Let's hear it?
Especially interested in some of the older runners from the 1950-1980's ie the boomers.
Let's hear it?
Especially interested in some of the older runners from the 1950-1980's ie the boomers.
Yes. There is nothing wrong about raising awareness and money for worth charities. The charities are much more important than Joe Blow's 2:3X pr.
Why would anyone be against charity runners? STFU!
To be honest, I preferred the smaller fields that defined the Boston Marathon during the 80s and 90s. And I preferred the more difficult BQs (ie: 2:50 for men under 40). But that day and age is lone gone. Having said that, I do not think today's charity runners deserve to be dissed. The 3rd wave has no negative impact upon so-called "serious runners".
Go raise charity money somewhere else. There were 483 marathons in the United States in 2011, up from 397 in 2010. That's more than 9 every weekend. Go to Chicago, Marine Corps, Disney, New York, Los Angeles ... anywhere but Boston. Boston is a shadow of its former self and is no longer an anomaly. It is no different from that marathon in Nowhere, USA with 92 finishers. I give it till 2024 before the charity runners find a way to "earn" a spot in the Olympic Trials marathon for raising xxx dollars.
They gobble up plane tickets and hotel rooms, making it more difficult for everyone.
Boston gets a lot of exposure, thus it's a great race for raising money. It's a good choice.
I always recommend that runners take a look to their right right after crossing the Mass Pike outside Kenmore Sq to see the Dana Farber kids and their families. There weren't many there today as I assume the heat/sun during treatments would prohibit their cheering on their charity runner. We're talking real life not the diversion we have chosen to occupy our time. I agree with the sentiment of the other posts as well.
Sorry, I'll be a prick and say NO. Do that at Disney or even Chicago/LA/NY - it's a better fit. You wouldn't have some 200 lb women running at a college invite in the 1500 for a charity, would you?
Bring back the seriousness of Boston.
No to charity runners. If they want to raise money at Boston they should have to qualify like everyone else. If the sponsor wants to donate part of the profits from the race, fine, let them.
I would let everyone who has a qualifying time in and after that fill out my field, i.e., up to whatever the limit is, with charity runners.
All of you against charity runners are just jealous you don't have a higher calling. My 6 hour marathon has greater meaning. It's a gift I give to the world.
I think Boston does it right. Let charity runners in, but have X thousand entries reserved for qualifiers and make the charity mob start behind qualifiers. Field limits and qualifying standards will always be arbitrary anyway. Also, keep Tur\ds in Training, their deceptive fundraising and collective bargaining tactics the hell out of Boston.
kksx wrote:
All of you against charity runners are just jealous you don't have a higher calling. My 6 hour marathon has greater meaning. It's a gift I give to the world.
0/10
sfddsfadsfdsfa wrote:
Yes. There is nothing wrong about raising awareness and money for worth charities. The charities are much more important than Joe Blow's 2:3X pr.
There's nothing right about it either. It's a race dbag. Charity has no place in a race. It is possible to raise charitable donations without doing a freaking athletic event. Boston is a marathon. A marathon is a race. That's it. End of story.
I would allow charity runners, but stick them and their five hour PR's all in a third wave.
Considering that Patriots Day is no longer a holiday for most, I don't think the race would go on as planned if the BAA didn't have the charity angle.
One of the reasons all of the various city governments are willing to put up with the race because it gives back. Community support counts in these decisions as well. If you cut out the charities, you lose the community support and you lose the race (in its current form). It just takes one town along the route to say "no".
So you can run fast. Big deal. The person sitting next to you at your lame ass cubicle farm doesn't know the difference between a 5k and marathon. Get some perspective and realize that if a guy from FL can get 20th at 2:29:17, its not that serious.
You're a loser. Get over yourself and understand that your race is truly unimportant.
NeolithicTroglodyte wrote:
Sorry, I'll be a prick and say NO. Do that at Disney or even Chicago/LA/NY - it's a better fit. You wouldn't have some 200 lb women running at a college invite in the 1500 for a charity, would you?
Bring back the seriousness of Boston.
So after the athletes are done and showered, you'd be against charity runners "racing" a post meet 1500 at $500 a pop all of which would go to support a worthwhile charity? It would also help make the meet more successful with more seats and more concessions sold to the charity runners.