Welcome! › Forums › Running Forum › Interesting, potentially controversial, article on marathoners › Re: Re: Interesting, potentially controversial, article on marathoners
Wilson, I think your proposal could be an interesting idea. The first thing people have to realize is that the slow runners are not the ones bring in the sponsorship and interest. LaSalle Bank would not sponsor Chicago, ING would not sponsor New York, Hancock would not sponsor Boston if these races consisted of 40,000 slow runners. Sponsors are looking for international media attention, which comes from world leading, if not world record, performances.
Maybe a few small sponsors are brought in because their names will be on 40,000 t-shirts or seen by a couple hundred thousand people on race day but the big sponsors are brought in by the draw of having your name or logo seen around the world by millions of people.
I do like the idea of a circuit of qualify-only races. Actually, from what I've heard of Boston, they would have to change things there. I've heard a lot of slower people still get in there through charity groups. However, a circuit like Boston, Grandma's, Houston, and a fall marathon on the west coast would give you a national circuit of four marathons, one during each season of the year, that could be focused on the competitive aspect.
Actually, I found out after Chicago that they do give out calendars to sub-3 runners as an incentive. I think it's a great idea. New Balance slaps their logo on the calendar, includes a few promotional lines for some of their shoes, and all sub-3 runners get free “personalized” calendars on New Balance's dime.