Honesty in Fundraising

Without fundraising, there is no point to Team in Training. For most of us, in order to be successful at it, we put almost as much work into fundraising as in to training. I've already discussed why I believe the fundraising to be efficient, and why it is not a scam. I've talked about how, even though it seems counter-intuitive, raising money to go to a "destination marathon" can bring in more money to the mission than can running a local event. I've talked about how some of our travel expenses to out of town events - a significant portion actually - are covered by the money we raise. Now, I will talk about honesty in fundraising.

A number of the posts on the running forums blasting, inaccurately in my opinion, TNT as a scam have no basis in fact and don't even attempt to use factual information. But here is one discussion I found that is critical of TNT and its honesty in fundraising that is thoughtful and analytical - not based on some personal rant. It is worth reading for anyone doing Team in Training. The main assertions are (1) that 75% of the money raised does not go directly to research and (2) participants don't disclose that they get a trip out of the deal. To summarize what the author, David Hays, says about the latter: Participants don't explain that that they are getting travel expenses paid - others are essentially paying their way to the event. While TNT does raise a lot of money for a good cause, TNT runners should fully disclose to potential donors that 25% of the funds directly benefit the runner.

Let's address the first point first. 75% of the money goes to the mission of LLS. Part of that mission is curing blood cancers. But there are other raised parts to the mission, which I have discussed here. So if you are doing Team in Training, just remember this distinction. Only about a fourth of the money raised goes to cancer research and cures. Another fourth goes to fundraising and administrative costs. The other roughly 50% goes towards patient services and to education and advocacy.

I've discussed the travel costs that are covered in the other posts referenced here at the start of this article. I don't think we participants go out of our way to talk about the travel costs. Maybe we should do that more. I personally think that as long at 75% of the money collected goes towards the mission, it should not matter whether the fund raising portion of the money collected goes to paying professional fundraisers or to rewarding a runner with a trip to a race for their hard work. The bottom line is that money is going to be spent on fundraising one way or another. But I agree we can be upfront about it. I did tell my potential donors about it, if not directly in emails then in conversations with them. I don't remember anyone having a particular issue with it, and if they did, they wouldn't donate.

Let me say this - I have never badgered anyone to donate. How many times do you get a phone call from a solicitation that just will not take no for an answer? I have, plenty of times. If people don't reply to my emails, I don't bug them. I do send frequent updates. If someone asks to come off my update list, I take them off with no argument and no abuse. If people donate to LLS on behalf of my efforts, I thank them. It is simple as that. I'll take that over being browbeaten into a donation by a phone solicitor who's company (and management) will get 15-20% of what I donated. And I will add that I have donated plenty of times to people doing TNT and similar events, and they have never badgered me, either.

When I next do TNT, I now have plenty of posts - with more to come - discussing the fundraising and where the money goes to that I can point donors to. And now, you can point your donors to these as well, should you choose. Be open and honest, and explain with some of the points I have brought up. If people don't like the idea of helping to pay for your trip to a race, so be it. I wonder how many of them would mind paying some professional fundraising company executive's 6 figure bonus instead?

I'll write about my personal experience with raising money for TNT and what percentage of my funds raised covered my travel expenses on my next post on this topic.

Are TNT Runners Curing Cancer?

As part of my continuing posts about why Team in Training is not a scam, I am going to write a couple of pieces about some good constructive criticism I saw out there about us. There were two comment in particular that were a little less caustic than some of the complaints I have seen about us Purple People. The first was this: "What does running have to do with finding a cure? The running is for yourself, it does not cure cancer - the only people helping the cause in the case of TNT are the donors."

True - running does not cure cancer. Nor does walking 60 miles in the Komen 3-Day. Would that it were that simple! In fact, when I am doing my fundraising, I actually emphasize that point to my potential donors. Without them, all I am doing is going for a long tiring run or walk. It is their donations and generosity that provides the ability for more research on cancer and potential cures, not me moving my feet. So there is a good bit of agreement on my part with that statement.

Where we differ is this: as I posted last week, there are many ways for non-profits to raise money. One of them, the one LLS uses with Team in Training and that many other organizations have imitated, is agreeing to do some kind of an endurance event and in return people will "sponsor" you by making a donation to the non-profit to support their mission. So while the running, cycling, and swimming in itself does not cure cancer, it indirectly inspires people to donate to that cause in support. We could argue whether or not they would have donated that same amount anyway even if you sat on the sofa with a TV clicker and a big bag of double-stuffed oreos instead of being up a 5:30 on a Saturday morning to run. I am guessing generally not, although I have no way to prove it. Maybe some would get a phone call or a flyer in the mail from LLS about its mission and be inspired to donate. But I rather doubt it. I get literally a dozen or more solicitations in the mail each week, and I don't even answer the phone anymore unless I recognize the number because of the barrage of calls requesting money. If I get an email solicitation from someone who I know is going to work their butt off to raise money for a good cause, I am more likely to check that out and donate.

Let's use my own case - in five TNT events and then the Susan G. Komen 3-Day for the Cure last fall, people have donated over $60,000 on behalf of my efforts. If I had never decided to go for it and see if I could do this - if as a cancer survivor I could do a marathon while asking people to donate (something that often feels uncomfortable) to a cause and being successful at it - how much of that $60,000 would have been donated anyway? How much would have been left on the table? Even if it was just half of it, that is $30,000 that got donated because I was willing to walk and run and ask. So while I acknowledge that it is the donors who are most important when it comes to helping the cause, I am not willing to say that they are "the only people helping the cause." That minimizes or negates the hard work of a lot of people, and I believe a good chunk of the money LLS receives through TNT would not arrive otherwise.

