All the above sounds very true...
From what I remember, at London sub 2.16 guys get help with expenses. Over that you are paying your own flight/accomodation.
Few years back i got an entry to the AAA champs incorporated into the marathon. You get an definite entry ( male) if running sub 75 for a half and sub 2.45 for a marathon. Not beyond the capabilities of most decent club runners worldwide i would say.
Staff were very anal about logos on vest for the AAA champs. En route to the tent setup for competitors... twice i was stopped and asked to show my club vest in case sponsor/manufacturers logo was beyond the 3 inch by 2 inch size restriction. WTF given thousands would be running after me clad like billboards. Daft.
The question is though... just who or what body should be responsible for pulling up the 'sub elites', like me, with a 2.22 (blush) to the better levels of 2.15 and below ?
Should that responsibility rest with the individual ? the club ? After all, if you are not hungry enough for success then you won't train harder to get better. So you need to find it in yourself to get better... and if it is not there then c'est la vie...
Like most things in life, it's the individual and the initial load of hard work that makes the difference. People & companies only get interested in you if you are already partly showing the goods.
No way will Scottish Athletics or English Athletics will say ok, all you 2.20 - 2.25 guys, let get together and put in that effort & money to pull you up to 2.15 or thereabouts... too much effort on their behalf and not enough 'measurability' they would say.
Tons of people are now running 5 km's every weekend through the efforts of Parkrun... one guy had the idea and volunteers organise 5km every weekend across the UK... the national federations in Scotland and England have done and continue to do
zilch to get the general population into running.
In my opinion the money/support goes to those runners who, by their own ability & effort & the right training, have already just slipped into that elite group. Then, with that extra money they get marginally better.
I heard in 1983 100 guys were sub 2.20 in London. The sport was obviously HOT then hence the depth. My marathon pb would have been way down the over rankings that day.
A systematic approach needs to be in place to haul the good masses up a level. I don't have the answer for whose role that is.