Run New York - it's much harder to qualify a guaranteed entry and really should be thought of as the marathon standard in terms of qualification for the 'common runner.'
Question is - will NY fill up early like Boston?
Run New York - it's much harder to qualify a guaranteed entry and really should be thought of as the marathon standard in terms of qualification for the 'common runner.'
Question is - will NY fill up early like Boston?
NY is in Nov and Boston is in April. One is hardly a natural alternative to the other.
I would respectfully disagree. The premise of the OP was that Boston is too diluted with slower and charity runners, lowering its accessibility and prestige. I would doubt the race organizers change anything substantially based on the views of running elitists on letsrun.
Besides the Olympic trials, I cant off hand think of another race with qualifying stds that one can strive for. NY's qual times are faster than Boston. It may be 6 months apart but it is an alternative, if not the alternative, to someone looking to run a marathon Major and achieve a time goal.
This looks to be the most closely related thread to my question...
Why does Boston open (and surely close/fill to capacity) prior to the running of numerous "major" fall marathons? Examples being: Twin Cities, Detroit, Chicago, etc.
Wouldn't an early November registration period allow for more athletes that are in shape "now" instead of "a year ago?" It still leaves just under 6 months of preparation, which I'd think is more than enough for those that obviously aren't on a "Couch to Marathon" type of program.
Thanks for reading...
Because they can.
As long as they have a full field and they have a few fast men and women up front, I would imagine they don't care who the actual bodies are. They still take in the same amount of money and keep enough prestige on the top end.
ELIMINATE non-qualifiers. They are called "non-qualifiers" for a reason.