The other comment I saw that I fully agree with is along these lines: the commenter complained about people doing Team in Training telling him that "75% of your donation goes directly to cancer research." It is important for all of us doing TNT to remember that LLS has a number of different program areas. As the author of the comment wrote based on him checking LLS financial statements, the donations break down as follows:

Research - 25.2%
Patient / community Services - 27%
Public Health Education- 18.4%
Professional Education - 4.7%

Total - 75.3%

As I discussed here, the other 25% goes to the administrative and fundraising costs of LLS that any non-profit has.

Therefore, if you are doing fundraising for LLS through Team in Training, just remember that not all of the mission is funding research. 75% of donations go towards the mission, but not to research. Maybe we tend to over-emphasize the research components.

So are those of us doing Team in Training curing cancer through our running? Well, not directly, of course. But I maintain that we are a part of the solution by being the catalyst for people to donate to the cause of cancer research and patient support and advocacy. If I live long enough to see that all cancers are curable or at least manageable, I know I will feel that I played my own small part in making this happen - through my running and walking, through my fundraising efforts, and through the many direct financial donations that I have made to various organizations.

Is TNT Fundraising Efficient?

Some of the comments I have seen on running bulletin boards is that Team in Training is not a good way to raise money, that running and charities have no natural connection. The idea seems to be that if you want to ask people for money for a charity, do it. If you want to run a race, do it. But don't connect the two by saying "I am running the Anchorage Marathon. In return, would you make a donation to the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society?" Instead, email or call people you know and ask them to make a donation to LLS because it is a good cause.

I really don't think this would work. Think about the ways that fundraising is typically done. I am not talking about the totally obscene fundraising done by political candidates which essentially turns our politicians into prostitutes and is wrecking our country's ability to represent everyday people, but charitable fundraising. Here are the ways I can think of: (1) The charity hires a fundraising company to make phone calls. (2) The charity hires a fundraising company to send mail solicitations (3) The charity or a fundraising company sends mass emails. (4) The charity holds some kind of an event or gala where people pay to attend. (5) The charity holds some type of telethon - think Public TV or Radio, or the Jerry Lewis Telethon where TV time is purchased or donated. (6) The charity participates in an athletic event or a walkathon. Can you think of anything else?

Think about all of these. The phone calls are annoying beyond belief to me. Most of the time, I won't even answer the phone. The "junk mail" is a close second, especially when I have donated to an organization and I get a letter a couple of weeks later asking me for more. There is also a cost to every fundraising technique, which is why the non-profits have a line on their income statement for the costs of fundraising. The companies that are hired to do the fundraising get a piece of each dollar raised - sometimes a very large cut of the total. I once bought some expensive jellies from a phone solicitation for some kind of police fund. I later found out that of the total donation, the police fund got maybe 30%.

Now given that, would most people respond if I called them at night asking for donations to LLS? I rather doubt it. But with TNT and similar events, people will respond. Even though there is not a direct connection between running and curing cancer, a lot of people will respond to the appeal through a personal connection with the person doing the event, or because they have a personal connection to the cause. There is some appeal to a non-athlete putting their body through all that is necessary to train for a marathon while in return someone they know makes a $25, $50, or $100 tax deductible donation to a good cause. Because we are all volunteers, there is no direct fundraising cost to LLS for this. What there is for a final cost is some of the travel expenses for the trip, and as discussed in my other posts, these are well in line with the typical fundraising expenses organizations have.

I give to a lot of charities during any given year. I donate directly through my pay at work. I reply to a certain number of the blizzard of mail solicitation that comes every day and every week. I sponsor a number of people doing TNT or other similar events. (I don't respond to phone solicitations anymore and rarely answer the phone if I don't recognize the number. It always seems to cost me money, or costs me time saying "no" repeatedly to someone who will be beaten by his supervisor if he takes "no" for an answer, or I have to listen to how Obama or Romney or Gingrich is the spawn of the devil.) All of the charities I donate to have administrative and fundraising costs. I know and accept that a portion of my donation will go towards these costs. It is just the way it is.

When I donate to someone I know (or even someone I don't know) doing a marathon for TNT, a Relay for Life for the American Cancer Society, a three-day walk for Susan G. Komen, or a long distance bike ride for the American Lung Association or the MS Society, I personally am fine with it. It feels good to support someone's efforts and hard work - someone dedicated enough to put their time and body on the line to try to make a difference - to raise money for a good cause.
Personally, I think it is a good way to raise money. It gets people involved in a cause and physically active who might not be otherwise. As long as the money goes to a good organization that is efficient - 25% for administrative and fundraising costs, not 50% - then I believe it to be a good thing. If someone who has worked their butt off gets airfare to travel somewhere to exhaust herself in a long race, well, in my mind, that beats that same money going to the manager of a fundraising business who gets a bonus because his phone bank browbeat enough people into make a donation. If people doing Team in Training and similar events flew first class; if they stayed in $500 a night resorts; if they were wined and dined at very expensive restaurants, then of course that would not be right. No one would donate to that knowingly. But that is not how it is - not at all.

TNT and Local vs. Destination Events

In some of the comments I have read proclaiming Team in Training to be a scam, there were a number that essentially made this point: it is probably OK for people to do TNT if the race is local, but not if the participant is going to get a trip out of it. The objections are that some of the donated money is paying significant travel expenses if the participant chooses a destination event - for example someone on the East Coast who runs the San Diego Marathon. As I pointed out in my last post about fundraising, all non-profits have costs for fundraising, and LLS's fundraising expenses of about 17 or 18% are not extreme. It just so happens that some of those fundraising expenses are travel expenses for race participants, as opposed to paying a bunch of money to telemarketers. But what about the point that local events would be a better use of donated money because expenses are less?

