Used to be Rono wrote:
feldman wrote:
hot take: Boston, the logistics are a nightmare and it's expensive as hell. And yes I've run it 3 times flying halfway across the country to do it.
Boston entry is: $185. NYC is $255. Chicago is $195. Is getting yourself to Staten Island a whole lot more wonderful than the trip to Hopkinton?
I stayed at the Doubletree Westborough for $85 a night and had a 10 minute van ride to the Athlete Village bus pickup at the EMC lot in Hopkinton.
PortlandXCgirl wrote:
Lots of competition for this title but the winner has got to be...
PORTLAND!!! ????
Portland isn't a big city.
I liked that race the time I ran.
tregrg wrote:
I would say the PNC Milwaukee Marathon (not to be confused with the Milwaukee Lakefront Marathon), but it wasn't really a marathon during its 2nd and 3rd years in existence. The course was long in 2016 and measured only 25.4 miles in 2017.
Haha, would definitely be the answer except it's neither a big city nor a big marathon.
Most big city marathons have a tremendous lack of portable toilets at the start and on the course.
This is a big reason to not like a particular marathon and not want to run it again.
The 5 mi plod up Kelly drive is miserable and devoid of spectators, then you get to do it again back down. It's like someone said f it after planning the first 4 miles of the route.
Until last year the course consisted of three turn-arounds, including one turn onto the falls bridge where you immediately circled a traffic cone and ran back again.
All this to at the finish dodge and then line up behind a bunch of people that took 2.5 hours to run the half marathon for any food or water (also "fixed" last year).
Of the three years I ran it I don't think it once started on time. The last time I did was a total cluster trying to get to the start due to "security".
Oh yeah, and after the esteemed Mayor Nutter hit his term limit it was shortly thereafter revealed some of the marathon funds had been "misused" to send some of our many incorruptible city servants first class to vacation in Italy.
JO Coach wrote:
Convexity wrote:
Philly
Interesting. Why Philly? I know that from a spectator's POV Philly gives me more opportunities to see my wife and her friends than other marathons they do.
Of all the possible "big city marathons", they're all well run events. It's hard to call any of them BAD. That said, I felt meh when I ran Philly. It's kinda in no-man's land.
* Enough runners to make the race annoying but not enough to really impress you. I see 9,000 runners for the marathon in the results for last year. They pad it with the 8K and half (so they can say 27,000 runners).
* Course isn't particularly fast but not particularly challenging either.
* Winners are around 2:15/16. Faster than any local race but not something people would tune in to watch.
* The course is kinda lame, particularly the 2nd half which is literally an out-and-back.
Filthadelphia wrote:
Until last year the course consisted of three turn-arounds, including one turn onto the falls bridge where you immediately circled a traffic cone and ran back again.
YES. That's how it was when I ran it. I was just looking at the course map and wondering where the bridges were, if i was delusional, or if they changed the course.
Marine Corp marathon was the worst I did by far.
The logistics getting into the race and then getting out didn't work. 30 min wait for a shuttle at 530am followed by a 90 minute wait at the athletes village where thousands of runners were funneling into 2 lanes to get in (while marines pointlessly filled cups of water at the 23rd mile marker instead of helping).
MCM continued.
After the finish you had a half mile walk back to the shuttles.
Oh and the expo is in downtown DC and every lot and street spot was filled so I just did laps around the block while the wife got bibs. They try so hard to get you to stay in the city but for everyone staying outside the city, it was a bad experience.
The VIA Lehigh Valley Marathon is total crap! It is a net downhill course so attracts a bunch of losers who can't legitimately BQ. Plus a lot of the race is actually run on a crummy, narrow rocky path. The weather is often bad because they hold it in September just before Boston registration period ends as some kind of "last ditch chance to BQ" because otherwise no one would actually run it. Oh, and a train came through the middle of the race one year, forcing a bunch of people to have to stop for 10 minutes.
Bart Yasso is involved somehow so all the Runners World crowd thinks it is a great event. Well, this the same guy who thinks 800 meter repeats are a great predictor of marathon ability. BART AND THE RACE ARE BOTH A FRAUD.
Not sure how Lehigh Valley is a "big city", but you did get to hate on Runners World and Bart Yasso, so I'm sure that made you feel good.
