Elite's get water bottle Treatment

Piggy backing off of another thread... Why do Elites get to have their own special water bottle placed on the course why everyone else gets a cup of water half filled if your lucky?

Seems odd that we are all doing the same race and worse yet the everyone but the elites is paying to participate. Seems we should be getting the nice filled up water bottles!

The real question is whether you think a race should pay appearance fees to attract elite runners and prize money to winners and high placing finishers. Most regional marathons don't and some large city marathons like Marine Corps don't. So you won't see any kind of special tables etc. at those races.

But if you are the Chicago Marathon,Berlin Marathon or London Marathon and you've literally paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to have the elites choose your race and have a prize pool of money to compete for, it is a no brainer to have things set up for them as perfectly as possible for fast times. That means hotels near the start for them, special staging areas for them to get ready pre-race, a seperate starting corral and special fluid stations and for some races paid pacers to help take them through most of the miles on a predetermined pace. The "why?" in a race that is paying $ to attract elites is obvious. Of course you can't and don't offer those same type of things to non elite runners since it is only the times run by the superstars that you are paying all that $ for. Once you decide to pay $$ for fast runners and fast times, you do everything possible to make those times happen.

The more interesting question to me is whether big city races should pay all that money to bring in elites. Don't you think Chicago and NYC would continue to sell out completely even if there was no prize money and nothing paid to elites as appearance fees? How many of those Chicago runners care at all who is running up near the front? Would corporate sponsorship disappear for those races if no elites were paid to race there? I think not with 45,000 runners and many more spectators out there as the primary target audience for the advertisers and sponsors. I believe those races would make MORE money if they simply eliminated the elites (or at least paying them) from their fields.

So my own view is that race directors as people are running fans and that drives a lot of their behavior as they want the best runners at their races less for economic reasons (I don't think they make and in fact lose $$ bringing them in) and more because they are fans of the sport and just want to see the fastest runners at their races.

Yeah, then they would charge $500 for entry. Our speed coach offers 3 custom stations that we prepare, I didn't get my act together in time and i was surprised how few out of the group took him up on it, next year.

The same reason they get a heated tent with personal bathrooms next to the starting line and whopping appearance fees - they're the best in the world and have earned that privilege.

Chris M wrote:The real question is whether you think a race should pay appearance fees to attract elite runners and prize money to winners and high placing finishers. Most regional marathons don't and some large city marathons like Marine Corps don't. So you won't see any kind of special tables etc. at those races.

But if you are the Chicago Marathon,Berlin Marathon or London Marathon and you've literally paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to have the elites choose your race and have a prize pool of money to compete for, it is a no brainer to have things set up for them as perfectly as possible for fast times. That means hotels near the start for them, special staging areas for them to get ready pre-race, a seperate starting corral and special fluid stations and for some races paid pacers to help take them through most of the miles on a predetermined pace. The "why?" in a race that is paying $ to attract elites is obvious. Of course you can't and don't offer those same type of things to non elite runners since it is only the times run by the superstars that you are paying all that $ for. Once you decide to pay $$ for fast runners and fast times, you do everything possible to make those times happen.

The more interesting question to me is whether big city races should pay all that money to bring in elites. Don't you think Chicago and NYC would continue to sell out completely even if there was no prize money and nothing paid to elites as appearance fees? How many of those Chicago runners care at all who is running up near the front? Would corporate sponsorship disappear for those races if no elites were paid to race there? I think not with 45,000 runners and many more spectators out there as the primary target audience for the advertisers and sponsors. I believe those races would make MORE money if they simply eliminated the elites (or at least paying them) from their fields.

So my own view is that race directors as people are running fans and that drives a lot of their behavior as they want the best runners at their races less for economic reasons (I don't think they make and in fact lose $$ bringing them in) and more because they are fans of the sport and just want to see the fastest runners at their races.

Wouldn't Augusta National still be considered one of the best and most prestigious clubs in the world if it stopped hosting the Masters every year?