There is nothing wrong with local events, and in fact, I have seen LLS promoting these more and more in the seven years since I first did TNT. The fundraising minimum is really low - about $500 to $700 - and the only cost to LLS is the participant's race entry, which is probably about $35. An example of this for my team would be the Monument Avenue 10K. Another type of local event would be one where the participant must drive to and stay a couple of nights, for example, the Marine Corps Marathon for the Richmond Team. For these events, we must raise $1,250 to $2,000. The expenses that LLS would pay are two nights in a hotel (sharing a room), the race fee, and two dinners. You could expect the expenses for this type of event to be in the $300 - $400 range for each person.

Contrast this with a destintation event, where the participant has a kind of adventure and travels to a far away place. For me, every one of my five events has been this kind. The fundraising minimum is much higher because the covered expenses are higher. These would include airfare, three nights in a shared hotel room, two dinners, and the race entry: all of which can easily reach $800 to $1,200. In return, we are raising $3,500 to $5,500 - which we are personally responsible for after we recommit. Frankly, it is a lot of work and stress to raise that kind of money. People might stroke a check for thousands of dollars if you are running for president, but no one I know can do that for someone raising money for a non-profit.

So would it be better if TNT just did local events? That way, less of the donated money goes to the travel expenses, but the participants are raising less money, so there is a lot less to go to the mission. For example:

Local event: Revenue $500, Cost $35, Net to LLS $465
Semi-local event: Revenue $1,500, Cost $350, Net to LLS $1,150
Destination event: Revenue $4,000, Cost $900, Net to LLS $3,100

So while it may seem like participants are wasting money that LLS could use for the mission to travel to a destination event, in actuality, I believe they tend to raise more money when they sign up for an exciting marathon or triathlon, and as a result, the net to LLS's mission is going to be much higher. Which is better - for LLS to spend $900 to send someone to Arizona for a race, knowing that they will have an additional $3,100 for their mission? Or for them to spend $35 for a participant to participate in a local 10K, with the person raising an additional $465 for the mission? I maintain the first choice is better for LLS - if that is what the person wants to do.

Exciting destination events are a major way to attract people to do Team in Training. Just as any non-profit has fundraising expenses, so does LLS. When a person is doing an event for TNT, some of those fundraising expenses will be part of their travel costs. There is nothing in this that scams people or uses money inappropriately in my view. Others may have a different opinion, of course. In my next post, I'll discuss comments I have seen about other ways people should raise the money they do, and whether or not these methods would be as effective or efficient.

Team in Training Fundraising Does Not Scam

One of the many claims I've seen about TNT being a scam is that the fundraising scams people: that most of the money goes to the trip and LLS overhead, and that the runners don't follow-through. Here are some things I've read out on the World Wide Web. "These operations are a scam - 30 to 40% of the money raised go to the parasites running the charities." "It's a fraud if they don't do the race after raising the money - they should give it back." "Runners should solicit donations for an organization that has less than 10% overhead and do the race through a running club." "If TNT were a charity, their 'runners' would pay for their own travel."

How much of this is true or relevant? Fundraising is a big and an important enough topic that I will devote several posts to on my blog, starting with this one.

Let's start with the first statement above - that 30-40% of the money we raise goes to the organization's leaders. That is patently false - click here for the Charity Navigator Summary for LLS. Charity Navigator gives LLS a score of three stars out of four. Yes, four would be better, and if I were LLS's leadership, I'd be working to see how I could get the top mark. But three stars is good, and donors can feel assured that their money is going towards the mission in an acceptable fashion. Eight percent of LLS's revenues - not 30-40% - goes to administration. 17.6% of the revenue goes towards fundraising. For Team in Training, that would include travel expenses for runners and the tiny numbers of supporting staff that go to the event. If the event is a local race, the travel expenses are minimal. If the event is a destination event - San Diego Marathon for anyone but Southern California runners, Dublin, Chicago, New York, and so forth, then the expenses are greater. There can be airfare involved unless the participant chooses the "no airfare" option, and there is an extra night in a hotel. The amount of money raised is correspondingly greater for trips involving more travel. Typically, we might have to raise $1,500 for a local event and $3,400 - $5,000 for a far away event. And yes, some of the money raised does fund a significant part of the participants travel. All non-profits have fundraising and administrative overhead, and LLS is no exception. From what I have seen, 23.6% of revenue towards administrative and fundraising costs is not exorbitant. The comment about runners soliciting money for organizations with less than 10% overhead makes no sense - how many such organizations are there? Unless they have a huge endowment to cover these expenses, all charitable organizations will have to spend a portion of their revenues on administration and to raise more money.

I've seen comments about TNT participants getting all expense paid trips and staying in "very fancy resorts," all on the donor's dime. So what do we get on a trip? Well, it is not all expenses paid. For any event, LLS pays our entry fee. For a local event in the same city, that would be it. For an event in a nearby city - within a five to six hour drive from what I have seen - participants drive there at their expense, but they get two nights in a hotel (sharing a room or paying for half of the room if they want a private room) and two group dinners. For a far away event, we would still get the two dinners, but would recieve an extra night in the hotel in the shared room, and also airfare if we choose. Since the airfare is the largest single expense, you can opt out of reimbursement for it and then have to raise a lot less money, which some folks do. The hotels I've stayed in are usually very nice, but I've not stayed in fancy resorts. That may happen at times - but I cannot say one way or the other, because I've never seen it. I have to assume that if TNT ever stays in fancy resorts, it is the exception rather than the rule based on my five trips. Oh, triathletes and cyclists will get their bikes transported round-trip if the event is far away, but transport them themselves if it is within driving distance.

