Triathlon Coaching and Lab Testing

Yeah, I agree. It's a great read, and it's one of the few mags that doesn't have a variant of:

"Build great abs in 5 weeks!!!!" splashed all over the cover. Guess what? the advice hasn't changed in the last 10 years...

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned

"Marathon and Beyond"

http://www.marathonandbeyond.com/

B.

---

-------------------------------------------------
http://www.teamorganicnyc.com
Sponsored by: TBA

Perhaps...but if there were a mag capable of feeding me...I might just sign up...Maybe you think no one is capable of that level of writing on running, cycling or multisport...

My argument is no different than the Newsweek or US News and World Report vs more highbrow stuff like Spectator and Economist...