Arnold the Pig wrote:
The VIA Lehigh Valley Marathon is total crap! It is a net downhill course so attracts a bunch of losers who can't legitimately BQ. Plus a lot of the race is actually run on a crummy, narrow rocky path. The weather is often bad because they hold it in September just before Boston registration period ends as some kind of "last ditch chance to BQ" because otherwise no one would actually run it. Oh, and a train came through the middle of the race one year, forcing a bunch of people to have to stop for 10 minutes.
Bart Yasso is involved somehow so all the Runners World crowd thinks it is a great event. Well, this the same guy who thinks 800 meter repeats are a great predictor of marathon ability. BART AND THE RACE ARE BOTH A FRAUD.
I disagree. It's a great race.
Change @ Park wrote:
vivalarepublica wrote:
I would say Boston. Because the course seems like one big boring mostly straight line and everybody in the metro area just seems miserable.
0/10
Wasn’t trolling. I hate running in straight lines for that long of a distance.
thons wrote:
BALTIMORE - not a race but a walk through the hood for 3/4 of the field
Ha! If you think that was the hood you clearly don't live in Baltimore
vivalarepublica wrote:
Change @ Park wrote:
0/10
Wasn’t trolling. I hate running in straight lines for that long of a distance.
I agree, most of Boston is just running through suburbs with a few spectators here and there until you get into the city at mile 22. There are more spectators at mile 8 in NYC than the entire Boston marathon course before mile 22. Not even exaggerating.
andicamp wrote:
PortlandXCgirl wrote:
Lots of competition for this title but the winner has got to be...
PORTLAND!!! ????
Haha! Yup.
You don’t like receiving the same T-shirt every year since 1985?! It will be a classic someday, trust me.
I am surprised no one has said San Francisco. Except for being able to say that I ran back and forth across the Golden Gate Bridge, there is nothing good about the race. No spectators to speak of and the City is a complete sh!thole. Seriously, it is like they put on a fairly big Marathon and didn't tell the local residents. The year I ran, they only served Nuun (no carbs) so, even though I had my standard three gels, I bonked pretty hard.
Contrary to most other races, Philly has continually made significant changes to address their weaknesses (which have all been described in this thread). At least they're trying! I think if they were able to secure a big, multi-year sponsorship, they might have some money to throw around for course updates.
1) The marathon is now the only event on Sunday, with the 8k and Half being run on Saturday. This helps to focus it as the "marquee" event of the weekend and decrease congestion (and confusion) through the first 13.1.
2) They've eliminated that horrible dog-leg over the Fall Bridge by adding on some miles in West Fairmount Park.
3) They've increased the prize purse to attract faster runners, which I totally respect. This is bucking the trend of other races eliminating prize purses altogether.
4) They have "seeded" and "elite" standards to attract some of the faster (and fastest) runners in the region.
5) The course is honest... but mostly flat with a few gradual hills in the early/middle miles. I prefer this type of course over a pancake flat course, as the hills help stimulate other muscle groups.
Having said all that, the out-and-back on Kelly Drive blows. That, to me, is the biggest weakness of this race. Once is fine, but the 2nd time on Kelly Drive is tough. At least, coming back, you have the benefit of going against the grain and getting some motivational support from those still heading out.
I'll be running it for a 3rd time this year, but first time on the new course. Looking forward to it.
Schuylkill wrote:
2) They've eliminated that horrible dog-leg over the Fall Bridge by adding on some miles in West Fairmount Park.
Having said all that, the out-and-back on Kelly Drive blows. That, to me, is the biggest weakness of this race. Once is fine, but the 2nd time on Kelly Drive is tough. At least, coming back, you have the benefit of going against the grain and getting some motivational support from those still heading out.
That little trip over the Falls Bridge was terrible. I'm glad to hear they got rid of that. I ran Philly as my first marathon, and I was struggling pretty hard. I had forgotten about that and it really messed me up for some reason.
The Kelly Drive portion is hit or miss. When I used to live closer to the city and could train on that portion regularly, it made it pretty easy. I could mentally break it down a little bit. Now, without having run Kelly as frequently, I would probably hate it.