So yes, donations do cover those travel expenses - which are a part of the fundraising costs which amount to just over 17% of LLS's total revenues. So let's say you don't donate to TNT, but write a check for $100 in response to a mail or phone solicitaion for a typical charity. Well, a portion - probably about $25 - of that pays the administration of the charity and the company contracted to do the mailings or make the phone calls. With Team in Training some of donations covers the expense of the participant's running trip, but at least they had to work their butt off to get that far.

I don't agree that if the participant drops out and does not do the race, the donors should get their money back. That money was donated to a good cause, not to there person doing the race. However, I do believe that anyone soliciting donations by saying they will do a marathon should make a good faith effort to do all that they can to follow through with the race.

In my next post, I'll discuss fundraising for local versus destination events. Should runners for Team in Training and other charities only do local events to minimize the amount of donations that go to send them to the race? Or is it possible that LLS gets more money for its mission when people choose a far away and adventuresome "destination event?"

Do TNT Participants Even Care About Doing Their Race?

A lot of comments out on running blogs state that TNT participants are not dedicated to doing their races. According to these folks, in the events, the purple people usually just coast and cut the course or even just take a bus near the end. Most of them, so the tale goes, don't have the physical conditioning or grit to do what they told people they would do when they asked for donations to the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society. This is all part of this ridiculous myth that Team in Training is a scam.

In one such post, labeled "Team in Training Does it Again!" the author stated that his wife was in the 2007 San Diego Marathon and saw a bus pull up at mile 22 or 23, and at least 20 TNT folks got out to finish the last few miles to get their medals. This started a whole diatribe from all kinds of other people about what a scam TNT is. How lazy we are. Calling participants fat asses and "tubbies." One guy said that the "majority don't even do 26.2, just collect the pledge money and allow corporate suits to drive Lexus's." Others said if we do do the race, we cut the course.

So is this true? Do the majority of us, or even many of us, do the absolute minimum? Do we take a bus to the end? Do any of us do this? While I am willing to believe this happens, I think it is very rare. I have never seen it - ever. In fact, I have seen the opposite, and not just with TNT. Anyone doing a marathon, century ride, or triathlon - wearing purple or not - has a lot of grit and determination.

Let's talk about the bus in the 2007 San Diego Marathon. If the guy's wife says she saw this, then I am willing to believe she did. After doing some checking, things like this are entirely up to the race management, not TNT, which has no involvement in it. Some races will pick up the stragglers who don't reach a certain point in time and shuttle them off the course. Others might give them a ride to a few miles from the finish line. Each race will use its own discretion about it, and it might even change from year to year. I did this same event one year earlier, in 2006. Our coaches stressed to us during our training about the cut off points that we had to hit, or we would be taken off the course by a sweep van. If we had passed the 13.1 mile point by the cutoff but couldn't finish, we would be given a half marathon medal. In the Arizona Marathon, there was a race course volunteer carrying a balloon. She told us that anyone behind her by a certain mile point would be removed from the course.

The TNT runners and walkers I have known and seen are very dedicated to completing their event. I saw a woman in the Anchorage Marathon who somehow finished despite blowing out a knee. We had to carry her on to bus at the end to go back to the hotel. One of my mentees in 2007 doing the Anchorage Marathon refused to switch to the half even though she had needed surgery and had barely been able to train for the last two month. She was young and strong, and knew that she would somehow finish it, and she did. That same year, another of my mentees walked the San Diego Marathon - the one with the bus incident. She was 62, and 9 months past abdominal cancer. She walked the whole thing and was very proud to finish.

What about cutting the course? I've been in two events - San Diego in 2006 and Nashville in 2009 - where a certain part of the course would have made it simple to cut the course and save miles. I have never seen any participant do this - never! Our coaches do, all the time, but they are not official participants. They have no race bib, no timing chip, and get no medals. Their job is to cover the race course, back and forth, making sure people are doing alright and helping anyone who needs assistance. A typical TNT coach will cover 30-32 miles on race day, and they do cut the courses to get between participants faster and more efficiently. Maybe people see them in their purple shirts and assume that they are cheating?

Speaking for myself, I have always considered doing all I can to finish the event a solemn pact between myself and the people that donated through me. They are doing the heavy lifting and the important task - giving money freely to support the mission of LLS - and in return, I've agreed to do a foot race. I believe that most participants - the vast majority actually - feel the same way and take the race very seriously, and are proud to achieve finishing a long distance event. Speaking for myself, if I were in a race and got injured and was bussed near the end so I could still finish, I would not cross the finish line. I want to do the whole thing under my own power.

So are we of Team in Training slackers who do the minimum, coast on race day, cut the course, and lallygag along so we can catch the bus? I say absolutely not in 99.9% of the cases. If someone out there is going to judge us all by the actions of the other 0.1%, then there is not anything I can do about that. But I will continue to do my best to dispel that myth by doing the right thing on race day.

Do TNT Participants Care About the Mission?

I've seen some claims that TNT participants don't care about the mission but are just trying to get a free trip. For example, there was this: "People sign up for groups like TNT because they think it looks cool, and they don't actually give a flip about the cause." Or this: they "do the absolute minimum to get by and then take an all expense paid trip paid for by charitable contributions."

