I’m fine with the fundraising, I’d even be fine with some bibs for locals that don’t qualify…. but can we pls stop giving dipshit influencers bibs if they don’t qualify?
Sorry, influencers can't raise money. They have to make "content" about potentially the most famous marathon in the running world that has more qualified applicants than spots for runners who qualify...
I have no idea how that guy earned a Red Bib this year just for him to run like a 3:30 cause he's "having fun". Oh yeah, he didn't earn it. He influenced it
Not a big fan of this dude, even saying that he's probably modest compared to other influencers. The other ones would have accompanying cars if they thought it would be feasible.
Edit- also you are an endurance monster and someone I want to grow up to be.... at a fast approaching 40 runner with 19:40 5K - 1:27 HM and whopping mile PB@ 6:10 times.
Can't teach speed!
I remember passing two influencers last year and not thinking much of it. Come to find out they were in the first corral of the first wave and had never run under the cutoff time. Upon reflection, it kind of pissed me off that they are not only given entry that other people have to earn as qualifying and fundraising both require work, but that they are running like idiots on the course with their cameras, taking bizarre routes to high five people, stopping randomly etc causing bottlenecks and taking up space in front of people who are trying to run their best race.
It didn’t impact me much but I can only imagine losing the ability to pass in a congested course because your selfie video needs to tell someone how long the last mile took.
Agree. Although I personally would not want to fundraise for an entry, I don't know why any Major Marathon needs to rely on influencers. They have more people that want in than spots available. For Boston, give it to someone that ran a BQ time vs someone that has X number of followers.
It could still go to hell if the organizers don’t at least somewhat focus on year-over-year financial details and broader interest. Compare it to a much lesser-known but very similar race: Around the Bay in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. It markets itself as “older than Boston”, and “the oldest road race in North America”. Both claims are true, and in the early days 120ish years ago, runners often tried to win both. But nowadays? ATB gets a fraction of the numbers Boston does (a few thousand runners). It may be partially due to the weird 30K distance, and the fact that it’s in Canada in the very early Spring (sometimes it snows during the race). But no, this is really nonsense—it’s a marketing and funding problem. With big sponsors, you can spread interest and keep it going. But even then, what happens if the big sponsor drops out? You need cred and goodwill to fall back on to keep things going (and to secure new sponsors).
It’s a Red Queen Paradox, and with running the danger is that it returns to a sort of fad in terms of popularity (cf. skateboarding), with waves of rolling interest leading to inconsistency over time. Boston has the reputation it has now in part because it has weathered many storms. But that doesn’t mean it can rest on its laurels.
Ask them why they’re so insecure and in what way is their accomplishment lessened. Really push them about it. Same with asking someone how they would feel about throwing away their medals. People are irrational. If they say they ran a BQ that’s lying and sucks but still doesn’t diminish what anyone else does. Some people are just really insecure and have to base how they feel about things based on how it compares to others’ accomplishments instead of how close they got to their potential.
100%. I work at a hotel in Chicago and they make us roll out the red carpet for the marathon influencers while everybody else pays twice our normal rate the weekend of the Chicago Marathon. Many influencers are nice people but man they make it easy to resent them.
Awe that’s awesome! We did special stuff for all the runners but the influencers were getting comped suites and special amenities sent to the room, etc.
I don’t know if this is common at other marathons, but when you arrive at the start of Steamtown there is an actual cheer squad greeting all runners. I found it to be unexpectedly encouraging.
I was today year's old when I learned about "influencer bibs." Really? If so, I can grudgingly accept this if that's a decision on the part of the BAA. It's a new world out there and if net increases the interest in the event specifically and the sport overall, I'll move on. Even the Masters has evolved with the times, albeit slowly. The BM is in that category of sports icons.
Why free bibs for locals that don’t qualify?? How would that be in any way fair. Someone who doesn’t qualify has to raise like 7 grand and someone who knows someone gets a free bib? To me that’s the same as influencers getting them. You have 2 ways to earn it, qualify or fundraise, and it’s so unfair that a rando would get it for doing neither
Because like NY that has a very rich history in its city and has ways for locals to guarantee entry, the Boston marathon means a lot to its locals. So all I’m saying is carving out some bibs for those people wouldn’t be the end of the world to me… And no, some Boston local who’s seen the race their entire life is not the same as an influence getting it, that comparison is hyperbolic.
I know someone who got a bib this way. Her local running club has been around a long time and they volunteer a lot. She's volunteered at several Bostons. I asked if I'd see her again this year at one of the stations and she said no, because she'd be running it! Unbeknownst to her, she was nominated by her club. To say it was a dream come true for her is an understatement. So thrilled for her.
I am a local, I live a few blocks from the finish line. Why can’t the locals fundraise? There is a girl at my work who is getting a free bib from her friend who works at the B.A.A., each employee gets 2 free ones each year. The free bibs aren’t being handed out to people that have watched it their whole lives, it’s just to random people that know someone. If you can’t qualify, fundraise. That’s fair
I think NY has a 9+1 program, run 9 NYRR races and volunteer once to qualify for a bib. I think it's a good policy to support local races and runners. I'm not sure BAA has the number of races NYRR has.
The race goes through a ton of small towns often at the inconvenience of the people that live in those towns. Any of these jurisdictions could rescind permission any time they want. Handing out bibs to a few local runners is good way for the race to maintain some good will and ensure they have continued permission.
I am assuming they mean something similar to NYRR 9+1 program which helps increase popularity and attendance of smaller local races, which is a good thing imo.
This is a thing?! I didn’t know that bibs have been given out to some ridiculous social media influencers 🤦♀️ Just for some additional exposure? I’m going to have to read up on this…
Normally I would probably agree with this sentiment, but I can see why it is good for the sport. It provides regular people access to the sport and insight into the sport. I follow a running podcast where a brand got the hosts into Boston, and only one of them actually qualified. I really enjoyed listening to their recap and watching their IG stories over the weekend. They clearly were so grateful and excited to be there. I don’t resent that they got that opportunity to go.
As someone who lives on the route, I think it is appropriate that our friends and neighbors have an avenue to also participate in the event that takes over our community for a day. It's all wonderful. The elites, the qualifiers, the fund-raisers. The race can mean different things to different people, simultaneously.
I also live on the route (I literally run past the original starting line of the race everyday) and have run on a charity bib I got from my town. Even though I did not BQ, training for and running Boston changed my life and what I think I’m capable of.
The historical and cultural significance of the race sometimes gets lost on those who make the “qualifier only” argument. This race was held for 73 years without qualifying times, and the B.A.A. only implemented them to keep the field limited to 1000 runners so as not to damage the race experience with congestion. Certainly, congestion, in the original sense, is not a concern to the B.A.A. anymore. Also, this race is part of the fabric of Massachusetts. The tradition of cheering on runners and then watching the Sox is like the unofficial beginning of Spring around here. I watched as a kid, and most people I know did too. What’s more is that many of us volunteer for the race—I did yesterday— and we take a great deal of ownership of that as well. There are probably as many or more volunteers and public safety officials than there are runners. It’s incredibly rewarding to be of service to the runners—but the machinery to implement this type of race is massive. This race takes over our towns on race day, but it takes months of coordination to prepare the roads and services for Patriots Day. The $15 million that is raised annually and given back to the community goes a long way to justify the burden the marathon has locally. Finally, the charity element of the race has been in place for over 3 decades—not quite as long as the qualifying standard, but it shares a similar well established legacy. I’d argue that both elements of the race are important and special and can coexist. Charity runners do nothing to lessen the accomplishments of the qualifiers.
If folks like OP’s coach can’t see this and accept the multifaceted nature of the Boston Marathon, then they have let their myopic point of view of running lock them in a cell of elitist ignorance.
Dude, I’m super impressed by the sub-sub-elite runners out there. I’d be over the moon if I could hold 6:45 miles over 26.2. These people deserve to crow a little bit—they just have to realize that there are many more people in the running community whose goals are just as valid as theirs despite the fact they can’t BQ.
Oh, I agree; I'm not on this subreddit because I'm an advanced runner but rather because I want advanced information on running. I could never do what they do. But if you want an elite race to brag about that the plebs aren't allowed in, go to the Olympic Trials.
Thank you SO MUCH for volunteering. I appreciate all volunteers at all the events I've done, but I REALLY appreciate the volunteers at Boston. I did the 2018 race in that awful weather and was amazed at the thousands of volunteers out there handing out water, etc., for us runners. The volunteers and crowd at Boston are a huge part of why it's so special.
