[Jeff Campbell]

http://www.appleinsider.com/blogs/g...ncing_ipod.html

"A marathon runner was disqualified from her victory after it was discovered she listened to music on her iPod for a portion of the race. According to the Milwaukee-Wisconsin Journal Sentinel, 27-year-old Jennifer Goebel was stripped of her victory time of just over three hours. She said she believes it was unfair."

Seems silly that they would ban electronic devices, but that being said, if she knew what the rules were before racing then it is her own fault. She wasn't the only DQ in the race as the person that actually finished ahead of her was DQ'd for accepting water from a friend that wasn't at one of the pre-determined aid points. Again, something that was also pointed out to all competitors before the race. 

[Jeff Campbell]

http://www.appleinsider.com/blogs/g...ncing_ipod.html

"A marathon runner was disqualified from her victory after it was discovered she listened to music on her iPod for a portion of the race. According to the Milwaukee-Wisconsin Journal Sentinel, 27-year-old Jennifer Goebel was stripped of her victory time of just over three hours. She said she believes it was unfair."

Seems silly that they would ban electronic devices, but that being said, if she knew what the rules were before racing then it is her own fault. She wasn't the only DQ in the race as the person that actually finished ahead of her was DQ'd for accepting water from a friend that wasn't at one of the pre-determined aid points. Again, something that was also pointed out to all competitors before the race. 

[doogald]

As far as disallowing iPod use among people vying to win a race - I can understand the ban. For all you know, the runner could be listening to a coach real-time. However, the ban among the general running pack? I disagree with it. They say that it potentially causes runners not to hear emergency instruction, or not hear a vehicle approaching from behind, but they do not ban deaf runners, or identify them in any way to emergency personnel if they are trying to give emergency instruction, so I think that these reasons are semi-bogus.

I'm guessing that the ban is desired by the insurance company in order to limit liability. Because, of course, idiots will sue anybody for anything, even if they are completely at fault.