Running historians - Can you tell me why / how Katherine Switzer became as or more famous than Bobbi Gibb?

You're the man Ambrose. Was there (as a fan) the day you won.

But read you ran a marathon on an indoor track (at Wesleyan?), now that's crazzzzy.

Do you think Katherine believes her entire story? You know how repeating something can make it seem true eventually.

She has certainly made a career out of the incident. She has done a lot of good for women's participation in road racing but its sad if it was based on lies.

Both women should be celebrated for protesting the sexist restrictions on their own terms. Now, if we could just convince sexist coaches to train men and women equally, we might just achieve some parity in this sport.

Switzer was not in her sanctioned division. She risked the entire event losing its accreditation with the AAU, and possibly the athletes as well. This is no different than if a man ran in a womens division.

Semple was supportive of Gibb because she did not jeapordise the entire event, and she was prepared. Switzer was neither of those.

In 1968, when 5 women finished and Gibb won again, Switzer was nowhere to be seen.

Switzer's agenda is that of her own self-promotion. She cares not a whit about the sport.

Your logic rests on a false assumption of physical equality. 0/10

equal but not wrote:

Both women should be celebrated for protesting the sexist restrictions on their own terms. Now, if we could just convince sexist coaches to train men and women equally, we might just achieve some parity in this sport.

Switzer has never claimed she was the first woman to run the Boston Marathon. She's never stated it that way.

I would not argue that Katherine was not a self promoter, and a pretty good one at that. Nor would I argue that she jeopardized the entire field that day though I think there's a very good chance she didn't know that. A lot of newish runners, and she was one at the time, were not aware of the Contamination Rule and its workings. If you want to slam anyone for perhaps jeopardizing the field knowingly in that way I think Arnie Briggs is more in line for that.

What I would argue with is your contention that Katherine doesn't care a whit about the sport. Being a self promoter isn't an exclusive gig and it doesn't mean you can't care about something beside yourself and promote that thing as well as yourself. Gibb's approach was much more like my own would have been but it didn't attract anywhere near the attention that Katherine's did and I doubt there would have been as much progress for women's running in as little time had someone not done something as attention getting as Katherine did that day.

HRE wrote:

Gibb's approach was much more like my own would have been but it didn't attract anywhere near the attention that Katherine's did and I doubt there would have been as much progress for women's running in as little time had someone not done something as attention getting as Katherine did that day.

You cannot attribute change to Switzer's actions, and lack of it to Gibb's. Gibb showed that women can run a marathon competitively, something that took Switzer 5-7 years to confirm.

You assume that these decisions were made in the open, like voting on Dancing with the Stars.

It could also be the case that AAU/IAAF increased the number of sanctioned womens' distance events without any of this. There were rumblings for a while.

Because we can never know what would have happened if a particular event hadn't taken place, you're correct, we cannot definitively attribute change to Switzer's actions. Nor can we deny the possibility that her actions played a major role in creating that change. I'm doing neither though I suspect she generated much more awareness that women could run long distances than Gibb did. I agree with most of your original post except the part where you said Switzer was a self promoter who didn't care a whit about women's running. I'd amend that statement to say she was a self promoter who cared very much about promoting women's running and managed to dovetail the two concerns.

curiouser wrote:

Do you think Katherine believes her entire story? You know how repeating something can make it seem true eventually.

She has certainly made a career out of the incident. She has done a lot of good for women's participation in road racing but its sad if it was based on lies.

Don't know about lies per se, but she seems to have a tendency to shade or bend the details. Here are 2 different Switzer quotes that mention where she was attacked on the course that day in '67.

In this version it was 2 miles in --

"It was sleeting on race day, and everyone was bundled up in gray sweatsuits. Two miles into the race, the press truck came by. Jock Semple, the race’s co-director, was riding with the press and lost his temper when he saw me, a girl, wearing race numbers."

In this version it's 4 --

"Arnie and Tom were in their element, running with me—a girl! All the positive encouragement gave them attention they had never had before. Tom ran with his chest stuck out, and even Arnie pranced; it was nice to see. Then, at just about mile four, came a honking of horns and someone shouting, “Get over, runners move to your right!” There was a lot of shuffling and some cursing as a big flatbed truck forced us all to the side of the narrow road."

The pictures gave KV Switzer enormous publicity. I believe the caption said that Switzer didn't finish the race. She called the paper and corrected them. And if I remember correctly, she also made an appearance on The Tonight Show.

And The wrote:

Switzer has never claimed she was the first woman to run the Boston Marathon. She's never stated it that way.

Well her website parses it this way --

"Kathrine Switzer was the first woman to officially enter and run the Boston Marathon."

So for those unware of Bobbi Gibb's landmark run in '66 you could easily infer 2 incorrect meanings from that quote, as rojo apparently did --

1 - Switzer was the first woman to run Boston (untrue)

2 - Switzer was an official participant in '67 (by AAU rule ALL women were unofficial until '72)

Because Switzer is still milking the whole "marathon woman" thing to this day and seemingly will continue to do so until she dies.

rojo wrote:

I'll start by saying that I'm male and wasn't alive in 1966 or 1967. But I'd always thought Katherine Switzer was the first woman to run Boston.

I think it is because Switzer was an official entrant, whereas Gibb was a bandit. Officially, only paid entrants get credit for completing a race. Also, from what I understand, Gibb simply loved to run and just wanted to run the race for the fun of it and wasn't trying to make a point and didn't want publicity.

HRE wrote:

Because we can never know what would have happened if a particular event hadn't taken place, you're correct, we cannot definitively attribute change to Switzer's actions. Nor can we deny the possibility that her actions played a major role in creating that change. I'm doing neither though I suspect she generated much more awareness that women could run long distances than Gibb did. I agree with most of your original post except the part where you said Switzer was a self promoter who didn't care a whit about women's running. I'd amend that statement to say she was a self promoter who cared very much about promoting women's running and managed to dovetail the two concerns.

Switzer cared as long as there was a paycheck attached to her concerns.

She wanted then and still does today get paid for her 15 minutes of fame.

Wether it be speaking engagements, book sales , appearances nothing is for free.

Back in the day , yes she did get a women's races series started that helped the sport and thank you for that.

Wouldn't be nice if she came clean and said publicly, I was not the 1st woman, I never won Boston. I was at the right place and right time when a photographer took a pic that helped me tell a story, thats all.

TrackCoach wrote:

rojo wrote:

I'll start by saying that I'm male and wasn't alive in 1966 or 1967. But I'd always thought Katherine Switzer was the first woman to run Boston.

I think it is because Switzer was an official entrant, whereas Gibb was a bandit.

Official? Not at all.

Switzer's notoriety is directly the result of those iconic B&W images of Jock Semple chasing her ass on Route 135.

I agree it would be good if she acknowleged Bobbi Gibb more than she seems to and I would not rule out a semi-sinister reason for her not doing so. But. even if she cared about women's running as long as there was a paycheck attached to her concerns she still cared and if true more power to her for finding a way to make a nice living from the sport. Do you know her or people who do? I know people who worked with her to promote women's running and none would say that her concerns only extended to a paycheck.

It's like saying the fastest athlete doesn't always make the most money or is the most popular.

And I found out about this from a book about the marathon that does stories mile by mile very interest. I have the book at home so I can't tell you what it was called from work.

Come on, that's such a minor error and has no bearing on the story, obviously just a mistake. Little details in stories are ALWAYS wrong if you dig into them. It's not because people are lying, it's because memory isn't reliable years after the fact.