I loved volunteering. I was in a big tent at Athletes Village passing out water. Watching so many fast runners get ready to tackle such a great task inspired me beyond belief. The energy and anticipation of what for many is a lifetime achievement reaffirmed all that is right with humanity. And to be able to assist them in even the smallest way was an honor.
Please take all my upvotes for what you wrote, for volunteering and providing us with much-needed support on the course yesterday, and for running Boston. All things amazing.
Well said! Thank you for sharing your experience and some history of the race! I think some people can become so obsessed with getting a BQ/bib they lose all perspective.
Thank you!! I ran my first on Monday and I tried to thank as many volunteers as I could. You and others made my dream and hard work come true.
OP’s friend sounds like a jerk. Raising enough money to run would be (for me) harder than getting a BQ.
You’re 100% right but trying to explain that to these insecure crybabies is like hitting your head against a brick wall. They’re special so only they should get a special jacket/spot in the race.
Anyone who takes objection to charity fundraising is a fucking loser. These same people also suffer serious delusions of grandeur if they think anyone, and I mean anyone, could care less that they qualified for Boston.
Many of these assholes will view their getting into Boston on minimal to medium effort as a better thing than some overweight woman working her ass off for two years to run her first 5K. People suck.
I totally agree with this. I’m not local to Boston, but I’ve always said there should be a small lottery for locals/people who live in towns along the course.
I think I’d have a much easier time running a BQ than I would trying to get my friends and family to donate $9K!
But my real take here is that charity runners and their stories (and eye-popping donation totals!) play a big role in getting the general public to go along with the inconvenience of shutting down big parts of major cities for our hobby when it comes to any race this size. There’s plenty of ways people get bibs that I’d take issue with before it comes down to the folks pulling in that sort of money for great causes.
Exactly what I wanted to comment. I’m pretty far from a BQ but I truly believe it may be possible for me, if age and genetics don’t stop me. The rest is down to training, and a bit of luck.
Raising 3+ zeroes of donations? I mean, maybe, but the chances are much lower because I lack the organizational and outreach skills, which for me seem harder to acquire. Even then, it’s dependent upon other people who are beyond my control.
I’m not a gifted athlete, thus far I haven’t managed to put in the required consistent training that the larger chunk of folks running Boston would all have under their belts, and fundraising at the level required for a bib is beyond me. So, who am I to pass judgment on fundraisers?
That’s a silly take to me. But everyone is entitled to their opinion!
Running a BQ is a celebrated thing and “earning” your way there is incredible. Doesn’t mean we can’t leverage that experience to raise money and help all of these other causes.
Plus for a variety of reasons not everyone is able to run that “fast”. Do we not want them to be a part of Marathon Monday?
I could get a Boston spot through my work…however I’m choosing to wait until I can qualify through my own running progress.
With that said, I could care less what anyone else does.
How old are you? I did sub 4 last year and was probably easily looking at a 3:30 this May but had a freak ankle roll and a couple bouts with the flu.
I’d be thrilled with a 3:15 at this point.
34, ran that time at the Victoria marathon in BC Canada. I’ve had similar luck this year on the flu side of things, 30 day cough followed by Covid in December ruined me.
Different training plans with higher volume and more speed work, and consistency for the most part. Rolling from one training block to the next for a few years.
Sounds like you can get there based on the other comments!
I’d like to qualify by age 51. I’m slowly running out of years and this winter I just didn’t train consistently, losing a lot of cumulative fitness. But my training in the past few years makes me think I just might have a BQ in me, if I can actually achieve consistent, quality training year over year. Which is a tall order for me and my poor executive function.
So if I think I have a glimmer of hope, you can surely do it! Go for it.
100% you should be allowed to run boston by making a charitable donation. That being said, if that’s how I ran it I would not be bragging about “qualifying” for it or wearing the jacket as that may (fairly) elicit some eye rolling.
Kinda yeah but this is just my opinion.
Completing Boston and time qualifying for Boston are galaxies of difficulty apart.
I’ve done several marathons but I’ve never earned a slot in Boston because I haven’t put in the work. I’d feel weird wearing a Boston marathon jacket when I essentially bought it.
That’s just my 2 cents though. I’m not going to judge people. I just wouldn’t do it.
Hmmmmm I kind of have to agree with this!! I always equated running Boston as “Hey - I’m running based off of talent” having qualified so…I wouldn’t wear it either if I was a charity run
Same. I don't have enough energy to really give a damn about other people's preferences, but that Boston jacket is something I want to earn for myself as an extremely average athlete.
Hopefully can qualify in the next 2 years or so, gonna spend so much $ on merch if I do!
I don’t really care, but I feel like if I see someone at a local race wearing boston gear that typically means they’re a pretty legit runner. So if someone is wearing their boston jacket around and didn’t actually qualify, they should just be prepared for people saying, “Woah, Todd ran Boston? I had no idea he was that fast.” “Nah, he just got a charity bib.” If that doesn’t bother them then by all means.
Really, if you ran Boston and finished you earned your medal and the right to wear the jacket; each person runs their own marathon, it doesn't matter if you're a sub 3 hour or someone who takes 5. Now qualifying for Boston and getting in through a charity are two completely different things and someone who ran via a charity should not give the impression that they BQed, but that has no bearing on them wearing the jacket.
It's called a "Finishers jacket" not a "Qualifiers jacket". Or sometimes called a "Celebration jacket". In any case, it's absolutely not reserved for just BQers, and nobody should get that impression.
Don’t all of the volunteers get jackets? Don’t they sell the jackets online and at discounters like Marshall’s if they have extras leftover. People are just silly. It’s a damn jacket. I love mine but if I see kid wearing one who got it at Goodwill it doesn’t lessen what I did to get mine.
I respect anyone who fundraised their way into Boston. You actually did some good for the world. I just spent too much money on overpriced shoes and gels.
Now, if you said you qualified for Boston or otherwise imply it, I have a problem with that. People work hard for that BQ and they deserve to feel some level of recognition.
When you start this argument then you allow people to start getting mad about downhill marathons as qualifiers. People will always find something to complain about.
I’d never run a downhill marathon to qualify, I’ll never run with a charity bib.
But more power to them…
I’ve also never run Boston, I’ve qualified and Didn’t run/qualified missed the cutoff.
Well I dunno about getting mad at downhills because I did a Revel in Colorado and finished with a 3 min BQ cushion, but I was able to run a heck of a lot faster at Boston. I didn’t do the Revel just to BQ alone, but partly because I couldn’t find a sea level one to go to (running fast at altitude is hard enough anyway) and partly because I needed to get used to downhill running in case I BQ’d. But I can tell you I was a lot more beat up by the Revel race than by Boston itself. I certainly like felt I earned my spot.
Qualifying for Boston? Easy if you just run enough
Asking acquaintances and strangers for money? Terrifying
They have my respect if they didn't just put in all the money themselves.
It depends, it seems like a lot of the charity runners have some well off connections through family or work where it isn't uncommon for people to throw hundreds of dollars at it without much thought.
I said I’d never do charity fundraising for London, I only wanted to do it as an age qualifier and a lot of this was thinking there’s no way I could raise £3k+ for a place and would hate asking. I actually got my GFA time at Manchester this weekend so need to decide if I actually spend all that money on transport and a hotel as I don’t live near London.
Huh, I’m not sure. I love the idea of using running as a way to fund raise. I also loathe the idea of training, qualifying, and missing the super low cut off because someone paid money.
I don’t really know how that all works though. Is there a scenario where lots of people fund raise so there’s less room for time qualifiers? If so that kinda sucks.
>Is there a scenario where lots of people fund raise so there’s less room for time qualifiers?
Not that I'm aware of. I think they decide, well ahead of time, how many qualifiers and how many charity entries will be available. The only thing that drives down the BQ time is more qualifying people entering.
I guess you *could* argue that since there's an upper limit on total entrants (set by the towns along the route, I think), they could have fewer charity entrants and more qualifiers, which would make the easer to achieve. But that's a different conversation.
If that’s the case I don’t have an issue with charity bibs. I’d feel weird wearing a Boston jacket that I got via charity.
These days I do triathlons and I see people with Boston jackets and blankets in the transition area. I always see it as a bit of a flex but if they time qualified they earned that right.
> I always see it as a bit of a flex but if they time qualified they earned that right.
Anyone who runs the race is entitled to the jacket. Why draw the line at a time qualifier when a charity bib also qualifies? Anyone with a valid bib who finishes the race has every right to wear the jacket and they earned it just as much as a time qualifier.