Sure, Chicago would still sell out. But it wouldn't be considered one of the top 5 (NYC, Boston, Berlin, & London) in the world. That status is worth something, maybe not in terms of selling out the race, but definitely in terms of TV time, internet coverage, newspaper articles, etc. Those coverage, in turn, leads to more sponsorships. Does Nike sponsor the event if the winning time is 2:18? I say no.

I probably take more of an interest in the elites than most runners, but within minutes of finishing, I asked my Dad, "Who won? Where did Ritz finish? Did the course record fall?"

Have to agree with Dave. No layperson would care AT ALL about marathons if it wasn't for the elites. They run fast, they look good doing it, and they are superhuman. It's like any sport. We don't watch the Olympics because they're everyday athletes. We watch them because they're ridiculously good, no matter how stupid we think their sport is the other 3yr 11mo.

Many of you don't know or even remember, but Boston scorned appearance monies etc until 1987's race. NY, London, and Chicago were all paying the elites prize money by then, but Boston refused through the 1986 race. In 1986, the race was won by what would most likely be considered "2nd" tier Elite runners with the woman' winning time in the low 2:30s. In fact, I ran 3:03 and was in the top 100 finishers. Boston realized that "tradition and history" were not all that mattered and they felt that in order to remain grouped with (what are now called) the "Marathon Majors", it had to be about the money.

Now, there are several excellent marathons - MCM, TCM, Big Sur, etc. that do not give out big prizes or pay for lots of elites to show up and they sell out. They don't; however, attract the "big time" elites but again the "2nd" tier runners. There is prize money and I know that many of these "2nd" tier runners are paid to come and run (paid in terms of hotels, meals, etc. are all taken care of and maybe some small amount of monies), but they don't get special treatment other than that. Janet Bawcom told us last year before the marathon trials that it would be her first race where she would have her own water bottles as she was trying to figure out how to decorate them. She was/is still considered new to the marathon seen despite here success year.

Mike MacLellan wrote:Have to agree with Dave. No layperson would care AT ALL about marathons if it wasn't for the elites. They run fast, they look good doing it, and they are superhuman. It's like any sport. We don't watch the Olympics because they're everyday athletes. We watch them because they're ridiculously good, no matter how stupid we think their sport is the other 3yr 11mo.

I think that's true. I remember crying when Cierpinski the doper beat Frank Shorter in 1976 and well remember Joanie's run down the LA Freeways with no other runners in sight.(I had forgotten that women were not allowed to race the 5k and 10k).

That's cool. I just saw the 1984 race course from Let's Run and the course ran right by what would be my future dwelling during my training years(Gorham/Bundy--yep, right next to OJ and Nicole).

http://www.runscore.com/coursemeasurement/Articles/LA84.pdf (pp. 191-208)

I am ok with elites getting special bottles. Like Dave said, they earned it. I also agree it is a bad form to take others' bottles. BUT, it is not that easy to get the right one when one is in true competition mode. I always slow down and take my time, then of cause I can, cause I am not going to win anything.

Guess, all I am saying is, if you fail to get your own bottle or someone else take it, live with it. Why don't you get there before your evil opponents? If you are a chicken sh*t like Pre scolded hiding behind and sucking on people's energy, that's the price you pay.

As a fan, I wouldn't be too harsh on the elites who made "mistake". A split of second, hard to make a moral decision. Not like those meditating months to bandit a race.

Then of cause, not appologizing taking the bottle, just not wise. At least you pretend to be a good person.



Edit to add: I want to add, as marathon gets more and more popular, it is wrong to assume only invited elites are going to take the win. So the special treatment does seem to be a little unfair practice. So when one amateur is somehow ahead of the elites in the same race, he/she is entitled to take the special water.

When people don't give, I take.

