Charity Runners at Boston

Let's try to go back to the orgins of charity road races. I wonder when was the first one? Why did they give to a charity? I haven't researched this but I guess I would look to see if races were challenged, that since they use the public roads, they must have a public purpose, and the directors could not just take any extra money and pocket it as if it were profit. So I think races decided to give any leftover money to charities.

I remember first encountering a race in the 1980s that was founded to raise money. There was a first race somewhere when the fund raising for charity came first. That was switch to a new idea.

Have road races become less because of it? Or are they now big enough that they can tolerate some charity aspect?

What is the right balance between fund raising and pure racing? Is having a race for its own sake as a community event to celebrate and promote the public good of running a race, a good cause itself? I think so. I think the sport doesn't need charities to justify having road races. (Charities need road races as long as they do raise money and when they don't the charities will vanish from the road racing market.) I think Boston has not lost sight of its original reason for coming into being, but the times have added other reasons. There is a dilution to be sure, but not enough to render the broth tasteless.

Tom

Sorry I took so long to reply. Yes, that does answer my question. I thought that you might wish to run Boston with a charity group as you care deeply about the charity and might have a close relationship with some of the other charity runners. As you observed many people do not run Boston as a race, and I thought you might be in that group as well. Your decision to run as a qualifier and as a charity runner is entirely admirable. I also thought your solution for the start was the best possible.

If Boston's become too watered-down for all you studs here, then here's what you should do, get together a bunch of the site sponsors (RRS, run-journal.com, etc.) and put on a LetsRun Marathon. You can throw down a flat loop course somewhere like Los Angeles or Houston and have it at a time of year when the weather's usually ideal there and put stringent qualifying standards on entries. Make your own race and then you can make it as exclusive as you think it should be.

EZ10Miler wrote:

That is my sentiment exactly. Why can't we have one race that has standards? I like the fact that when you go to the local road race and see a guy with a Boston jacket you know he's at least a 3:15 marathoner.

Granted by Let's Run standards that's jogging, but in the real world that at least seperates the Race for the Cure types from those of us that take the sport seriously.

Hornissimo wrote:

No such thing as a "charity runner".

Charity is an unselfish deed, like racing money for a beneficial cause without getting/expecting anything in return.

Using fundraising to exploit a loophole or get a free ride is not charity.

Bump - in part to knock the garbage off the front

Charity