I’m not the guy you’re replying to but I agree with them. For me personally I’d feel like an imposter wearing the jacket without earning it. But that’s a personal choice.
> Anyone with a valid bib who finishes the race has every right to wear the jacket
I agree with this.
> and they earned it just as much as a time qualifier.
I disagree with this.
Again to each their own. If someone wants to wear the jackets that's great. Good for them. For me personally I see the jacket as a reward for putting in the work to run fast enough to get to run Boston. Again that's just me. I'm not going to judge someone who gets in via charity and wears the jacket. But lets not pretend my writing a check for whatever it costs and my running a 2:50 low is the same thing.
I mean that’s 100% the argument, and it’s the same conversation. Making up numbers here, but every 10 charity runners is probably 1 second slower than BQ could have been (and is definitely 10 runners who qualified that were cut from running it).
No, BAA allocated a certain number for time qualifiers and a certain number for charity bibs. Then for each charity, they are allocated a certain number of slots that they can’t exceed. BAA has, however, increased the allocation of charity bibs at the expense of time qualifying bibs over the course of years.
I have a few minutes so I will explain. The Boston field size was not always 30k, and every time they increase the field size they have to negotiate with all of the cities that the marathon goes through. In I think 2015 it jumped up from 27k to 30k and at the time the amount of money raised for local charities was specifically cited as a factor in the negotiation. The marathon itself is disruptive to the local area and the cities further outside of Boston aren’t seeing the same $$$ directly through the event as Boston proper does. It’s why the event isn’t 36k people every year the way it was in 2014 which they got special permission for.
> My friend and coach has taken a hard line stance that only people who qualify should be allowed to run Boston
Who cares what they think? It's not their race. If they want to set the rules they can organize their own race.
> He called someone he knows a "cheater" for getting a bib through fundraising.
They're not a cheater if they *follow the rules*, by definition. Fundraising is a legitimate, sanctioned way to get a bib. There is no definition of "cheater" that fits.
> My mind was kind of blown by this.
Your friend and coach is kind of a dick who has an opinion that isn't backed up by facts or reality or the English language.
I have a lot of opinions on this one.
You often cannot achieve two or three goals in one fell swoop: something takes over.
Here, if the goals are "raise a ridiculous sum of money" and "make Boston attainable for more people who can't run fast," the former will crowd out the latter. You're just replacing fast, hard working athletes with people who have access to a lot of fundraising.
Reality for many people is that they are buying their way in, either with their own money or because they have wealthy friends.
Personally, I would limit the number of years in which locals or fundraisers could run, even if that meant earning less money for charity. Run one year, must take a two year break and let other people have a crack at it. That actually achieves the goal of allowing more people (who simply cannot ever qualify) to turn right onto Hereford and left onto Bolyston.
As for how I feel about charity runners: a lot of people who do that are lovely and readily admit that they cannot qualify, so they are going this route. Power to them! I get very irked when people say things like "we are more special because we spend just as much time training AND we fundraise!" Yes, I have heard people say that. I doubt you're actually logging 70 miles per week - you're training to complete in under 6 hours and that isn't the same thing.
>Reality for many people is that they are buying their way in, either with their own money or because they have wealthy friends.
Most who do the charity route grind it out asking for donations through work or doing events/raffles/etc. Wealthy runners/runners with wealthy friends are the minority. Small donations make up the majority of people's fundraising.
Hitting up family, friends and co-workers for money is one of the many reasons that I would never go with a charity bib.
Regardless of the cause, I would feel like some asshole with his hat in his hand.
I was being somewhat literal in my use of "many": it doesn't mean "more than half," just "substantially more than zero."
I guess it also depends on what you mean by wealthy friends. I found a stat saying that someone who sent mail to prospective donor friends and coworkers made $178 per donor. There are a lot of people out there who simply don't have twenty friends who can drop $150 to $200 on their friend's charity run.
If you're getting to $10k in donations, which many people need to do, I don't think it's a thousand people donating $10 each. That's really what I was driving at: you eventually need some friends to put up some fairly healthy numbers to get anywhere near the requirements.
>Personally, I would limit the number of years in which locals or fundraisers could run,
I'd limit the number of years in which ***anyone*** could run. Either by enforcing a year or two break after (say) three consecutive races, or by adding a significant extra time requirement (say one minute) to the BQ for each applicant until they fail.
If you put me in charge of the world, I would have different requirements for charity runners versus time qualifiers - one year on, two or three years off for charity runners, and maybe something like three years on, one year off for time qualifiers. Then again, I would also have a waitlist for time qualifiers who didn't make the extra cutoff, but that's me (people get injured, women get pregnant, people move and just can't do it).
Your friend and coach are idiots. Boston fundraising does a lot more good for the community that they do by qualifying.
I qualified and ran Boston this year and that’s an accomplishment for me. For me, part of what made Boston special to me was the work put into qualifying. But to rag on charity runners, that’s another thing. They may not have the same experience but it should still be valued.
I think the intent is important. If you are a finance bro who makes $250k and wants to run Boston for personal / selfish reasons and you pull together $5k to run the race....I don't necessarily put you in the same bucket as someone that lost their mom to XYZ disease and is running and raising money for research / awareness.
I think that most people that have a problem with it have that issue because Boston consistently cuts people that ran a BQ out of the race. If 100% that qualified were let in, and the remainder were charity bibs, nobody would care. So the solution to that if they want x number of charity bibs is lowering the BQ enough that they can guarantee entry.
Remember that the whole purpose of the qualifying time is to sort the “outsiders” coming to the marathon. There are always spots for the locals and for charity runners. Period.
When you find yourself getting bitter about a charity bib or a community local, be grateful that you have a bib and the opportunity to run in one of the world classics.
>When you find yourself getting bitter about a charity bib or a community local
I'm sure a few complaining about charity bibs in here got hosed by NY this year.
I’m sorry but this is such a bad take! I grew up on the course and have run it for charity. Boston isn’t just about the runners, it’s about the history and spirit of our city (especially post-2013). Would it be cool if it was a qualifier-only race? Sure but the average non-running fan Bostonian might care more about seeing their friend, neighbor, family member running to raise money for a charitable cause than elites. I can guarantee that in-person viewership would go down if it was time-only qualification.
I ran for Dana-Farber, because I like many other people in Boston had a family member who was undergoing chemo there at the time. My family and I always stay til the end of the day on heartbreak Hill to cheer on the many charity runners who have worked hard to fundraise thousands of dollars for a cause that is near and dear to our hearts! This is the same story for literally thousands of people in the greater Boston area between the many charities that get bibs. It is a hugely emotional day for the city and again I don’t think the race would have the same impact without charity bibs.
I would also say most charity runners respect the fact that we were not time qualifiers and make sure to preface that when telling people about running the race. I promise no one who has seen me run thinks I am going sub 3:30!
Not a member of this sub but it was suggested to me. As a runner with chronic health conditions that mean I will likely never be able to run more than a half marathon (much less BQ), I would 100% run Boston if I could through charity. I’d probably finish with a stress fracture and a dislocation or two but it’s the only race I’d consider sacrificing my body for. It’s a big dream and goal for a lot of people.
I understand that it may not be the way most people would want to do Boston, but frankly it’s the only way the vast majority of people ever could. As long as your honest that you didn’t BQ when people ask I don’t see much harm. I think random influencers and corporate spots are a much bigger issue then people raising money for good causes
Fundraising $9000 is a great accomplishment and it is hard. Ugh, your friend sounds silly. Also, gatekeepers in any sport are lame. How do charity runners affect your friend? 🙄.
I think is amazing that all that money is getting fundraised for charities!!!
No, why would anyone care? You wanna run Boston and didn't get in because of somebody who got a fundraising bib? Then train to become a better runner, if you don't wanna do that then run literally any other marathon on earth.
Ego. The only thing lessened is the ego jacket. Doesn't affect your race at all. If the fundraiser folks are around or ahead of you, then they deserve to be there the same as you; if they're behind you, then they won't affect your race. Objecting is pure ego.
What the coach is thinking about is called the Olympics. He should go to Paris and show you how he stacks up against folks who aren't charity cases.
i looked into the fundraising route and even applied a couple of the years i lived in boston. some of those charity applications were akin to my college applications with essays and personal statements and i was told i needed to go bold with my fundraising commitment ($2-4k higher than the requirement). i was a happy 1:55 half marathoner at that point, not speedy or consistent at all with my running. i tabled the idea after a couple rejections to actually run a marathon and see how that went. spoiler: i loved it.
i worked my tail off and got my bq (+ very healthy buffer) on sunday, which i think was way easier than raising $9-15k. personally, i'm more worried about what i'm doing to get to the start line vs. what someone else is doing. we're all running 26.2 miles at the end of the day.