Like anything else, there are no absolutes. Somewhere, is there someone doing TNT who has no interest at all in the mission? Somewhere, is there someone doing TNT who coasts while just taking a trip? Is there one such person out of the 40,000 or so who do Team in Training? I'm sure there is. My point is, they are the exception not the rule.

People doing TNT tend to have some interest or connection to the mission. They might be a survivor themselves - that is what got me interested. Or they might have a friend or family member who is a survivor or even died from a blood cancer. Or they might just have a casual interest in raising money for a good cause, even if there is not a direct connection. The latter group usually gets additional interest in the mission during the process of doing TNT, but even this group came in with some interest. I think the most passionate TNTer I have ever met, Coach Chuck, would have been in this last group. Once they learn more about the mission and what these awful cancers do to people, they get very interested.

Now, about doing the absolute minimum to get by, for an all expense paid trip - well, first, it is not all expenses paid. Significant but not all by a long shot. I'll be discussing this aspect of TNT in detail later. I've seen people put an incredible amount of effort into TNT. Frankly, if you are going to raise $2,000 - $5,000 and train for a marathon, half-marathon, century ride, or triathlon it is a lot of work. A lot of folks bust their butt in the process. I've seen people do it with a moderate amount of effort. I have never seen anyone do the minimum to get by who completes the program or comes close. Anyone like that is going to end up dropping out after a month or two. You cannot do TNT successfully and complete it with a minimum effort - you just can't.

Does TNT Fill Up Races Months Ahead of Time?

Wow, where do people come up with this stuff? I mean, seriously, where do they get these ideas and then talk about them as if they are the truth, getting others to buy in? So, out on a running board was this comment: "TNT people are what probably forced the Chicago Marathon to fill - screwing people who didn't enter in time so these fat asses get bussed to the 20 mile mark." And this comment: "They end up selling out races five months in advance even though many are unfit and can't complete training and many drop out cause they can't hit fundraising targets." I not only call BS on this one: I call double BS!

There is one event - the Nike Women's Marathon and Half-Marathon in San Francisco - that Team in Training might limit other racers in. This race is a major fundraiser for TNT, and last year, about 18% of the finishers were in the purple. But selling out the Chicago Marathon? Really??? That race does sell out, and it allows 40,000 entrants. In 2011, 426 of these participants were with Team in Training, raising $900,000 for blood cancer research and patient support and advocacy. There is simply no way that slots reserved for TNT sold this race, or others with the possible exception of Nike, out. Big races are popular and you have to enter early. That is just the way it is. Even the Boston Marathon, with its strict time requirements, has more qualified people wanting to run it than it has spots for.

Here's another one: the Shamrock Marathon and Half Marathon. The half sold out several weeks ago. I signed up a couple of weeks before. Yeah, I would rather have not put that $100 on my credit card just before Christmas, but it was either that or not run it. Everyone knows that this race fills up early. There are a total of 150 TNT people in these two races, which allow 7,000 for the half-marathon and 4,000 for the marathon. Most of the 150 TNTers are in the half marathon. So is someone who waited until January to sign up and got frozen out going to blame one of the 120 or so purple people from freezing him or her out of a race with 7,000 spots? If so, then they are just not talking sense.

Now, to the comment TNT folks taking away slots and then not completing training or dropping out for fundraising reasons, this is just not true. About 12 weeks before our race, we either drop or recommit. Until that time, LLS has not registered us for the race and we have not taken a slot. Once you recommit, you are going, even if you fill the minimum fundraising yourself. Even if you get injured after that point, you will still go, and yes, you would take a race spot as of that point. I have rarely seen it happen that somone is hurt too badly to not do the race. If you get an injury once you've signed up, you will take care of it and do everything you can to still do the race, even if you have to slow down. Someone who cannot complete the training will usually realize it before the recommitment point and drop well before they take up a race entry. I'll be discussing fundraising minimums and recommittment in a later post.

Well, so ends my latest post refuting these ridiculous claims that Team in Training is some kind of scam. No, 464 TNT runners and walkers didn't force the 40,000 slot Chicago marathon to fill up and screw all the "more deserving" runners who had not entered in time. Races are getting popular, and most races do a pretty good job of letting you know when they fill. If you don't enter in time - don't blame Team in Training as a convenient scapegoat.

Discussing Cults and TNT

In some of the message boards claiming what a scam TNT is (which I am refuting), there are sometimes comments about us being a cult. I already wrote a tongue-in-cheek piece about TNT as a cult, but wanted to come back to this in a more serious vein.

Here is one comment I read that kind of suggests the writer's view of us as a rude cult: "During races if you pass a TNT cheer squad and you are not in purple, you will not be cheered - just silence." And here is another: "I can't tell you how many times I've seen some purple clad a__hole cut in front of others in expos saying 'she is running for charity, the rest are just running for themselves.'" Other people simply write: 'It's a cult!"

Here is the best definition of cult to this situation: "A group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc." Switch the word veneration to dedication or interest and that might describe it, but that changes the definition to something other than a cult. I don't consider us a cult any more than I do the Hash House Harriers (a drinking group with a running problem), the local Saturday morning marathon team, or the ladies sewing circle.

I am no sociologist, but it seems like from our earliest days, we have wanted to form groups. It is part of our nature. We are a social animal. You cannot have social bonds with one million other people. So we join groups with common interests. We form teams. We root for a certain sports team together. We join clubs. We have a circle of friends, and some have a larger circle of Facebook Friends. We go out and find Meetup groups that we are interested in. This happens all of the time. It is not peculiar to Team in Training, although some of the same ideas are at work. Join together for a cause that is bigger than you - to cure blood cancers. Run and have fun while doing a good thing. Get in better shape, make new friends. I don't see that as cultish - I see it as normal human behavior: to join up with people with the same interests.

