At Boston, a sponsor, John Hancock, rather than the race organizer, handles recruitment of the elite field.
The other marathon majors use their sponsors' money for the same purpose, but do the recruiting themselves.
The different approach is even more notable because all the other ones have title sponsors, while the B.A.A. lets Hancock do this without being a title sponsor. The B.A.A. is left sort of like, "Why look who's running our race, isn't that nice?"
This seems wacky.
smd - do you know why Hancock isn't a title sponsor? Did they obtain the unusual privilege of doing their own elite recruiting by forfeiting title rights, so the B.A.A. can feel like they're maintaining the tradition of "the Boston Marathon" rather than "the John Hancock Financial Boston Marathon," as it would surely have to be referred to by TV announcers and in all press accounts?
I don't know, but I do enjoy there being one less race where I have to fight to remove all references to corporate sponsor in print.
Yeah, it'd be far better if there were no corporate interest in road racing.