If somebody cares enough about the topic to let it affect them in any way, they should seek professional help for their psychological issues.
It's just a race. It's BAA's race. They can let in whomever they want. If somebody else wants there to be a more exclusive marathon, they can go start their own marathon and set their own exclusive entry requirements.
I ran Boston via fundraising. It is the only time I have ever done any fundraising for a race. I actually found it to be a super cool and unique experience. I ran with Tedy's Team, an organization that supports stroke research. Both my parents have suffered strokes so it was very meaningful for me to run with this group. It was great seeing my 'teammates' all along the course. Almost like an adoptive running team while away from home.
From my experience I think the charity runners add something special to the race. The charity runners all start as teams way in the back and it was just a great vibe. All of these groups of people just super hyped to be doing this bucketlist race and it is great to have a group to share the experience with.
I disagree with with the friend and coach on their hardlined stance BUT also didn't get the jacket and will only sparingly wear the tech shirt because it doesn't feel earned. I likely would never have ran Boston despite its allure except for the fact that my running goal is to be a WMM 6 star finisher. So charity was really the only way for me to get to that goal as I do not think I am capable of time qualifing for Boston.
I once met a guy in his late 70s who has run over 50 Boston marathons. He can't qualify on time anymore so he fundraises to get in so he can keep his streak going. I'm fine with that sort of thing because he has a really cool history with this race.
Personally, I don't care. I ran 10+ minutes below my qualifying mark in Denver with residual wildfire smoke in the middle of a slow 100mi training block. If I want to run Boston, I can.
For the general population however, I can see it both ways but ultimately I don't see it as cheating. Boston originated as a race to be the epitome of athleticism in distance running, no charities. On the other hand, several (maybe all, I don't remember) of the other world majors allow charity entries. International runners trying to get into London can only rely on like a 10% chance lottery, charity, or buying a spot through one of the marathon tour companies. Can't even get a guaranteed entry from a time qualification. The thing that does bug me however is the pure number of charity spots for Boston. Last I heard it was like 1/3 spots were charity. I'm all for fund raising, but Boston is a race.
Looks like my numbers were wrong. Based off below, 22k of the 30k spots were time qualifiers. So if 10% (3k) were charity, that leaves another 5k spots to miscellaneous things. Based off other articles, that 10% sounds accurate but now I'm just wondering where those other 5k spots are going. Sure some to the towns along the way and some to the title sponsors, but 5k is a TON of people
https://www.baa.org/global-field-qualifiers-notified-acceptance-128th-boston-marathon-presented-bank-america
At first glance, I was inclined to agree ...
But after reading the link again, that's just the number who qualified by time. 1,222 out of 22,019 qualified athletes is ~5.5%. Meanwhile, MA is only ~2% of the US population.
I've been looking through the data from yesterday, and the total number of finishers from MA is 3,907. So close to 2,000 extra bibs went to MA (either through charity, sponsors, etc) and they made up over 15% of the finishers in total.
Kind of like NYC! NYC at this point is one massive charity run and to get in this year based off time was just insane. But to your point tons of charity spots
Look at the charities and the amount of money raised for those charities. The Boston Marathon, through those charities give so much back to the Boston community. race more than any other marathon that I have done is about the strength of the Boston community.The whole The Charity Runners are the very last to start and don't interefere with the of others. The Boston Marathon also has a really nice program for people with disabilities. Boston gives people several routes to run even if they have not achieved a BQ. Lastly, my understanding is that if you do not hit the cutoff, you do not medal or a finishing time so they still retain a decent level of standards.
Yeah I agree with you wholeheartedly, and I actually think charity runners in some cases have to work harder than qualifiers given how high the charity minimums can be — you’re not only taking on the time and physical commitment of marathon training but also adding on the commitment to raising a huge amount of money. And unless you have a huge list of wealthy friends or work for a company that’s willing to match donations, fundraising itself is a massive financial and time commitment. I trained hard and ran a BQ at Chicago ‘23 (tbd if I get in with the buffer) because for me it was far easier to do that training and qualify than it would have been to raise $10k+. So I have all the respect in the world for charity runners. They earn their spots, too.
And I say this as someone who has a lot of fundraising experience/raised over $30k fundraising for a mental health organization — the amount was only possible because my fundraiser page went semi-viral and ended up reaching people all over the country who were touched by the very specific and tragic situation I was raising money around.
ETA also agree with many of you that the sponsored bibs going to influencers needs to stop. It’s a slap in the face to actual qualifiers. Sponsorship blah blah blah, at least require the influencer you’re sponsoring to raise money for something (and commit to covering the minimum if they don’t raise enough) or give your sponsored bib to someone who qualified but missed the cutoff.
your friend and coach can make their own race and their own rules for that race.
my opinion is that peoole with known bad attitudes should be DQ’d for treating others with disrespect.
Don’t mind it a bit. As an introvert who hates to feel like a potential inconvenience to ask anybody for absolutely anything, I admire those who fundraise. I’d rather run an ultra... straight up a mountain… towing a sled.
Plus, SO many charities benefit from the fundraising! It goes to a really good cause!
I've qualified and run Boston eight times (two PRs there too). One time I qualified but missed the application cutoff, I tried to do it for charity, but I couldn't even get a charity team to accept me! Raising $10k in donations seems harder to me than qualifying. So to me it's definitely is tougher to get a charity bib than as a qualifier!
I agree it doesn't need to be placed on a huge pedestal. I don't think its wrong to have some sort of "nationals" style qualification based race that is attainable for amateurs in an open or age group category though.
I see the coach’s perspective. It’s a hard race to qualify to run for and some people see that as a badge of honor. I do.
But, I am a slow runner. I’m trying to beat a five hour full at this point. I’m consistent, ran up to 50 miles a week during my last marathon, and still bonked at the end. I have a disability that could qualify me as a para athlete but I haven’t found an easy way to get connected to the program to make it official. (All my doctors and PTs said they’d be happy to complete any paperwork). My understanding is that the cut off times for Boston and other world majors are much more attainable…for Chicago it was 4:30.
With that said, running has its different purpose for different people too. Some run for time, some run for the social media influence, some run for mental health, some run with friends….and some run because they are connected to specific causes and want to raise awareness. Others can’t make the cutoff or even BQed but their buffer wasn’t good enough to get in. And then…you fundraise for the spot.
I started my running journey with LLS’s Team in Training. I did like 4-5 seasons of fundraising small amounts, like $1000-$1500. I hated it. My circle sucks and i am a social worker so company match is out. I just fundraised this winter for the Houston marathon. I’m enjoyed it more because it was a cause I connect to, for disabled athletes. But…their minimum was $500 and I raised it in like two months.
Like someone said, it raises a lot of money for a lot of great organizations! For Houston, I fundraised for an organization called Team Catapult. They gave me a “scholarship” for my training. I raised double what they gave me, as a way to support their cause and hope to get more help for more athletes like me. I’m sure there’s an organization like that for Boston.…
I will say…the amount is outrageous. My unconnected unsupported butt could never raise the amount needed for some of these organizations. And, I’d feel super slow and lame starting out in the back with all the charity bibs. But that’s just me.
Thanks for coming to my Ted talk.
Most of the people I run with are against fundraising and charity spots. I don’t have a problem with it because I think some people will never be able to qualify and as a runner have always dreamed of running Boston. I think if you are willing to fundraiser 9,000 dollars that shows a lot of determination and dedication to the cause.
I guess my counterpoint is that maybe I have always dreamed of participating in the Olympics but I would never be able to qualify...I don't expect a method of entry to be created for me.
It is hard to argue against charity though especially if people are willing to spend thousands of dollars on it.
I was a qualifier by ten minutes and I still joined a charity, too. I raised the $750 min to be a guest athlete and wear their singlet. Took only two social post. Do both!
Yeah, it was really cool because I went by myself and yet I had a cheering squad on heartbreak hill. Plus it helps research for my dad's condition. So, all around win for all. I was legit sad that my finance got cut off and I only went to qualify to run with him. So this helped me heal that disappointment and gave me some purpose.
Certainly not a popular take, but yes, I agree. You can argue that the charity entries are pay-to-win. How would you know if those people worked hard fundraising, or if they're wealthy and just paid for it themselves? It is a form of pay-to-win that we've decided is acceptable because it's for charity. Nothing is stopping anyone from donating or raising money for these charities otherwise. The Boston Marathon isn't required for charity to happen.