I do want to address the two specific comments about the rude behavior. Regarding the cheer teams, I don't doubt that has happened sometime. I have not seen it. I have voluneered three or four times for cheer squads for TNT, and in every case, our written instructions tell us to cheer for everyone, not just TNT runners or cyclists. I joined several teammates after we ran the Country Music Half Marathon in 2009 to cheer the marathoners for several hours, and we cheered and encouraged every single runner and walker who passed by. And two years ago, I joined several friends to cheer the Shamrockers. Yeah, we went there specifically to cheer for our TNT comrades and would not have been there were it not for them, but once we got there, we cheered everyone who passed by. Did we cheer a little louder if we saw someone we know? Sure? Wouldn't you? But we cheered for the whole field.

Regarding the comment about the rude and dismissive line-cutters at the Expo, I have never once seen that, let alone multiple times. I see people who are happy, cheerful, and excited, but never rude like that or putting others down by pretending to be better. I just haven't seen it, not from a Team in Training person or from anyone else. I can't say it didn't happen, but I also can't see how it is common like the person that made the comment suggests.

So, is Team in Training a cult? If you think so, then so is every other group or club. Everyone wants to belong to something, and most people - especially as they get older - want to accomplish something good. With Team in Training, you can do both at the same time. It is not a cult, but it does strike that very human need.

Do Slow Runners Have the Right to Do a Marathon?

In the course of reading disparaging, and in my view, false, comments about Team in Training being a scam, I found plenty of negative comments about slow runners. For the most part, these were directed towards Team in Training participants specifically, as well as some about slow runners in general. Themes included: slow runners and walkers get in the way of real runners, they cheapen the experience for real runners, they are tubby, they gum up the works for everyone else, any one who takes five, six, seven, or even eight hours to complete a marathon does not deserve the medal... Need I go on?

Well despite my claim that I will set a world record marathon some day, I am one of those terrible and unworthy slow runners. Even more egregious, I do a good bit of walking along the way. So I feel obligated to make some comments about people's intolerance and superiority complex, which I feel is held by a relatively small set of runners - but too many of them, judging from all the runners' board comments.

Let me start with the obvious. Unless you can turn in a 2:30 marathon, or maybe 2:45 if you are female, I don't think you have the right to criticize someone else for being slow. Slowness is relative. I have a great admiration for people who can complete a marathon in three or four hours, but not if they dump all over others who cannot. Then I just think of them as being conceited and arrogant. Sure, I wouldn't be able to keep up with them in a run, but I wouldn't want to run with them anyway.

I particularly love the many comments about all the slow runners and TNT runners clogging the race course and ruining the experience for the real runners. We all get assigned a corral based on our likely finishing time. The faster you are, the closer to the front of the start of the race you are. Hey, fast runner, why did you decide to run in the rearward corrals with all of us slow runners who clog the race? That wasn't so bright, was it? Or maybe this is it - maybe all of us slow runners run our ass off until we can get in front of you, then we slow down to clog up the race course and make your life miserable. Come on, man!!!! We slow runners clog the race for you? Really???

Now as far as calling people tubby and criticizing them for being out in a race, unless your body mass index is 22, what gives you the right to call someone else tubby? First of all, a person's weight is their business. Second, in some ways, they have more guts and grit than the 3 hour lean marathoner. Try carrying an extra 40 pounds and not only running a long race, but going non-stop for seven or eight hours. I wouldn't want to do that. I also resent the many implications I saw talking about the "TNT tubbies," as if most Team in Training people are fat, lazy slobs who didn't care about their fitness level or the race. It's ridiculous.

Races can always weed out slower runners by setting a time limit. So, suppose a big city put on a marathon with a 3.5 hour time limit? It sure wouldn't be a big field, would it, maybe a few thousand people. How much do you think the fee would be? How many spectators would be out there cheering for you? Do you think that the thousands of spectators that line a typical marathon course came out just to see you? If so, you are well beyond being conceited. Hell no, they come out to cheer their daughter, their husband, their Aunt Martha, their dad, their wife. Along the way, they cheer for others, including you. So be glad that their slow Uncle Willie is huffing and puffing along five miles behind you, because otherwise there would be hardly anyone there cheering for you.

People participate in marathons for all kinds of reasons. For a very elite few, it is to win first place. Compared to them, all of the rest of us are slow. So for the rest of us, the slowest runners and walkers included, we are not going to win the race. But within ourselves and what we are capable of, we are going to achieve a victory all the same. If it makes you feel more secure to criticize those who are slower than you and consider them as unworthy to be in the race, go ahead. We'll be too far behind you to hear you, and all we care about is finishing the race and crossing that finish line within our own capabilities. Maybe we will even set a personal record. Yeah, it might be slower than the best you can do, but that is why it is called a "PR."

Discussing Race Etiquette

Okay, let's talk some racing etiquette points! In my last post, I tried to refute the claims I've seen that we supposedly rude and slow Team in Training runners (or TNT Tubbies as I saw us referred to all too often in running bulletin boards) were just ruining the race experience for real runners. I refute this, but have to agree that all runners - fast and slow, TNT and non-TNT - need to be aware of their behavior and etiquette on the marathon course.

I've been in five long distance races and about eight 10Ks - so I have some experience but not a ton. Even so, I've seen some of the things people complain about - too many runners and walkers abreast, people stopping on the course, people weaving in and out, runners carelessly tossing a half full cup of Gator Aide behind them without looking. I have seen Team in Training people do some of these things, and I have seen plenty of others not wearing the purple doing them. In my experience, a minority of runners use poor etiquette, but it does happen. To blame it all or even most of it on Team in Training is ridiculous, though.

