Chuck ‘Marathonjunkie’ Engle lights fire with Boston Marathon & Charity comments

[Bateluer]

http://www.marathonjunkie.com/?p=1277

The 2012 marathon has just over 20,000 registered and qualified athletes. There were roughly 7,000 other slots that were awarded to charity runners. That means just over 1/4 of runners in the 2012 race are charity runners. Boston has become nothing more than a rich man’s race? These new standards piss-off a lot of people. But with enough money or the ability to harass your friends out of their money, you can still arrive at the same starting line as those who legitimately EARNED their spot. In this day and age of “no one left behind” and “everyone gets a medal” does Boston have to follow suit?

Are we to look at these “charity” runners the same as we did those early women pioneers. Should we embrace their fundraising skills and deem them worthy of a Boston bib number? Personally I won’t respect the charity spots of the Boston Marathon unless they complete the required qualification time just like the rest of the field. I also feel their medal should have an appropriate demarcation that shows they were a charity runner. You’re damn right my Boston Medal should look different than theirs. I earned mine by running fast enough to qualify and I am not just buying the medal.

I've been following this debate via Twitter and he really kicked a hornet's nest.

http://runitfast.com/2012/04/10/run...ies-boston-marathon-charity-runners-comments/

Lots of comments in the RunItFast link.

I have to say, I agree with Engle, and its not just Boston. The average finisher time for marathons has slowly increased over the past decade, and I share Engle's aggravation with charity runners. They don't follow race etiquette and many of them aren't capable of finishing the distance they signed up for. Its frustrating to see people start in a single digit corral and be walking before the first mile mark, when there's a field of 30K people.

I definitely feel his irritation when he states his medal should look different than the one presented to a charity runner. He earned it, they didn't.

The Boston Marathon has always been an elite event, with fast qualifying times required. Unfortunately, I'm not fast enough to qualify either.

 

[Capt Caveman]

Its frustrating to see people start in a single digit corral and be walking before the first mile mark, when there's a field of 30K people.

Well, that's bullshit. And without the charity runners, the marathon wouldn't be as popular as it is. Maybe, the BAA should go back to not offering any prize money when you didn't have elite runners running. Personally, they could easily increase the number of runners which would silence a number of the whiners.

 

[Bateluer]

Well, that's bullshit. And without the charity runners, the marathon wouldn't be as popular as it is. Maybe, the BAA should go back to not offering any prize money when you didn't have elite runners running. Personally, they could easily increase the number of runners which would silence a number of the whiners.

Pretty sure the popularity of the marathon wouldn't see a dent if charity runners were 100% barred. There are tens of thousands of people who qualified to run Boston, but weren't able to register in time. Reserved slots for charity runners is ludicrous. You post a qualifying time, get in, then you can build a charity donation.

 

[Capt Caveman]

Pretty sure the popularity of the marathon wouldn't see a dent if charity runners were 100% barred. There are tens of thousands of people who qualified to run Boston, but weren't able to register in time. Reserved slots for charity runners is ludicrous. You post a qualifying time, get in, then you can build a charity donation.

And you'd lose half of your corporate sponsors and 10,000s of spectators that come to support their local runners and charities. The vast majority of stories on the news/paper/etc about the Boston Marathon are on the local runners and charities.

Like I said, they could easily increase the size of the field which they have done on several occasions to make everyone happy.

 

[Bateluer]

And you'd lose half of your corporate sponsors and 10,000s of spectators that come to support their local runners and charities. The vast majority of stories on the news/paper/etc about the Boston Marathon are on the local runners and charities.

Doubtful. I may not have run Boston, but I've ran several events of equal sizes and hundreds of shorter distance races. The majority of the races I run have sponsors, but no charity runners.

Engle isn't suggesting that charity runners be banned entirely, and neither am I. He stating that the people who didn't run a qualifying time shouldn't be getting the same recognition and distinction as the people who busted their asses off training to join that elite field and get that finisher's medal. He's speaking against the slow decline of mediocrity that everyone seems willing to tolerate.

Any runner, charity or otherwise, needs to be placed in the right starting position for the pace they're going to run. The people who trained know exactly what pace they're going to run and get into the right corrals. Charity runners don't, sadly. They should be positioned in the rear corrals behind the runners who actually trained. Pats Run is the worst race for this I've ever seen. Its only a 4.2mi run, but there's 30K participants, and a big charity race. You'll see people getting into corrals, marked for 6:00/mi pace, that clearly can't hit that pace. And you have to dodge around them before you pass mile 1. Its mildly tolerated at Pats Run because its a charity event to the core. Boston is not.

Like I said, they could easily increase the size of the field which they have done on several occasions to make everyone happy.

Since I haven't run Boston, I can't comment on how many people that course can handle. The RnR Phoenix Marathon gets extremely congested at times, but its not a show stopper. Walt Disney World was massive, but the parks themselves are signed to handle that load of people.

 

[Capt Caveman]

Since, I live here and being watching/following the Boston Marathon for 20+ years. The race has never been as popular.

Arguing is going to be a waste of time I see. I'm out.

Last thing, the Boston Marathon hasn't always been an elite race. Before they started offering prize money, all of the elite runners avoided the race.

 

[Bateluer]

Since, I live here and being watching/following the Boston Marathon for 20+ years. The race has never been as popular.