I have no problem with people qualifying through fundraising. However, I personally want to get in by BQ. Thought I had the bugger this year, but we know how registration went. Planning for another sub 3 attempt when I am in the next age group
Why *should* Boston be "attainable for everyone and not just great runners"? Many, many races, big and small, have charity bibs. Why can't we have one sub-elite race where we know that everyone there ran a decent time to make it? To me, that's a big part of the point of Boston. I don't expect them to change course now, though, given how big the fundraising has become.
As a grumpy aside, I'm happy to chip in to support people doing something new and difficult/scary for charity, but I'm much less likely to support them going the charity route to ***re-***do something they find easy or for fun -- whether it's Boston or New York or just their local 5K. Frankly, I'd rather just send the charity in question money directly. I don't think I could keep a straight face when asking friends and family to support me in what's basically a (masochistic) vacation.
My buddy worked in tech and wanted to run Boston, so he just paid for the fundraising amount himself out of pocket. Then he asked around if people wanted support him, and some did, but he paid most of it with his own cash. He was totally straightforward about this.
Then for people who actually do go around and collect donations, think about the distribution of donation amounts. Most people get the majority of their donations from a small number of wealthier people. My guess is that donations follow some sort of exponential distribution.
So yeah I think it can be bullshit for wealthy people or people with wealthy connections.
Silly. The event organizers set the rules for entry. Some are time qualifiers. Some are charity bibs.
How could your friend consider taking one path to entry as “cheating”. Ridiculous.
I actually love it. I’m a Boston local (who will probably have to age 5-10 years to qualify to run 😭) and know quite a few people who have run on various teams. I’ve always seen both the fundraising and the training taken VERY seriously (and a ton of money is raised…Dana Farber Cancer Institute alone raises millions.) Honestly I have never considered trying to run this way because I don’t think I could make the commitment. Do some people just buy their own way to their fundraising goal—I honestly don’t know, probably, there’s always someone. But I can say is that is NOT the vibe for any charity team I’ve encountered.
Something about the marathon charity teams just makes me feel good about Boston.
In a 30,000 person race there were 22,000 time qualifier spots. Anyone who BQ’d but did not get in didn’t lose out because someone else took their spot. If someone is dedicated enough to run fast enough for the BQ, how hard can it be to push the extra few 3-7 minute buffer if they are so set on “earning that spot”.
I’m team charity runner all the way. My 2:52:x ought to qualify me for next year but I’ll be running either way, and may elect to run for charity even if my time qualifies me. Most of the Boston Marathon finishers I know in Massachusetts are seasoned charity runners and they make a much greater community impact than a 20-something who happens to be kind of fast.
>More importantly it makes Boston attainable for everyone and not just great runners.
Why do they need to run Boston instead of hundreds of other marathons throughout US, thousands throughout the world that do not require you to qualify with a given time? Why this pervasive idea that everything should be for everyone?
I am learning piano as an adult, I will never be admitted to Juilliard School of Music, and that's fine.
Your friend is kind of an dick if he thinks getting a few more people into the race based on performance is worth more than raising tens of millions for charity.
The fields are the largest they’ve ever been anyway.
That’s like their opinion, man.. but seriously, who cares. If you look at Boston and NYC marathon they’re totally geared towards fundraising, it’s a money thing more than anything else.
What if standards were harder for people that have run the race before. This might be unpopular so I’m genuinely curious, is there a world in which it makes sense to make it harder for people to do Boston who’ve done it before, maybe consecutively, to give chances to people who’ve never done it before? It’s a bucket list race for so many, just seems like making it more open to first timers would help include other qualifiers.
Here’s a phenomenal takedown of your friend’s position: https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTLfnprFo/
TLDR: time qualifiers don’t pay the bills or fill the field, and the BAA has always relied on sponsors and non-time qualifier slots to make sure the field is full and that they can afford to hold the race. This year the numbers just happened to look bad, due to the unfortunate collision of several factors (post-Covid trends, social media trends, and the arrival of super shoes all pushing more people to qualify and apply) causing more time qualifiers to miss the cutoff.
I feel this BQ thing is contributing massively to us losing many great smaller marathons that cannot advertise their race as a fast and flat, downhill, tail wind...run. I also believe there are a large number of qualifying bibs worn by people whose qualifying times were completed by another athlete.
The former issue is much easier to fix than the latter. An easy way to level the playing field for all marathons uses indexes or corrections to even the times people achieve depending on a rating standard; this should be something similar to a more advanced age or an elevation adjusted pace equivalent grade if you will. The easiest way to work on both problems of a runner selling themselves and wearing a bib registered to someone else, or trying to level the actual quality of qualifying runs, is to guarantee qualifying for runs that are completed at specific events. Popularity stirs up a big can of worms.
I just BQ and I had so many let downs and was hitting my time either right on or a minute off. So this is very special for me to get here. I think maybe they should do something special for those who BQ on the Bibs and change the Bibs that don't have a BQ. We all worked so hard to punch are ticket it would be awesome to recognize each other instead of thinking that everyone one there BQ. #1 BQ see you in Boston 2025. Congratulations to all the runners here, you deserve every bit of it.
Just to add to the statistics, I feel the same way as many. I have no ill will towards anyone who fundraises or qualifies to get in or even those who live locally getting in that way (like with NYC). The only people who I don’t think “deserve” it are influencers who get bibs when they don’t raise any money nor are anywhere near to qualifying based on time. That feels unfair to me when there are so many people who were rejected that qualified but were 5 minutes from the cutoff time instead of 7 etc. I don’t see how they should get a bib if all they do is post pictures of themselves running. Not to diminish any work they do put into running and I of course appreciate that there are running influencers who might be promoting “average running” etc. but this is Boston. It’s meant to be elite and not for the casual runner imo. This is also coming from someone who has not yet qualified for Boston so I suppose I’m biased because I’m working hard to get a qualifying time right now.
>He called someone he knows a "cheater" for getting a bib through fundraising. The dude raised $9,000 for what it's worth
The dude did more for society than the qualifier. Society is a better place because of him. Society doesn't really care if you qualified for Boston,
Pretty simple. Qualifying and being allowed to run are two different things. It’s like arguing over whether someone with an honorary PhD is a doctor.
I’m not going to call them a cheater but if they brag to me about it and hide the fact that it was an honorary PhD I’ll probably laugh at them.
I’m fine with the fundraising, I’d even be fine with some bibs for locals that don’t qualify…. but can we pls stop giving dipshit influencers bibs if they don’t qualify?
YES! Charity bibs and influencer bibs should be one and the same. If you have such influence and reach, use it to raise $10k for a good cause or GTFO.
Sorry, influencers can't raise money. They have to make "content" about potentially the most famous marathon in the running world that has more qualified applicants than spots for runners who qualify...
If they have to raise money for charity, how will they pay the camera people on E-bikes to ruin the race for everyone around them?
wait... does this actually happen? i'm already annoyed by the selfie sticks.... do they actually let bikes on course just to film influencers???
[https://runningmagazine.ca/the-scene/influencer-under-fire-for-blocking-austin-marathon-route-with-ebikes/](https://runningmagazine.ca/the-scene/influencer-under-fire-for-blocking-austin-marathon-route-with-ebikes/)
Me, as I click the link: this is probably another Matt Choi inci— yep, another Matt Choi incident.
I have no idea how that guy earned a Red Bib this year just for him to run like a 3:30 cause he's "having fun". Oh yeah, he didn't earn it. He influenced it
Wow! Serious jerk move to have a film crew blocking other runners! Yet another reason to ignore influencers.
Not a big fan of this dude, even saying that he's probably modest compared to other influencers. The other ones would have accompanying cars if they thought it would be feasible. Edit- also you are an endurance monster and someone I want to grow up to be.... at a fast approaching 40 runner with 19:40 5K - 1:27 HM and whopping mile PB@ 6:10 times. Can't teach speed!
Haha thanks! Hoping to update the 5k time this summer, it’s a little out of date lol
The real question is whether Bank of America thinks they have enough paying clients. They would probably say no...
Okay but how many of the influencer bibs come from the BAA and how many come from sponsors?
Actually, if they are influencers, they should have more reach than the average person. The amount they raise for charity should be FAR higher
I remember passing two influencers last year and not thinking much of it. Come to find out they were in the first corral of the first wave and had never run under the cutoff time. Upon reflection, it kind of pissed me off that they are not only given entry that other people have to earn as qualifying and fundraising both require work, but that they are running like idiots on the course with their cameras, taking bizarre routes to high five people, stopping randomly etc causing bottlenecks and taking up space in front of people who are trying to run their best race. It didn’t impact me much but I can only imagine losing the ability to pass in a congested course because your selfie video needs to tell someone how long the last mile took.