So, here are my thoughts on proper race etiquette. For the record, I switch between running and walking, so am continually passing people and being passed - often the same ones again and again. I also usually carry a camera and take lots of photos. If you are a TNT participant or are running for any charity, it is especially important to use good judgement and race behavior, since apparently a lot of folks are judging us by the actions of a few.

1. Don't run more than 2 or three abreast, and if you even have that many, keep off to the side.
2. If you have to stop for whatever reason, move off the course.
3. Start in a corral that matches your realistic time of finishing the race. I am slow, but I routinely pass people in races that started eight or ten corrals ahead of me.
4. Be considerate at water stops. No one needs a cup full of sports drink or water tossed on them.
5. If the race course is crowded and you are running with others, leave a little space between you so faster runners can pass between.
6. If someone is struggling or needs help, take a second to see if they are OK and offer them some encouragement. Unless you are trying to qualify for Boston, a few seconds isn't going to cost you anything.

Now as a Team in Training participant five times, I guarantee you that our coaches emphasize all of these things - over and over. And I believe this is not unique to just our Virginia TNT coaches. So I am not buying that most TNTers are inconsiderate jerks as some of the people posting in the running bulletin boards seem to think - in fact, I've seen very few who are jerks. Let's just all be aware of others out on the race course. Frankly, any race with 30,000 or 40,000 participants is going to have a few bad apples, and will also by its nature have some congestion. So it is even more important to use good etiquette in really crowded races.

Does TNT Ruin the Race Experience for Everyone Else?

As part of my series of posts refuting that Team in Training is a scam, I just have to discuss the charges I saw a number of times on running and triathlon blogs saying that TNT essentially ruins everyone else's experience. While I am calling BS on this one, I do agree that every runner and triathlete - whether wearing a purple singlet or not - should be aware of race etiquette and practice good sportsmanship.

Here are a few of the comments that I read, paraphrased to some extent: "I'm sick of dealing with throngs of TNTers every time I try to do a major race." "Inexperienced runners get in the way and gum up the works." "Charity runners attempt to equate themselves with much better runners. It is deceitful, disingenuous, and hurts the sport." "They are not courteous on the race course. They and their coaches tend to think that everyone in purple are the only ones who matter. They cut people off and stop in front of you." "No one likes TNT when five purple shirts are lined up across the entire road." I also saw a number of negative comments about slow runners, and very disparaging remarks about TNT "Tubbies."

Wow, where to start? Well, how about the comment about being sick of throngs of TNTers in every major race? This makes no sense. From what I can tell, the only races with throngs of TNTers is the Nike Women Marathon / Half Marathon (something like 18% of participants are with TNT), and perhaps the San Diego Marathon. Most races just don't have that many Team in Training participants - it is simply too difficult to do the fundraising. For example, the Country Music races when I participated in 2009 had 650 participants from TNT out of something like 35,000 participants. That's less than 2%. Here are a few more figures from various races last year: Marine Corps Marathon: 358 (of 30,000); Shamrock Marathon and Half Marathon: 160 (of (11,000); Dublin Marathon: 135 (of 11,245); Honolulu Marathon: 149 (of 25,000); RNR Savannah: 523 (of about 23,000). So throngs of TNT runners ruining the race experience for everyone else? Once again, I call BS!

The comments about inexperienced and slow runners, not just TNT, gumming the works also do not make a lot of sense. These runners and walkers will be in the later corrals. The only people they might interfere with would be other slow runners. Anyone with any speed will be well ahead of them. Of course, we've all seen runners who think they are fast enough for an earlier corral and are not. But that seems universal at all races I have been in. I pass plenty of people in the races I have done who started well ahead of me, and I am no speed demon - trust me.

I've never talked to a charity runner who equates themselves with the top runners. I have no idea why anyone would make such a comment. If you feel that way, please email me or leave a blog comment, because I just don't get that one.

The comments about inconsiderate runners might fit a lot of people on the race course. I've certainly seen a few from TNT who are not paying attention during the race, who run or walk too many abreast, who cut in front of people, who stop suddenly. I've seen plenty of others not in purple do the same thing. I think this behavior is not universal, and not even that common - our coaches at TNT stress race etiquette during our training, whether or not we choose to follow it - but anyone doing a race needs to be cognizant of their impact on others. Race etiquette is an important enough topic that I plan a separate post.

TNT coaches certainly give higher interest to TNT participants than general runners. That is why they are there. But I think most coaches will give encouragement and aid to any runner who needs it. Maybe it is not as common as it should be. Coaches reading this - read and heed, and give some thought to making a good impression on the race course. I have seen TNT coaches go above and beyond - I saw one coach in Nashville escorting an exhausted (non-TNT) participant all the way to the finish for the last half mile.

The negative comments about slow runners and "tubbies" are offensive enough that I will write a dedicated post.

I'll welcome any comments about this topic, as long as they are constructive and factual.

Does TNT Drive up the Cost of Races for Everyone Else?

This is the first of my detailed posts addressing charges that Team in Training is a scam, which I very much dispute.

The charge that I have seen in a number of running bulletin boards is that TNT is responsible for driving up the cost of race entry fees (and hotels in the city of the race) because courses are kept open 5, 6, 7, or even 8 hours for slower runners. Frankly, I call this ridiculous! And here is why.

