Next year will be the US Olympic trials 10 weeks before Boston. It will be interesting to see how many American elites will be showing up ready to race.
Next year will be the US Olympic trials 10 weeks before Boston. It will be interesting to see how many American elites will be showing up ready to race.
Let’s Run complaining about peanuts for the para-athletes, please stop! Why not complain Joe Burrows 5 year $275 million contract? That’s like $3,437,500 per game for a 16 game regular season. That doesn’t include his sponsorship money. He alone could pay the Boston Marathon winnings. Instead of hating parts of community, para-athletes and non-binary for increased prize money, we need to come together and make our sport better.
I don’t hate Joe Burrows for his increased pay check, because the Cincinnati Bengals and the NFL know the amount of jerseys, sports wear, beer, and nachos and seats tickets, etc that will flow in the next five years because of Joe. $275 million is just a drop in bucket. Him and his agent proved his worth to the NFL, so some of money flows back to him. However, if we can make figure out to make our sport more entertaining and marketable, we are always just fighting over peanuts. I love running, the events, and the community. We need better management, marketing, and less arguing.
Nike, Adidas, ON, Puma, and the other sports companies need proof that running can generate more for them, like the NFL MLB, NHL, tennis, and FIFA, and the runners will get the pay days that they deserve. Otherwise, the money flows one way, to the sports companies.
The overall prize fund increases by $121,000 in 2023 to a round million in 2024. Some of that increase, naturally, is partitioned to the para division.
I am curious why you think it's such a bad thing for wheelchair athletes to win significant prize money?
I don't think it's a bad thing for wheelchair athletes to win significant prize money. I do think it's a bad thing that you can finish 16th, ahead of thousands of competitors, in either the men's or women's race and get nothing, while the wheelchair winner finishes ahead of dozens of competitors and win as much as they do. I'd be perfectly happy with the increase in wheelchair money if there was a correspondingly big increase in money paid in the open and masters' divisions.
The overall prize fund increases by $121,000 in 2023 to a round million in 2024. Some of that increase, naturally, is partitioned to the para division.
I am curious why you think it's such a bad thing for wheelchair athletes to win significant prize money?
They can pay the wheeled competitors whatever they want but the open categories are much more competitive.
It appears that the prize pool in the open categories hasn't increased since at least 2018. Perhaps offset by more getting appearance money?
Next year will be the US Olympic trials 10 weeks before Boston. It will be interesting to see how many American elites will be showing up ready to race.
I guess the issue is the regular runners are also paying for it. It's simple to me, if you are not happy with certain things don't participate. They can do what they want with the money.
The overall prize fund increases by $121,000 in 2023 to a round million in 2024. Some of that increase, naturally, is partitioned to the para division.
I am curious why you think it's such a bad thing for wheelchair athletes to win significant prize money?
I don't think it's a bad thing for wheelchair athletes to win significant prize money. I do think it's a bad thing that you can finish 16th, ahead of thousands of competitors, in either the men's or women's race and get nothing, while the wheelchair winner finishes ahead of dozens of competitors and win as much as they do. I'd be perfectly happy with the increase in wheelchair money if there was a correspondingly big increase in money paid in the open and masters' divisions.
That's an issue for USATF in terms of developing and incentivizing american pros. Boston doesn't have to be fair if they don't want to.
I don't think it's a bad thing for wheelchair athletes to win significant prize money. I do think it's a bad thing that you can finish 16th, ahead of thousands of competitors, in either the men's or women's race and get nothing, while the wheelchair winner finishes ahead of dozens of competitors and win as much as they do. I'd be perfectly happy with the increase in wheelchair money if there was a correspondingly big increase in money paid in the open and masters' divisions.
That's an issue for USATF in terms of developing and incentivizing american pros. Boston doesn't have to be fair if they don't want to.
No, Boston doesn't need to be at all fair. But that doesn't mean people have to be happy that they aren't. I also agree that USATF is the organization that should have the formal job of developing US distance runners. But they don't.
I live in a town where running is quite popular. If every Boston marathon winner (men's and women's) for the last 10 years walked through the busy downtown streets here, not 1 person in a thousand would know who any of them are.
The TV rating for the race are miniscule. It is momentarily interesting to see runners fly by at speeds that the average person couldn't run for 50 feet. And of course, no one pays to watch. Frankly, marathon running is boring to watch. The money will never be significant.
I live in a town where running is quite popular. If every Boston marathon winner (men's and women's) for the last 10 years walked through the busy downtown streets here, not 1 person in a thousand would know who any of them are.
The TV rating for the race are miniscule. It is momentarily interesting to see runners fly by at speeds that the average person couldn't run for 50 feet. And of course, no one pays to watch. Frankly, marathon running is boring to watch. The money will never be significant.
Most runners don't care. They can barely name top 5 pro runners. Outside of Kipchoge, they have no clue.
I live in a town where running is quite popular. If every Boston marathon winner (men's and women's) for the last 10 years walked through the busy downtown streets here, not 1 person in a thousand would know who any of them are.
The TV rating for the race are miniscule. It is momentarily interesting to see runners fly by at speeds that the average person couldn't run for 50 feet. And of course, no one pays to watch. Frankly, marathon running is boring to watch. The money will never be significant.
Most runners don't care. They can barely name top 5 pro runners. Outside of Kipchoge, they have no clue.