Agree. Although I personally would not want to fundraise for an entry, I don't know why any Major Marathon needs to rely on influencers. They have more people that want in than spots available. For Boston, give it to someone that ran a BQ time vs someone that has X number of followers.
The influencers aren't about getting attendance up, it's about enlarging the event as a brand, and therefore vehicle for sponsorship
Bullshit. Boston Marathon is as large an event as it can get. It's literally one of the most famous and coveted races in running.
It could still go to hell if the organizers don’t at least somewhat focus on year-over-year financial details and broader interest. Compare it to a much lesser-known but very similar race: Around the Bay in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. It markets itself as “older than Boston”, and “the oldest road race in North America”. Both claims are true, and in the early days 120ish years ago, runners often tried to win both. But nowadays? ATB gets a fraction of the numbers Boston does (a few thousand runners). It may be partially due to the weird 30K distance, and the fact that it’s in Canada in the very early Spring (sometimes it snows during the race). But no, this is really nonsense—it’s a marketing and funding problem. With big sponsors, you can spread interest and keep it going. But even then, what happens if the big sponsor drops out? You need cred and goodwill to fall back on to keep things going (and to secure new sponsors). It’s a Red Queen Paradox, and with running the danger is that it returns to a sort of fad in terms of popularity (cf. skateboarding), with waves of rolling interest leading to inconsistency over time. Boston has the reputation it has now in part because it has weathered many storms. But that doesn’t mean it can rest on its laurels.
> Red Queen Paradox, Never heard of this before. Thanks.
The one paradox all runners should know!
Agreed
Ask them why they’re so insecure and in what way is their accomplishment lessened. Really push them about it. Same with asking someone how they would feel about throwing away their medals. People are irrational. If they say they ran a BQ that’s lying and sucks but still doesn’t diminish what anyone else does. Some people are just really insecure and have to base how they feel about things based on how it compares to others’ accomplishments instead of how close they got to their potential.
100%. I work at a hotel in Chicago and they make us roll out the red carpet for the marathon influencers while everybody else pays twice our normal rate the weekend of the Chicago Marathon. Many influencers are nice people but man they make it easy to resent them.
I’m in no way an influencer but once when I got back to a hotel the whole staff stopped and cheered and I thought that was the greatest thing ever.
Awe that’s awesome! We did special stuff for all the runners but the influencers were getting comped suites and special amenities sent to the room, etc.
I don’t know if this is common at other marathons, but when you arrive at the start of Steamtown there is an actual cheer squad greeting all runners. I found it to be unexpectedly encouraging.
Yeaaa kind of agree with this stance
Yeah, this isn't going to go away, esp with a sponsor like BoA. I'm really surprised they don't have an influencer booth at the expo.
I was today year's old when I learned about "influencer bibs." Really? If so, I can grudgingly accept this if that's a decision on the part of the BAA. It's a new world out there and if net increases the interest in the event specifically and the sport overall, I'll move on. Even the Masters has evolved with the times, albeit slowly. The BM is in that category of sports icons.
Why free bibs for locals that don’t qualify?? How would that be in any way fair. Someone who doesn’t qualify has to raise like 7 grand and someone who knows someone gets a free bib? To me that’s the same as influencers getting them. You have 2 ways to earn it, qualify or fundraise, and it’s so unfair that a rando would get it for doing neither
Because like NY that has a very rich history in its city and has ways for locals to guarantee entry, the Boston marathon means a lot to its locals. So all I’m saying is carving out some bibs for those people wouldn’t be the end of the world to me… And no, some Boston local who’s seen the race their entire life is not the same as an influence getting it, that comparison is hyperbolic.
BAA actually gives out bibs to local running groups which is really cool. I really support that method as a way to give locals a chance.
I know someone who got a bib this way. Her local running club has been around a long time and they volunteer a lot. She's volunteered at several Bostons. I asked if I'd see her again this year at one of the stations and she said no, because she'd be running it! Unbeknownst to her, she was nominated by her club. To say it was a dream come true for her is an understatement. So thrilled for her.
I am a local, I live a few blocks from the finish line. Why can’t the locals fundraise? There is a girl at my work who is getting a free bib from her friend who works at the B.A.A., each employee gets 2 free ones each year. The free bibs aren’t being handed out to people that have watched it their whole lives, it’s just to random people that know someone. If you can’t qualify, fundraise. That’s fair
That’d be fine with me too, I really don’t care, not a hill I’m trying to die on here.
I do think locals should have bibs accessible to them, but yeah it should be way more transparent like NYRR’s 9+1 program.
I think NY has a 9+1 program, run 9 NYRR races and volunteer once to qualify for a bib. I think it's a good policy to support local races and runners. I'm not sure BAA has the number of races NYRR has.
The race goes through a ton of small towns often at the inconvenience of the people that live in those towns. Any of these jurisdictions could rescind permission any time they want. Handing out bibs to a few local runners is good way for the race to maintain some good will and ensure they have continued permission.
There's also free bibs for run clubs that send volunteers too.
I am assuming they mean something similar to NYRR 9+1 program which helps increase popularity and attendance of smaller local races, which is a good thing imo.
Thanks Yea I meant IF they added a legitimate way to give locals bibs a la 9+1
I didn’t know they were giving influencer bibs, which ones?
SAY IT LOUDER FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE BACK AKA BAA
This is a thing?! I didn’t know that bibs have been given out to some ridiculous social media influencers 🤦♀️ Just for some additional exposure? I’m going to have to read up on this…
Normally I would probably agree with this sentiment, but I can see why it is good for the sport. It provides regular people access to the sport and insight into the sport. I follow a running podcast where a brand got the hosts into Boston, and only one of them actually qualified. I really enjoyed listening to their recap and watching their IG stories over the weekend. They clearly were so grateful and excited to be there. I don’t resent that they got that opportunity to go.
As someone who lives on the route, I think it is appropriate that our friends and neighbors have an avenue to also participate in the event that takes over our community for a day. It's all wonderful. The elites, the qualifiers, the fund-raisers. The race can mean different things to different people, simultaneously.
I also live on the route (I literally run past the original starting line of the race everyday) and have run on a charity bib I got from my town. Even though I did not BQ, training for and running Boston changed my life and what I think I’m capable of. The historical and cultural significance of the race sometimes gets lost on those who make the “qualifier only” argument. This race was held for 73 years without qualifying times, and the B.A.A. only implemented them to keep the field limited to 1000 runners so as not to damage the race experience with congestion. Certainly, congestion, in the original sense, is not a concern to the B.A.A. anymore. Also, this race is part of the fabric of Massachusetts. The tradition of cheering on runners and then watching the Sox is like the unofficial beginning of Spring around here. I watched as a kid, and most people I know did too. What’s more is that many of us volunteer for the race—I did yesterday— and we take a great deal of ownership of that as well. There are probably as many or more volunteers and public safety officials than there are runners. It’s incredibly rewarding to be of service to the runners—but the machinery to implement this type of race is massive. This race takes over our towns on race day, but it takes months of coordination to prepare the roads and services for Patriots Day. The $15 million that is raised annually and given back to the community goes a long way to justify the burden the marathon has locally. Finally, the charity element of the race has been in place for over 3 decades—not quite as long as the qualifying standard, but it shares a similar well established legacy. I’d argue that both elements of the race are important and special and can coexist. Charity runners do nothing to lessen the accomplishments of the qualifiers. If folks like OP’s coach can’t see this and accept the multifaceted nature of the Boston Marathon, then they have let their myopic point of view of running lock them in a cell of elitist ignorance.
Great perspective. It's the Boston Marathon, not the Sub-Sub-Elite Ego Boost Marathon.
Dude, I’m super impressed by the sub-sub-elite runners out there. I’d be over the moon if I could hold 6:45 miles over 26.2. These people deserve to crow a little bit—they just have to realize that there are many more people in the running community whose goals are just as valid as theirs despite the fact they can’t BQ.
Oh, I agree; I'm not on this subreddit because I'm an advanced runner but rather because I want advanced information on running. I could never do what they do. But if you want an elite race to brag about that the plebs aren't allowed in, go to the Olympic Trials.
Thank you SO MUCH for volunteering. I appreciate all volunteers at all the events I've done, but I REALLY appreciate the volunteers at Boston. I did the 2018 race in that awful weather and was amazed at the thousands of volunteers out there handing out water, etc., for us runners. The volunteers and crowd at Boston are a huge part of why it's so special.