First, any race has both fixed costs and variable costs. The variable costs are what will go up with each runner - the cost of your medal, official shirt, snacks, timing chip, and so forth. The fixed costs will stay about the same whether or not there are 1,000 runners in the race or 30,000. There are certain expenses that the organization sponsoring the race will have to cover, period. I don't know how much of each race fee, say $150 for the Chicago Marathon, covers the variable costs as opposed to the fixed costs, but with at least 35,000 runners, that fee will bring in $5,250,000 for Chicago. Lets assume that 75% of that amount is variable costs and 25% of the costs are fixed. So given that assumption, the fixed costs - which must be covered equally by the number of participants - would be about $1,300,000.

In 2011, there were 35,755 finishers in the Chicago Marathon. If they wanted to impose a strict time limit to avoid the cost of keeping the race course open for longer times, they could do this by imposing a 4.5 hour limit. 15,734 runners in Chicago beat this time, so let's call it 20,000 runners to be allowed, proving a 4.5 hour time limit. That 1.3 million dollar fixed cost, which could be shared by 35,000 runners (about $36 each) would now have to be covered by 20,000 runners ($65 each). So everyone's fee would go up by $29. There might be perfectly good reasons for limiting registrations based on time (Boston is quite successful), but reducing the fee because race courses are not kept open as long is not one of them.

Here is a second piece of evidence. The fee for the Nike Women's Marathon is $135 for the full marathon ($115 for the half). This race is an official sponsor of the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, and has very heavy Team in Training presence - out of 20,907 finishers, 3,728 (18%) were from TNT. I could not find numbers of TNT runners for the Chicago Marathon, but it is certainly much lower. Do you remember the movie "The Spirit of the Marathon?" How many purple shirts in the Chicago field did you see during the course of the movie? I remember about a half dozen, although I would guess that several hundred participants of the 35,000 in Chicago run for TNT. The marathon fee is $150, slightly higher - not lower - than that of Nike's.

Incidentally, the Boston Marathon has a fee of $130. The marathon has fast times to qualify. A small amount of charity runners participate, and they pay an extra fee to do so - plus they do fundraising.

So how is TNT driving up the race entry costs for everyone? In a word, it's not - that charge just makes no sense.

It also is illogical that TNT is driving up the cost of hotels. A marathon weekend is a huge deal for a city, and hotels and restaurants are going to be full. When demand is up, costs go up. It is possible that LLS can get a lower group rate by guaranteeing several hundred rooms at a hotel, but how is that any different from any other group - such as a convention? It's not.

If anyone out there has empirical data that shows how TNT is increasing the costs of race entry fees, please share it. Until I see proof, I'm calling BS on this one.

Team in Training is Not a Scam

I've been amazed about all of the comments I've read about Team in Training on various athletic message boards, including many that TNT is a scam. We've been slammed by a lot of people for all kinds of things. Some of these things undoubtedly have happened, although I am convinced they are not the norm. Other things clearly make no sense. Still others need some analysis and evaluation. So that is what I've decided to do in a series of blog posts over the next couple of weeks about these charges and issues.

Full disclosure: I've done TNT five times, all on foot - two walking marathons, one mostly walking marathon with some running, and two half-marathons where I ran about 70% of the time. I've volunteered as a TNT mentor several times. I've done other volunteer work for LLS: manning a booth at running expos, making phone calls to tell people about TNT information meetings, volunteering for First Connection, and cheering at races. I've never been paid a dime. I did get some of my travel expenses paid for the five events that I did for TNT. I'll discuss this in detail in a later post. But clearly, I believe in LLS and its mission, and in its major fundraising program, Team in Training.

After reading lots of message posts, here are the major complaints that people seem to make about Team in Training. Each of these will eventually become a separate blog post, and after I write the post, I will change the text here to a link to that post.

1. TNT drives up the costs of race entries and hotels for everyone else. I think this is totally untrue, and illogical.

2. TNT prevents more deserving runners from entering the race because they fill the races up five months early. This is another charge that makes no sense to me.

3. TNT ruins the experience for real runners and triathletes. I think this is bogus, but agree that TNT participants - and everyone else - need to be aware of race etiquette. There also seems to be a lot of resentment among "real runners" that "slow runners" participate in races.

4. TNT is a cult, and disdainful of other athletes. I previously wrote a tongue in cheek post about TNT not being a cult. To a non-runner, any group of runners may appear cultish.

5. TNT participants don't care about the mission but are just trying to get a free trip. This does not match my observations at all.

6. TNT participants are not dedicated to doing the race. In the events, they usually just coast and even cut the course or even just take a bus near the end. Sorry - not from what I have seen. Not at all.

7. The fundraising scams people - most of it goes to the trip and LLS overhead, and the runners don't follow-through. This is not true at all.

8. The fundraising would be okay if they did local races and not the destination events. Although doing local events with minimal travel is not a bad concept, I will show how LLS can get more money for its mission when people choose the destination events.

9. The fundraising is not efficient. There are many ways for charities to raise money. Many of them are very annoying to the potential donors. I think that TNT is fairly efficient, and no where near as annoying as getting unsolicited calls at dinner time.

10. The fundraising is dishonest, or at the least misleading. I read some misplaced and some thoughtful criticisms of TNT participants in this area, and will discuss these along with my own thinking. Plus, what does running have to do with curing cancer anyway?

11. TNT participants are mostly tubby people who are not serious about running, are sold a bill of goods, and have no business being out there. They cheapen the marathon experience. Definitely, I can't wait to address this one!

12. A lot of potential participants are not comfortable doing the fundraising, and when they do, they get pressure from LLS staff to keep raising money. This is one that I think needs some analysis and discussion.