I understand that if someone runs a world record time at Boston that it doesn't count for the record. Is this still true? Is that keeping some of the elite away?
I understand that if someone runs a world record time at Boston that it doesn't count for the record. Is this still true? Is that keeping some of the elite away?
Correct. The course is not record-eligible. The start and finish are more than 10% of the race distance away from each other, which affords the possibility of being wind-aided on some days (which certainly happened the year the CR was set). Second, the altitude drop between start and finish is too much -- tho this "averaging" method, which is the required determinant, does not factor in that little speed bump between the 16-21mile marks.
And I imagine that it does keep some runners away due to presumed unavailability of WR bonuses from their promotional partners (which some people call "sponsors"). There's also the factor that a lot of runners just don't want to run a race with hills in it, thinking that it lowers their probability of achieving similar bonuses thaqt may be available from the promo partners for meeting fast-criteria.
oh man, what I wouldn't give to watch Haile, Tergat, and Khannouchi lose their lunch down Heartbreak and get trashed in the "graveyard" section of Commonwealth Ave. It will never happen, unfortunately . . . unless the BAA starts forking over big-time appearance fees.
In the mid 1980's, Boston had a big problem because it wasn't giving out prize money, which was noble (being the "last bastion of amateurism") but tactically stupid. Although Beardsley and Salazar had run their 2:08's in 1982, by 1985 2:10-2:15 started to trickle in as an frontrunner time . . . then John Hancock insurance came through with prize money and VOILA !
Rob de Castella shows up and runs 2:07.51, Ingrid Kristiansen stops by and wins too. They were the best in the world. It was the first Boston for both.
now the bar has been raised by appearance fee. Simple solution. Give appearance fees and London will be out the window.
Macho Time. There are no World Records in the marathon. Semantics aside -the IAAF only recognizes "World Bests"- what lure runners to London, as opposed to Boston, is the course. Boston is not a WB course. Boston marathon history is riddled with runners coming through 20 miles in under record pace, only to be humbled by the final descent.
In 1990,the same year that the Boston course was declared "aided" and that no world best times set there would be given whatever sort of official recognition marathon world bests get was the year that John Campbell finally bested Jack Foster's over 40 marathon "record". But as Campbell's time came on an aided course, it should mean that Foster continued to hold the "record." Yet virtually everyone who paid attention to such things immediately recognized Campbell as the new "record holder." When Mohammed Ezzir ran 2:10:19 as a 40 year old, every reference I saw to his performance noted that he had broken John Campbell's over forty "record", not Jack Foster's.
So I think that if someone went to Boston and ran 2:04:something their time would be considered the "world record" regardless of the fact that those who declare "world's best's" wouldn't acknowledge the time as such.
Regardless of "world bests" Boston is the greatest Marathon in the world, anybody who debates this is a fool. Unless you run Boston your Marathon resume' is incomplete. Where else does a State make up a phony holiday (evacuation day??!) so every body can support the Red Sox and the Marathon at the same time. They schedule the Game to end around the time the Runners are coming in to Kenmore square, last April the Yankees were in town; this had to be the greatest day in the History of the world. Every other marathon is a qualifier. If the BAA is listening: Figure out a way to pay appearance fees before we lose anymore prominence to these flat, classless, podunk marathons.
When my college career is over, my first stop is to pick up a qualifier in Chicago and then, Boston.
"When I die, bury me in Chicago so I can still be politically active."
The holiday is "Patriot's Day".
It is John Hancock that pays the money, not the BAA. Hancock puts the field together not the BAA. There are no pacers in Boston which also may lead to slower times. Hancock once paid Deke $500,000 to come so it is possible to pay the going rate for the top guys. See Tom Dedarian's book for Boston history. It is the best one out there.
Oh yeah, "Patriots Day", I was thinking about how we used to call St. Patricks Day "evacuation day", (for when the British supposedly evacuated). It had to do with the sentiment of Irish discrimination if I am not mistaken.
Why don't more elite Americans run Boston? The funny thing is that this race gets more exposure than any other running event. If KK runs 2:04 in London, you may read about it in your local local paper. If an unknown Kenyan runs 2:10 to win Boston, it's on Sportscenter and your local newscast. It has name recognition with regular folk as well. I can't begin to count how many times some yokel has yelled out something about the Boston Marathon as I've run by.
No disrespect to the folks in St. Louis and Birmingham but, Boston should be our national champs and Trials every year.