Mike MacLellan wrote:Have to agree with Dave. No layperson would care AT ALL about marathons if it wasn't for the elites. They run fast, they look good doing it, and they are superhuman. It's like any sport. We don't watch the Olympics because they're everyday athletes. We watch them because they're ridiculously good, no matter how stupid we think their sport is the other 3yr 11mo.

As a fan of running, I'm all for the elites being at the big races and paid well to be there....but I disagree completely with Mike's statement above. In fact, I'll go so far as to say that way way over 90% of the laypersons who do care about marathons DON'T care about the elites. I think Oprah Winfrey had a larger impact on participation in marathoning than any elite runner in the past 20 years. The marathon phenomeon of the past 5-10 years has been more driven by the concept of "bucket lists" and 26.2 stickers on cars than any time ever put up by an elite. I think its simply untrue that Sammy's incredible 2008 performance in China led to more people paying to enter marathons or caring about what the other elites were/are doing. Marathons as a participation sport has completely boomed and unlike, say, the days of the 1970s when Shorter and Rodgers were inspiring people to get out there, this boom is NOT fueled by performances at the top.

The Marine Corps Marathon keeps selling out faster and faster and the average finishing time keeps getting slower and slower. From a business perspective, the layperson that Mike is talking about has spoken and its all about "the event" and not at all what someone doing sub 5:00 miles for the distance is doing.

Seperate out what you want to see as a fan (I want the same thing.....super fast runners are fun to see do their thing) and think about these marathons from the perspective of the average participant. I don't think it is likely that you could walk around the expo at a race like Chicago and think almost any of the people care even a smidge about the elite racers.

Chris M wrote:

The Marine Corps Marathon keeps selling out faster and faster and the average finishing time keeps getting slower and slower. From a business perspective, the layperson that Mike is talking about has spoken and its all about "the event" and not at all what someone doing sub 5:00 miles for the distance is doing.

Right. And Chicago would still sell out too. But it will never be a premier international event when Chad Ware, the Fleet Feet runner/Army Chaplain from Chicago, is winning the race (with all due respect to Chad, who is a far better runner than I could ever be). Why would a race like Chicago or Boston, that has achieved worldwide attention, willingly give that away over a couple hundred thousand dollars?

On a smaller scale, the Rock N Roll series has taken your strategy to the local scene and its greatly changed the perception of its races. Five years ago the Chicago Distance Classic was the premier half marathon in Chicago. Every semi-elite runner I knew in Chicago circled that event (along with the Shamrock Shuffle and the Marathon) as one to be ready for.

Then, Rock N Roll took over, jacked up the entry fees to $125, told all the local running clubs they weren't getting free entries for their runners anymore, and made it clear that only cared about selling out their race. To their credit, they have done so every year. The trade off, though, is that no one involved in the running scene gives a shit about the race anymore.

Yup. We agree on what's going on with the Chicago/Boston/Berlin mindset versus Rock n Roll and Marine Corps type races. In the serious running community (SMALL!) there's real cache in the field you attract to your race. But I think the Rock n Roll/Competitor Group reality Dave describes tells the real answer to how the average layperson runner feels about elites. That's why I disagree with Mike's position that average people care about elite runners. Did Las Vegas Rock n Roll even have elite runners comped? I doubt it. But they ran the vent down the Strip at night and I'll bet sold that race out with the highest ever fees for a Vegas-based race. The experience and event matters way more to 90%+ of the runners than anything going on with the elites.

Chris M wrote:Yup. We agree on what's going on with the Chicago/Boston/Berlin mindset versus Rock n Roll and Marine Corps type races. In the serious running community (SMALL!) there's real cache in the field you attract to your race. But I think the Rock n Roll/Competitor Group reality Dave describes tells the real answer to how the average layperson runner feels about elites. That's why I disagree with Mike's position that average people care about elite runners. Did Las Vegas Rock n Roll even have elite runners comped? I doubt it. But they ran the vent down the Strip at night and I'll bet sold that race out with the highest ever fees for a Vegas-based race. The experience and event matters way more to 90%+ of the runners than anything going on with the elites.

