Closing races due to heat

Member

I think the RD's in both cases did the correct thing. Closing the race after it started was extreme, but the extreme heat created a unique situation. And even though we all sign those forms, a case could still be made for gross negligence if a runner died from heat exhaustion when numerous runners were having difficulties on the course. And the problem is the longer you leave runners on the course under those conditions the more likely it is someone will suffer serious consequences.

I suspect when they originally started the race it was in hopes that maybe things would not be too bad, but I'm sure when people began falling out and ambulances began making regular runs they did what was in the best interests of the runner. It's no different than a race being called due to ice or snow in the winter. Sometimes courses simply become too dangerous to continue on. Part of the job of the RD and their medical staff is to make such determinations.

Look at it this way. All the runners involved will be able to race another day. Had they continued that may or may not have been a true statement. If I was a runner, I would rather the race be cancelled even if I was pulled from the course rather than needless endangering my or another runner's health just because we signed some forms. The RD's and their staff used common sense IMHO. After all, no reason for those forms we sign to become death warrants.

Gone Fishin

Another factor worth mentioning is looking at the participants of the Med-City marathon, it is 85% Minnesotans. And being a spring marathon, you're talking about a population of runners that have just come off a winter of either cushy indoor running or outdoor below freezing running. Sure we've had 6-8 weeks of decent temps, but it hasn't been in the 80's let alone 90's yet. Few runners in this race would be acclimitized to these extreme temps.

Take it from a guy that had the bright idea of going to Florida in the middle of a Minnesota winter to run a marathon. The human body can't flip the switch over night and tolerate high temps, despite the amount of hydrating you do.

I can just imagine the ER staff at the Mayo Hospital getting runner after runner after runner being dropped off and the docs saying to each other "when is that dope of a race director going to call this thing off! this is crazy!!" As a race director myself, I can definitely agree with the decision made. I think I'd have done the same thing had I been in charge at that point. Further though, I'd have put it all on the butcher block and either tried to call the race before the start or the day prior because mid-race is going to wreck many return runners next year I'm thinking.

And as for the medal and shirt, I'd have taken them. I'd have callen it my 27k marathon. In my personal collection I have a 10km race shirt that I ran 10-miles to get after following some lost leaders. And I've got a 15km shirt from a race I ran 17km. The list goes on and on. After >200 races, it's inevitable that Murphy's Law is going to prevail and you gotta shrug those off, marathon or not, laugh when you look at the hardware or shirt, and know that every so often it's going to happen due to circumstances beyond your control. But this ain't the Olympics, so I keep my 'flawed' collection and keep my sense of humor about it. And again as a race director, I sure hope my participants keep their senses of humor about it too 'cuz God knows, I ain't perfect either.

Puppy Love!

I can see both sides of the argument, but, with respect, I agree that it is personal responsibility. I probably would have walked a lot of it.

And, I would have taken the medal.

It's a no win either way, though.

Member

The Movie Geek

Newbie

I believe that while it is the runner's responsbility to be as safe as possible while participating, the race director also has a responsbility to the runners. Race directors need to put on the absolute safest event they can. There's a certain level of risk that directors of distance races or any races really can accept. It's possible that with the heat and other factors that the folks in charge decided that the event had crossed over from being acceptably risky to unsafe.

The original poster (or possibly someone else) mentioned hearing sirens all day, and even seeing people go down. Chances are, the race had a certain number of EMS units assigned to standby, not necessarily the medical volunteers, but actual ambulances ready to transport. It's possible that the excessive number of "casualties" caused the ambulances working the race to be sent to the hospital with patients, after that, more ambulances needed to be brought in. Eventually, and sometimes very quickly with certain events (like marathons) all EMS resources are used up. How would you feel if when you got serious injury and needed an ambulance, you were told there'd be a 20-40 minute wait, because all the ambulances were at the hospital with the first round of race casualities. It may seem unrealistic, but it's something that could happen if 10-20 people needed ambulances during a medium sized race.

Runners need to be able to accept the risk, and be aware of whether or not they're putting themselves in danger. But race directors also carry a lot of the safety obligation, because they can't have large numbers of people putting themselves in danger.

Adjunct

I guess it could be called in extreme cases, but there are races even in places like death valley.

I would hop that the RD would put up a disclaimer that he/she can cancel the race at any time before or during the event.

Member

At my last race I read all of the fine print on the waiver and there's a line that says something to the effect of "I agree to let the race director determine whether or not it is safe for me to continue." I'd still be pretty upset about it, but I don't think I'd be demanding a refund.

Closing races due to heat

LIFEFORM SOCIAL COMMUNITY NETWORK