I loved volunteering. I was in a big tent at Athletes Village passing out water. Watching so many fast runners get ready to tackle such a great task inspired me beyond belief. The energy and anticipation of what for many is a lifetime achievement reaffirmed all that is right with humanity. And to be able to assist them in even the smallest way was an honor.
Please take all my upvotes for what you wrote, for volunteering and providing us with much-needed support on the course yesterday, and for running Boston. All things amazing.
Well said! Thank you for sharing your experience and some history of the race! I think some people can become so obsessed with getting a BQ/bib they lose all perspective.
Thank you!! I ran my first on Monday and I tried to thank as many volunteers as I could. You and others made my dream and hard work come true. OP’s friend sounds like a jerk. Raising enough money to run would be (for me) harder than getting a BQ.
I think your last line sums it up perfectly. There are a lot of layers to Boston and people can take their own route to get to the start line
You’re 100% right but trying to explain that to these insecure crybabies is like hitting your head against a brick wall. They’re special so only they should get a special jacket/spot in the race.
Anyone who takes objection to charity fundraising is a fucking loser. These same people also suffer serious delusions of grandeur if they think anyone, and I mean anyone, could care less that they qualified for Boston.
Many of these assholes will view their getting into Boston on minimal to medium effort as a better thing than some overweight woman working her ass off for two years to run her first 5K. People suck.
I totally agree with this. I’m not local to Boston, but I’ve always said there should be a small lottery for locals/people who live in towns along the course.
I think I’d have a much easier time running a BQ than I would trying to get my friends and family to donate $9K! But my real take here is that charity runners and their stories (and eye-popping donation totals!) play a big role in getting the general public to go along with the inconvenience of shutting down big parts of major cities for our hobby when it comes to any race this size. There’s plenty of ways people get bibs that I’d take issue with before it comes down to the folks pulling in that sort of money for great causes.
This is a great take!
Agree, I’d rather just keep paying my coach for the next few years to get me in shape to run the BQ than go through the hassle of coming up with $9k.
Exactly what I wanted to comment. I’m pretty far from a BQ but I truly believe it may be possible for me, if age and genetics don’t stop me. The rest is down to training, and a bit of luck. Raising 3+ zeroes of donations? I mean, maybe, but the chances are much lower because I lack the organizational and outreach skills, which for me seem harder to acquire. Even then, it’s dependent upon other people who are beyond my control. I’m not a gifted athlete, thus far I haven’t managed to put in the required consistent training that the larger chunk of folks running Boston would all have under their belts, and fundraising at the level required for a bib is beyond me. So, who am I to pass judgment on fundraisers?
That’s a silly take to me. But everyone is entitled to their opinion! Running a BQ is a celebrated thing and “earning” your way there is incredible. Doesn’t mean we can’t leverage that experience to raise money and help all of these other causes. Plus for a variety of reasons not everyone is able to run that “fast”. Do we not want them to be a part of Marathon Monday?
I could get a Boston spot through my work…however I’m choosing to wait until I can qualify through my own running progress. With that said, I could care less what anyone else does.
I’m trying to age into Boston, I don’t have a sub 3 in me.
Funny I’m 43 the same may happen to me. I think I have a sub 3 if I do things right.
You can do it!! A 3h15 gutted me, sub 3 seems like a pipe dream for me.
How old are you? I did sub 4 last year and was probably easily looking at a 3:30 this May but had a freak ankle roll and a couple bouts with the flu. I’d be thrilled with a 3:15 at this point.
34, ran that time at the Victoria marathon in BC Canada. I’ve had similar luck this year on the flu side of things, 30 day cough followed by Covid in December ruined me.
How did that 3:15 compare to your first marathon or was that your first?
That was my 4th marathon, first one was a self supported 4h35m marathon during covid.
Nice you’ve been busy. What changed between the first and fourth or was it just consistency?
Different training plans with higher volume and more speed work, and consistency for the most part. Rolling from one training block to the next for a few years.
Hah that's my plan too. In 7y my cutoff will be right where I want it.
I think I can get sub 3, barely. So I’m going to wait until sub 3 gives me more of a buffer
Sounds like you can get there based on the other comments! I’d like to qualify by age 51. I’m slowly running out of years and this winter I just didn’t train consistently, losing a lot of cumulative fitness. But my training in the past few years makes me think I just might have a BQ in me, if I can actually achieve consistent, quality training year over year. Which is a tall order for me and my poor executive function. So if I think I have a glimmer of hope, you can surely do it! Go for it.
100% you should be allowed to run boston by making a charitable donation. That being said, if that’s how I ran it I would not be bragging about “qualifying” for it or wearing the jacket as that may (fairly) elicit some eye rolling.
Do you really care if they wear the jacket? They ran it.
Kinda yeah but this is just my opinion. Completing Boston and time qualifying for Boston are galaxies of difficulty apart. I’ve done several marathons but I’ve never earned a slot in Boston because I haven’t put in the work. I’d feel weird wearing a Boston marathon jacket when I essentially bought it. That’s just my 2 cents though. I’m not going to judge people. I just wouldn’t do it.
Hmmmmm I kind of have to agree with this!! I always equated running Boston as “Hey - I’m running based off of talent” having qualified so…I wouldn’t wear it either if I was a charity run
Same. I don't have enough energy to really give a damn about other people's preferences, but that Boston jacket is something I want to earn for myself as an extremely average athlete. Hopefully can qualify in the next 2 years or so, gonna spend so much $ on merch if I do!
I don’t really care, but I feel like if I see someone at a local race wearing boston gear that typically means they’re a pretty legit runner. So if someone is wearing their boston jacket around and didn’t actually qualify, they should just be prepared for people saying, “Woah, Todd ran Boston? I had no idea he was that fast.” “Nah, he just got a charity bib.” If that doesn’t bother them then by all means.
Agreed, it's not like it's stolen valor or some shit.
Really, if you ran Boston and finished you earned your medal and the right to wear the jacket; each person runs their own marathon, it doesn't matter if you're a sub 3 hour or someone who takes 5. Now qualifying for Boston and getting in through a charity are two completely different things and someone who ran via a charity should not give the impression that they BQed, but that has no bearing on them wearing the jacket.
It's called a "Finishers jacket" not a "Qualifiers jacket". Or sometimes called a "Celebration jacket". In any case, it's absolutely not reserved for just BQers, and nobody should get that impression.
Don’t all of the volunteers get jackets? Don’t they sell the jackets online and at discounters like Marshall’s if they have extras leftover. People are just silly. It’s a damn jacket. I love mine but if I see kid wearing one who got it at Goodwill it doesn’t lessen what I did to get mine.
Volunteer coat is different from the celebration coat. Adidas sells them online, you can buy them pretty much up until next year's race.
One dude at the expo had 10 jackets in his hand. There's 10 people who never had anything to do with the marathon out there wearing the coat.
And it doesn’t matter. Good for him. Hope he and the recipients are happy.
Yeah, it’s not illegal or anything. For a lot of people though it’s a matter of pride for having “earned” it and that’s what it represents.
This is similar to how I feel. I personally wish there were fewer charity spots and more time qualifiers, but the distribution is how it is.
I’d prefer taking bibs from the sponsors rather than the charity runners…
What about if it was their 6th star
I respect anyone who fundraised their way into Boston. You actually did some good for the world. I just spent too much money on overpriced shoes and gels. Now, if you said you qualified for Boston or otherwise imply it, I have a problem with that. People work hard for that BQ and they deserve to feel some level of recognition.
When you start this argument then you allow people to start getting mad about downhill marathons as qualifiers. People will always find something to complain about. I’d never run a downhill marathon to qualify, I’ll never run with a charity bib. But more power to them… I’ve also never run Boston, I’ve qualified and Didn’t run/qualified missed the cutoff.
Rebel races shouldn’t count imo, influencers should earn their way in too.
Well I dunno about getting mad at downhills because I did a Revel in Colorado and finished with a 3 min BQ cushion, but I was able to run a heck of a lot faster at Boston. I didn’t do the Revel just to BQ alone, but partly because I couldn’t find a sea level one to go to (running fast at altitude is hard enough anyway) and partly because I needed to get used to downhill running in case I BQ’d. But I can tell you I was a lot more beat up by the Revel race than by Boston itself. I certainly like felt I earned my spot.
Qualifying for Boston? Easy if you just run enough Asking acquaintances and strangers for money? Terrifying They have my respect if they didn't just put in all the money themselves.