The dirty little secret is that, at the NYC Marathon, the “Elites” run in front of the fewest number of people. The big crowds don’t show up until the 4-5 hour runners come through. Most of the crowd is there to see friends and family.
I live in a town where running is quite popular. If every Boston marathon winner (men's and women's) for the last 10 years walked through the busy downtown streets here, not 1 person in a thousand would know who any of them are.
The TV rating for the race are miniscule. It is momentarily interesting to see runners fly by at speeds that the average person couldn't run for 50 feet. And of course, no one pays to watch. Frankly, marathon running is boring to watch. The money will never be significant.
Money from running will never be significant compares to high profile sports. But Boston has something like 20,000 people paying an entry fee of at least $205 and a bunch of sponsors paying the BAA to have their names listed as "official sponsors." They could pay their winners and top placers a lot more than they do and they could have prize money go a lot deeper than it does. Not doing so is their prerogative and what they do in terms of prize money is mostly in line with what other major marathons do. And none of us really know what they do about appearance money so maybe they aren't as miserly as they look to me.
I agree that you could have BAA winners from the past ten years walk through the downtown of a city with a large running population and go unrecognized today. But if you did that forty or so years ago, when the winners were people like Rodgers and Meyers there'd have been some recognition.
I live in a town where running is quite popular. If every Boston marathon winner (men's and women's) for the last 10 years walked through the busy downtown streets here, not 1 person in a thousand would know who any of them are.
The TV rating for the race are miniscule. It is momentarily interesting to see runners fly by at speeds that the average person couldn't run for 50 feet. And of course, no one pays to watch. Frankly, marathon running is boring to watch. The money will never be significant.
Hence why the sport has to be propped up by public funds, otherwise american distance running stays behind.
I live in a town where running is quite popular. If every Boston marathon winner (men's and women's) for the last 10 years walked through the busy downtown streets here, not 1 person in a thousand would know who any of them are.
The TV rating for the race are miniscule. It is momentarily interesting to see runners fly by at speeds that the average person couldn't run for 50 feet. And of course, no one pays to watch. Frankly, marathon running is boring to watch. The money will never be significant.
Money from running will never be significant compares to high profile sports. But Boston has something like 20,000 people paying an entry fee of at least $205 and a bunch of sponsors paying the BAA to have their names listed as "official sponsors." They could pay their winners and top placers a lot more than they do and they could have prize money go a lot deeper than it does. Not doing so is their prerogative and what they do in terms of prize money is mostly in line with what other major marathons do. And none of us really know what they do about appearance money so maybe they aren't as miserly as they look to me.
I agree that you could have BAA winners from the past ten years walk through the downtown of a city with a large running population and go unrecognized today. But if you did that forty or so years ago, when the winners were people like Rodgers and Meyers there'd have been some recognition.
I guess just thinking about growing the sport in the US... paying top placers more money won't make a difference. American runners can fly to any major marathon and try to earn money. If they gave the winner $5m, it would grow pro interest in the race big time and make it more competitive, but there are already very competitive marathons throughout the year and they don't want to run hills.. so why waste the money?
Most runners don't care. They can barely name top 5 pro runners. Outside of Kipchoge, they have no clue.
The dirty little secret is that, at the NYC Marathon, the “Elites” run in front of the fewest number of people. The big crowds don’t show up until the 4-5 hour runners come through. Most of the crowd is there to see friends and family.
No, this is common knowledge
This post was edited 23 seconds after it was posted.
It's a virtue signaling must have. Shouldn't it be part of a bicycle race? Does anybody actually care about wheelchair runners?
I agree 100%. Pure virtue signaling. Running a Marathon shouldn't be hard to comprehend. A person or group of persons running with two legs for 26.2 miles.
Money and virtue signaling has all but ruined the Boston Marathon. It is no longer a premier athletic event. Its a social event.
So what? They're still giving out 2 1/2 times as much prize money to the runners, and the winners get almost four times as much ($150,000). Plus the top runners get appearance fees.
I imagine being a wheelchair racer and traveling to races is expensive without a lot of sponsorship opportunities, this helps defray some of their costs. Even if they can race more frequently than marathon runners, it doesn't matter much since there are very few races that offer good wheelchair prize money. And it's not like marathoners are only doing two races a rear, they do lots of road races in between where they can pick up easy money and more appearance fees.
Crapping on people in wheelchairs ... a new low for LR.
It's a virtue signaling must have. Shouldn't it be part of a bicycle race? Does anybody actually care about wheelchair runners?
I agree 100%. Pure virtue signaling. Running a Marathon shouldn't be hard to comprehend. A person or group of persons running with two legs for 26.2 miles.
Money and virtue signaling has all but ruined the Boston Marathon. It is no longer a premier athletic event. Its a social event.
Yes, it's a social event, and no one cares about the elite athletes, regardless of division. Also, no one cares about your 3 hour marathon time.
Why not just have a good time, run, and challenge yourself? Sheesh!
Boston can pay who they want- it's a fair or unfair issue.
Personally, I'm not interested in the wheelchair division. I'm not interested in the Tour de France or NASCAR either. I'm interested in the running race.
I get angry when the TV coverage goes to the wheelchair race and ignores the running race.
Maybe they should have a separate stream for the wheelchair division and see how many people watch it. That could help them determine what percentage of the prize money should go to them.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.