The most incredible running event I've ever witnessed. It's the closest that an average runner will ever feel to being an Olympian. I've run 8 of them and can't say enough about the race. Awesome crowd support almost the entire race and so much tradition! The course is so much tougher than people give it credit for being. The first 16 are very quick w/ lot's of downs and some up's... By the time you hit the hills bet. 16 and 21 your quads can be toast from all the downs. You really have to know what you're doing there and prepare specifically for the course. I ran in '94 when we had a nice tailwind and that was a definite advantage, but I've run more Bostons than any other course and my PR was run at a different race. Not an easy place to run your fastest. It's too bad they have to go by the book on this one as far as record setting goes, because if you can break a world record on that course, you deserve it!!! All runners should make the trip out and run Boston before you die. It's absolutely the best!
Suffolk County has two holidays -- Evacuation Day and Bunker Hill Day. The State government observes these days. The state as well has a statewide holiday known as Patriot's Day, when the marathon is run.
I don't know why more Americans don't run Boston -- they have a good shot at winning and will get a lot of press (witness Rod DeHaven two years ago when he placed highly)
In 1977 I was in the sixth grade and won my school's speech contest with a 5 minute talk on the Boston Marathon. I cannot imagine somebody doing a similar one today on the London marathon, nor the Chicago marathon. While I've never heard bad things about either of those races (and hope to run them both in the future), Boston will always be Boston. Outside of the Olympics, it is the most recognizable marathon in the world and I do wish that KK, Geb or Tergat would consider racing it. Now that would be special.
Monty
What are some of the Boston PR s on this LetsRun Forum?
And if WeJo sees this, why dont you give it a shot?
I am not sure if this is unique to Boston, but last year we were spectating at the corner of mass. Ave and Comm. Ave. (about 800m to go) and Ely Rono (I think) decided to stop and walk. The crowd started as a soft din to urge him to keep running, he refused at first, then everybody got in on it and the specatators began to roar. The crowd was determined to continue cheering him on untill he started running again. He smiled and waved and finally continued to run, everybody started cheering and clapping like they were responsible for him finishing. This trend contiued at least untill I left around the time 3:30 people were finishing.
"Autumn of Discontent" and "Portland Runner" have somehow stolen my thoughts -- that's intellectual property infringement, guys. Then again, I canl;t claim a monopoly on being right.
Maybe they know what happened to Bikila and Wolde in '63...
Top Americans don't run Boston because, much to your disapointment I'm sure, they CAN'T win. Look how thrilled we all were when Browne ran 2:11 at Twin Cities. There were messages that this was practicaly the "second coming of Salazar" !!! Many years, that would finish out of the $$$ in Boston.
In 2000, Kenya used Boston for their Olympic Trials, so most of the top 15 places were gone. Why bother killing yourself when you get no return for it ?? To me, Boston is "sacred". I run it as best I can every year (and finish in the top 500 if I'm lucky), but to the top guys, running is how they pay the bills, and they can't take a chance on running "great" at Boston, and still going home with nothing for their effort. Then they can't race again for a month (or more), and they're skrewed.
No, JEH claims to have those rights.
1983 Boston
1 Greg Meyer 2:09.00
trained at low altitude in Massachusetts
2000 Boston "Kenyan Olympic Trials"
1 Elijah Lagat 2:09.47
americans can't win
Since Myers won (almost 20 years ago !!), how many Americans have won? --- 0.
1984 Geoff Smith Great Britain 2:10:34
1985 Geoff Smith Great Britain 2:14:05
1986 Robert de Castella Australia 2:07:51
1987 Toshihiko Seko Japan 2:11:50
1988 Ibrahim Hussein Kenya 2:08:43
1989 Abebe Mekonnen Ethiopia 2:09:06
1990 Gelindo Bordin Italy 2:08:19
1991 Ibrahim Hussein Kenya 2:11:06
1992 Ibrahim Hussein Kenya 2:08:14
1993 Cosmas Ndeti Kenya 2:09:33
1994 Cosmas Ndeti Kenya 2:07:15
1995 Cosmas Ndeti Kenya 2:09:22
1996 Moses Tanui Kenya 2:09:15
1997 Lameck Aguta Kenya 2:10:34
1998 Moses Tanui Kenya 2:07:34
1999 Joseph Chebet Kenya 2:09:52
2000 Elijah Lagat Kenya 2:09:47
2001 Lee Bong-Ju Korea 2:09:43
2002 Rodgers Rop Kenya 2:09:02
In the last ten years, the winning time has been slower than 2:10 only once, and the weather suk'd that year. How many Americans have broken 2:10 in the last 10 years ?? At ANY marathon ?? Probably less than 10 ...
Again, why would someone risk running their best (which may be 2:12-13) and not get paid. First US runner at Boston in 2002 ran 2:13:28 and got 15th. Maybe Culpepper or Browne will run there in 2003 and prove me wrong, but I doubt it ... KK can make a cool $250k just by showing up in London, so the only thing in Boston for him would be pride.