Why is it that Boston Marathon is the most famous marathon when the qualifying standards at other marathons are harder?

Being the oldest in the United States and some of the other history behind the race are probably important too.

I do believe that reasonably challenging standards that are actually mediocre to slow when compared to truly fast marathon times are a part of the attraction since it creates a kind of attainable "running snob" appeal.

It is not the most famous to anyone outside the US

It's been run annually since 1897 when it began as a part of a marathon revival. All other well known marathons are johnny-come-latelies, by comparison.

OP, what would qualifying standards have to do with a race's popularity?

Idiot, WhatAn wrote:

... the qualifying standards at other marathons are harder?

What are you talking about? The only other marathons that restrict entries using a qualifying standard are the World Champs, Olympics and Fukuoka. I'd say these races are as well known as Boston.

Humbug wrote:

It is not the most famous to anyone outside the US

Correct. Olympics, anyone ?

Fukuoka? London?

The Boston line-up this year was very weak on talent. Compare the line-up with London for example, on both men and women's sides.

Frightened Inmate # 5 wrote:

Humbug wrote:

It is not the most famous to anyone outside the US

Correct. Olympics, anyone ?

Fukuoka? London?

The Boston line-up this year was very weak on talent. Compare the line-up with London for example, on both men and women's sides.

The question is why Boston is the most famous? It's not about line-ups. Try to keep up.

I first heard of the Boston Marathon when there was a bomb there. Before then I thought America's marathon was in New York. Is the Boston Marathon the same distance as the London Marathon?

Just out of curiosity, which marathons do you count as have tougher qualifying times? New York has tougher qualifying times, but that's only a small percentage of the race. Most people get in through the lottery. Same with London, which actually has times that match Boston's if a Brit wants to get in without going through the lottery. Chicago doesn't have any qualifying times unless you want to get into the sub-elite corral.

What made Boston unique was the fact that you had to qualify to run - it was impossible to just sign up. That's been mitigated a bit by the charity runners, but qualifying is still the only way to get in if you don't want to raise several thousand dollars.

Chicago does have qualifying times for auto entry (no lottery)

Your question is literally too dumb to answer ... but I'll try!

Olympics/World Champs are raced in a different venue every time, so even if they're more famous it says nothing about where they take place. And the World Championships marathon is not that famous.

Fukuoka is obviously tougher to qualify for, and a very prestigious race, but it doesn't seem to be well known outside of Japan and the circle of running geeks who care about "the non-championship marathon with the fastest average finishing time". Even then, I'd consider it a little gimmicky with the 2:45 sag wagon.

The other major marathons listed do not require qualifying times for anyone other than elites/sub-elites (maybe 5-10 percent?), and the vast majority of people get in through lotteries. At Boston, there are charity spots - and a lot of them - but there is usually no other way in for non-qualifiers.

Ignoring those minor points: Boston is famous because it has been run 118 times. It's the "granddaddy" of every major marathon. It's big, basically as big as the road allows. It runs from small town America to the big city. It's got personality and a famous course profile. It's difficult. It's got "Heartbreak Hill" - name another famous marathon landmark.

All that is not to say that there aren't other great, and deservingly famous marathons. Small ones, medium ones, and big ones! There are also some famous "major marathons" for which there is a dedicated international circuit competition hosted annually.

I know it's somehow cool to bash Boston on these boards - precisely because of the culture that surrounds the qualifying standards - but come on, wouldn't you love it if it were your hometown marathon? Jealous much. Or too cool. Either way, why don't you run it and find out. Or don't.

For starters, the marathon distance was not contested as a race until 1896 when some philosophers got together to concoct a slate of events for the first modern Olympic games. They happened upon an ancient Greek poem about Philippides running from Marathon and spitballed the distance at 40K and the marathon was born.

The following year the BAA put on the Boston Marathon. So, barring the first marathon year in history, Boston has been held every year the notion of racing a "marathon" has existed. Remember, there were no 1916/1940/1944 Olympics, but there were Boston Marathons those years.

So, ignoring the fact that the race is a religious institution in Boston, that it is arguably the hardest to get into, and a hard course, it is the first and oldest annually contested marathon in the world. I think that contributes to a lot of its fame.

Real simple: it's the oldest marathon in the world, except the Olympic marathon with more tradition than any other marathon. It's one of 6 World Marathon Majors. NYCM, London, Berlin, Tokyo and Chicago are all newcomers by comparison.

At the elite level, WC and Fukuoka both have harder standards but a lower level of competition. Fukuoka used to be a much bigger deal but has faded over time.