Chicago matathon: Unacceptable coverage for a marathon major

Coverage on the Olympic Channel was pretty good...

I watched the second half of the race. Never saw Rupp, never saw Farah, never heard Hassay's race discussed.

I NEVER SAW A SINGLE AMERICAN RUNNER until Bates around 24. Approx. 1 hour of watching a broadcast for the American market and not one single shot for one single second of an elite American runner.

Nobody, and I mean really almost nobody, knows what a 35k split is. Tell us their last 5k or mile or predicted finish time. Unless someone is running about your PR, which in the American market would be nobody because Rupp was running, even an experienced runner can make little sense of a 35k split.

I agree 1000%. I watched the NBC Sports Gold "coverage".

Mind you, I'm the guy on here who just gushes incessantly about NBC Sports Gold as they provide incredible coverage not only of international athletics but also the big road affairs. But this was ridiculous. Basically a camera feed. No splits. No info that Kosgei was on WR pace. Worst coverage ever of a marathon major.

It's very embarrassing as an American that we do such a poor job covering our own events unless we have a Brit or two in the booth. Except this time, there was no booth! And you can't say that they wouldn't have had a storyline: WR attempt, the NOP mess, health questions about Rupp/Hasay, Farah's competitiveness, etc. Pretty much a bummer all the way around except for the WR (which we never knew was happening unless we sat by with a calculator and did the math).

Contrast this with the individual event feeds on NBC Sports Gold from the WC. No voice-over, just great camera work and informative graphics. The women's HJ event was presented almost like an art film, such was the quality and camera work. You can do a lot as long as you present the information, as was stated earlier and bother to show the other competitors every once in a while.

I NEVER SAW A SINGLE AMERICAN RUNNER until Bates around 24. Approx.

Then I guess you weren't watching or listening. They mentioned the American man the women's winner passed just after 26 miles.

How many cameras do you expect these guys to have.

I agree 100% as well. This was by far the worst coverage of any major marathon I have watched over my 4 decades of running. Too many sidebars, not enough race coverage. We never knew what was going on behind Kosgei. It took forever for them to tell us names of the (6) male frontrunners. Ed Eyestone having to politely correct some of the stupid things said by his counterparts. Geez! How many shots of the corner street dancers do we have to see? I realize they have a lot of time to fill, buy how about some personal profiles of some of the top competitors instead? How about a little history on this fantastic marathon, how it started, how its grown. Maybe some comments about the fabulous architecture the runners are running past? How about just 2 ex-marathoners/coaches in the league of Eyestone in the booth. One male, one female. Dump the rest. I've got tons of ideas, but we got this today. NADA!

"How many cameras do you expect these guys to have?"

A helluva lot more than they had, that's for damn sure! This is the 21st century!

You have obviously never watched some of the earlier marathon coverages, say from 1995 to 2005, or even more recent, of the Boston and New York Marathons. They had great coverage. I've seen local marathons covered better by local news stations in the 1980's done better than this was today.