Every decently organized race grows every year. Running is an increasingly popular sport, regardless of the quantity of charity runners.

Arguing is going to be a waste of time I see. I'm out.

You have the right to your opinion.

Last thing, the Boston Marathon hasn't always been an elite race. Before they started offering prize money, all of the elite runners avoided the race.

Not sure what an elite runner means to you, but Boston's been going on since 1897, and the first finisher did a 2:55. Thats elite. They didn't start offering prize money until 1980 though, according to the BAA history site.

http://www.baa.org/races/boston-marathon/boston-marathon-history.aspx

 

[neocpp]

...snip...

Any runner, charity or otherwise, needs to be placed in the right starting position for the pace they're going to run. The people who trained know exactly what pace they're going to run and get into the right corrals. Charity runners don't, sadly. They should be positioned in the rear corrals behind the runners who actually trained. Pats Run is the worst race for this I've ever seen. Its only a 4.2mi run, but there's 30K participants, and a big charity race. You'll see people getting into corrals, marked for 6:00/mi pace, that clearly can't hit that pace. And you have to dodge around them before you pass mile 1. Its mildly tolerated at Pats Run because its a charity event to the core. Boston is not.

...snip...

This is the by far the most annoying part of normal road races. When I'm trying to hit a PR I don't need to be dodging and weaving people running 2-3 minutes per mile slower than I am. Sometimes I feel I actually run better in time trials just because there's no holdup -- although personally I need the competition to really push myself. I'm much more aggressive about making sure I get a spot at the actual line for this reason alone. I never realized how much better college races were about this, but I guess it makes sense when everyone there knows how fast they run and group up naturally.

Also that factoid about the first Boston Marathon is very interesting. 2:55 doesn't seem very fast by today's standards, but looking at the marathon world record progression that looks incredible. I wonder what has changed in the last 100 years to the point where even relatively average runners can beat the 1908 WR. I understand there were a lot of times that were much faster but not exactly marathon distance, but I am still amused.

As far as the hate for charity runners though, I would have no problem with it in a normal marathon, as long as they don't interfere with the elite racers or just faster people in general. Completing 26.2 miles is a major accomplishment whether you run 2:05 or 5:05. However, I think the fact that Boston is so selective and has a time cutoff, and even if you make the time cutoff you have to register IMMEDIATELY or you don't get a spot, makes this a little different. There are plenty of people who are qualified and eager to go but just don't get the chance. I know several people who run around 2:50 and only one of them was able to secure a spot. In that case I don't think its fair that charity runners will get a spot but someone who runs 2:50 (smashing the qualifying time btw) won't get one. But it's not my race and they are free to run it however they wish.

Slightly tongue in cheek, but as for medals there is a simple solution -- run fast enough to get an actual place medal instead of "just" a finishers medal. If you can't do that, then maybe you don't deserve it either.

 

[Mursilis]

This is the by far the most annoying part of normal road races. When I'm trying to hit a PR I don't need to be dodging and weaving people running 2-3 minutes per mile slower than I am. Sometimes I feel I actually run better in time trials just because there's no holdup -- although personally I need the competition to really push myself. I'm much more aggressive about making sure I get a spot at the actual line for this reason alone.

I totally feel your pain. That's the main reason I don't do more races - I hate bobbing and weaving around every idiot who thought he should be at the front with a 10:00/mile pace! That, or groups walking 4-5 abreast across the course! Really?!?! You'd think race directors would announce some basic etiquette guidelines at the start, but I've never heard any. It's incredibly frustrating.

 

[marmasatt]

Damn, hate to ask how you guys feel about bandits then, lol. :sneaky: That was always the main ire of elitist runners. But charity folks.... These are people who are raising money for some really great causes. The minimum is $4,000 to raise. Some charities put the bar higher. I don't know how many slots there are, but that's alot of money...

 

[neocpp]

Bandits are okay imho. Usually they know what they're doing and don't interfere with the racers who actually paid for a spot -- at least that is my experience.

 

[HendrixFan]

I totally feel your pain. That's the main reason I don't do more races - I hate bobbing and weaving around every idiot who thought he should be at the front with a 10:00/mile pace! That, or groups walking 4-5 abreast across the course! Really?!?! You'd think race directors would announce some basic etiquette guidelines at the start, but I've never heard any. It's incredibly frustrating.

This.

I just ran a 10k last month and it took about three miles for me to finish weaving past people who were stopping to walk. Not only did I put on additional distance weaving back and forth, but I couldn't get a steady pace going. I had to sprint any chance I got to get around people then slow up as I got bunched in again. I looked back at some of the people I passed by and their bib showed they were in a time group behind me (or two or three behind) yet they had no problem cutting into a better start group.

Sigh.

 

[Megatomic]

This is why I like ultramarathons guys. Honestly, Bateluer, do you have these problems at long trail races?

For the record, I'm with the Engle and his supporters on this one. Earn your way in just like everyone else or don't show up.

 

[Bateluer]

This is why I like ultramarathons guys. Honestly, Bateluer, do you have these problems at long trail races?

Not so far. Most of the trail races I do are capped around 200 due to park regulations. The Aravapai distances have an hour between start times too, very little congestion on single track or trails. 50K'ers go at 7a, ~30K'ers go at 8a, and ~18K'ers go at 8:30/9a.