Are marathoners average people?
I think they are more educated and do care about the elites, at least at Boston, Chicago and NYC.

The average person cares more about synchronized platform and springboard diving, and beach and team volleyball, according the NBC's massive ratings for the first two hours of the Olympics. Big disconnect!!!!

I know that the spectators of the Boston Marathon care about the elite. My Mom has been watching since she can remember (late 1930s) and she looks forward to the event and the elite runners/competition every year. This started long before I ever ran. I even remember taking some Canadian runners who dropped out in Natick to their hotel in Boston back in the 1970s.

Michele "1L" Keane wrote:I know that the spectators of the Boston Marathon care about the elite. My Mom has been watching since she can remember (late 1930s) and she looks forward to the event and the elite runners/competition every year. This started long before I ever ran. I even remember taking some Canadian runners who dropped out in Natick to their hotel in Boston back in the 1970s.

Geez, maybe I really am in the minority here but I just don't think many marathon runners even know the first thing about the elites or care at all. Maybe you guys hang out with a lot more plugged-in running fans than I do. Outside of these boards, I can't think of many people I know who follow running despite many of them being avid runners and racers. I know soooo many marathoners who are family and friends and I can't think of more than 1 or 2 who even could come close on guessing what the current marathon WR is or naming a single elite runner. Boston and it fans is a different thing, to be sure. But of the 45,000 people who registered to run the Chicago marathon on Sunday, I'm betting less than 10% knew or cared about who was in the race at the front of the pack or what times those elites ran. I did not walk around that expo last weekend thinking "wow, look at this group of running fans" but instead thought "man, marathons have truly become the thing to do for everyone".

Chris M wrote: Geez, maybe I really am in the minority here but I just don't think many marathon runners even know the first thing about the elites or care at all. Maybe you guys hang out with a lot more plugged-in running fans than I do. Outside of these boards, I can't think of many people I know who follow running despite many of them being avid runners and racers. I know soooo many marathoners who are family and friends and I can't think of more than 1 or 2 who even could come close on guessing what the current marathon WR is or naming a single elite runner. Boston and it fans is a different thing, to be sure. But of the 45,000 people who registered to run the Chicago marathon on Sunday, I'm betting less than 10% knew or cared about who was in the race at the front of the pack or what times those elites ran.....

Maybe they should...

E Greenie

Mike MacLellan wrote:Have to agree with Dave. No layperson would care AT ALL about marathons if it wasn't for the elites. They run fast, they look good doing it, and they are superhuman. It's like any sport. We don't watch the Olympics because they're everyday athletes. We watch them because they're ridiculously good, no matter how stupid we think their sport is the other 3yr 11mo.

I would agree about Elites and what Dave had to say also. But I really don't know what a difference Elites make when it comes to the layperson or non runner. I'm willing to bet that 99% of the people that come out and watch the marathon are there to see family or friends run. Sure they get to see the elites run past but really don't care. I DVD the race so I can watch the Elites later but how many of you know of people that aren't runners go hey the Chicago or NY marathon is on TV I think I will get up early to watch it? Most people finding running boring and not something that exciting to watch on TV. So as much as I think that elites are cool to watch I'm not sure they really make a difference in our sport to some degree. Where I think they make a difference is bringing in sponsor money which I you would think lowers are entry fee. Then again does it? I mean when I started running Chicago it cost 80 dollars and 30,000 ran it, today I pay something like 140 dollars and 45,000 run it. I don't get anything more then I did back in 2005?? So go figure, I'm almost inclined to say that Chicago would still be a top 5 marathon without Elite runners. I don't think people come to run Chicago because so and so "Elite" runner is running it. I feel that people come to run Chicago because it is a cool city to go on vacation and spend time and oh run a marathon if you are a runner. Maybe I'm wrong in my thinking and that is why I'm split on the whole thing of Elites or no Elites. Just a thought I guess.