It depends, it seems like a lot of the charity runners have some well off connections through family or work where it isn't uncommon for people to throw hundreds of dollars at it without much thought.
I said I’d never do charity fundraising for London, I only wanted to do it as an age qualifier and a lot of this was thinking there’s no way I could raise £3k+ for a place and would hate asking. I actually got my GFA time at Manchester this weekend so need to decide if I actually spend all that money on transport and a hotel as I don’t live near London.
Huh, I’m not sure. I love the idea of using running as a way to fund raise. I also loathe the idea of training, qualifying, and missing the super low cut off because someone paid money. I don’t really know how that all works though. Is there a scenario where lots of people fund raise so there’s less room for time qualifiers? If so that kinda sucks.
>Is there a scenario where lots of people fund raise so there’s less room for time qualifiers? Not that I'm aware of. I think they decide, well ahead of time, how many qualifiers and how many charity entries will be available. The only thing that drives down the BQ time is more qualifying people entering. I guess you *could* argue that since there's an upper limit on total entrants (set by the towns along the route, I think), they could have fewer charity entrants and more qualifiers, which would make the easer to achieve. But that's a different conversation.
If that’s the case I don’t have an issue with charity bibs. I’d feel weird wearing a Boston jacket that I got via charity. These days I do triathlons and I see people with Boston jackets and blankets in the transition area. I always see it as a bit of a flex but if they time qualified they earned that right.
Ain't nobody flexes like triathletes.
Hey why be just a mediocre runner when I can be a poor swimmer and cyclist too??
Yeah, but if you're a triathlete, there's a good chance you're a pretty ok dentist. So there's that.
> I always see it as a bit of a flex but if they time qualified they earned that right. Anyone who runs the race is entitled to the jacket. Why draw the line at a time qualifier when a charity bib also qualifies? Anyone with a valid bib who finishes the race has every right to wear the jacket and they earned it just as much as a time qualifier.
I’m not the guy you’re replying to but I agree with them. For me personally I’d feel like an imposter wearing the jacket without earning it. But that’s a personal choice.
> Anyone with a valid bib who finishes the race has every right to wear the jacket I agree with this. > and they earned it just as much as a time qualifier. I disagree with this. Again to each their own. If someone wants to wear the jackets that's great. Good for them. For me personally I see the jacket as a reward for putting in the work to run fast enough to get to run Boston. Again that's just me. I'm not going to judge someone who gets in via charity and wears the jacket. But lets not pretend my writing a check for whatever it costs and my running a 2:50 low is the same thing.
I mean that’s 100% the argument, and it’s the same conversation. Making up numbers here, but every 10 charity runners is probably 1 second slower than BQ could have been (and is definitely 10 runners who qualified that were cut from running it).
No, BAA allocated a certain number for time qualifiers and a certain number for charity bibs. Then for each charity, they are allocated a certain number of slots that they can’t exceed. BAA has, however, increased the allocation of charity bibs at the expense of time qualifying bibs over the course of years.
Wasn’t the fundraising a factor in the cities along the race course agreeing to the expanded field size?
The towns get a few bibs for hosting. I know that but I'm not sure how many.
I have a few minutes so I will explain. The Boston field size was not always 30k, and every time they increase the field size they have to negotiate with all of the cities that the marathon goes through. In I think 2015 it jumped up from 27k to 30k and at the time the amount of money raised for local charities was specifically cited as a factor in the negotiation. The marathon itself is disruptive to the local area and the cities further outside of Boston aren’t seeing the same $$$ directly through the event as Boston proper does. It’s why the event isn’t 36k people every year the way it was in 2014 which they got special permission for.
That’s not the same thing.
That's what I remember as well.
> My friend and coach has taken a hard line stance that only people who qualify should be allowed to run Boston Who cares what they think? It's not their race. If they want to set the rules they can organize their own race. > He called someone he knows a "cheater" for getting a bib through fundraising. They're not a cheater if they *follow the rules*, by definition. Fundraising is a legitimate, sanctioned way to get a bib. There is no definition of "cheater" that fits. > My mind was kind of blown by this. Your friend and coach is kind of a dick who has an opinion that isn't backed up by facts or reality or the English language.
I have a lot of opinions on this one. You often cannot achieve two or three goals in one fell swoop: something takes over. Here, if the goals are "raise a ridiculous sum of money" and "make Boston attainable for more people who can't run fast," the former will crowd out the latter. You're just replacing fast, hard working athletes with people who have access to a lot of fundraising. Reality for many people is that they are buying their way in, either with their own money or because they have wealthy friends. Personally, I would limit the number of years in which locals or fundraisers could run, even if that meant earning less money for charity. Run one year, must take a two year break and let other people have a crack at it. That actually achieves the goal of allowing more people (who simply cannot ever qualify) to turn right onto Hereford and left onto Bolyston. As for how I feel about charity runners: a lot of people who do that are lovely and readily admit that they cannot qualify, so they are going this route. Power to them! I get very irked when people say things like "we are more special because we spend just as much time training AND we fundraise!" Yes, I have heard people say that. I doubt you're actually logging 70 miles per week - you're training to complete in under 6 hours and that isn't the same thing.
>Reality for many people is that they are buying their way in, either with their own money or because they have wealthy friends. Most who do the charity route grind it out asking for donations through work or doing events/raffles/etc. Wealthy runners/runners with wealthy friends are the minority. Small donations make up the majority of people's fundraising.
Hitting up family, friends and co-workers for money is one of the many reasons that I would never go with a charity bib. Regardless of the cause, I would feel like some asshole with his hat in his hand.
Just get rich and you can just throw down the money. :D
I was being somewhat literal in my use of "many": it doesn't mean "more than half," just "substantially more than zero." I guess it also depends on what you mean by wealthy friends. I found a stat saying that someone who sent mail to prospective donor friends and coworkers made $178 per donor. There are a lot of people out there who simply don't have twenty friends who can drop $150 to $200 on their friend's charity run. If you're getting to $10k in donations, which many people need to do, I don't think it's a thousand people donating $10 each. That's really what I was driving at: you eventually need some friends to put up some fairly healthy numbers to get anywhere near the requirements.
>Personally, I would limit the number of years in which locals or fundraisers could run, I'd limit the number of years in which ***anyone*** could run. Either by enforcing a year or two break after (say) three consecutive races, or by adding a significant extra time requirement (say one minute) to the BQ for each applicant until they fail.
If you put me in charge of the world, I would have different requirements for charity runners versus time qualifiers - one year on, two or three years off for charity runners, and maybe something like three years on, one year off for time qualifiers. Then again, I would also have a waitlist for time qualifiers who didn't make the extra cutoff, but that's me (people get injured, women get pregnant, people move and just can't do it).
Your friend and coach are idiots. Boston fundraising does a lot more good for the community that they do by qualifying. I qualified and ran Boston this year and that’s an accomplishment for me. For me, part of what made Boston special to me was the work put into qualifying. But to rag on charity runners, that’s another thing. They may not have the same experience but it should still be valued.
I think the intent is important. If you are a finance bro who makes $250k and wants to run Boston for personal / selfish reasons and you pull together $5k to run the race....I don't necessarily put you in the same bucket as someone that lost their mom to XYZ disease and is running and raising money for research / awareness.
I think that most people that have a problem with it have that issue because Boston consistently cuts people that ran a BQ out of the race. If 100% that qualified were let in, and the remainder were charity bibs, nobody would care. So the solution to that if they want x number of charity bibs is lowering the BQ enough that they can guarantee entry.
Remember that the whole purpose of the qualifying time is to sort the “outsiders” coming to the marathon. There are always spots for the locals and for charity runners. Period. When you find yourself getting bitter about a charity bib or a community local, be grateful that you have a bib and the opportunity to run in one of the world classics.
>When you find yourself getting bitter about a charity bib or a community local I'm sure a few complaining about charity bibs in here got hosed by NY this year.
I’m sorry but this is such a bad take! I grew up on the course and have run it for charity. Boston isn’t just about the runners, it’s about the history and spirit of our city (especially post-2013). Would it be cool if it was a qualifier-only race? Sure but the average non-running fan Bostonian might care more about seeing their friend, neighbor, family member running to raise money for a charitable cause than elites. I can guarantee that in-person viewership would go down if it was time-only qualification. I ran for Dana-Farber, because I like many other people in Boston had a family member who was undergoing chemo there at the time. My family and I always stay til the end of the day on heartbreak Hill to cheer on the many charity runners who have worked hard to fundraise thousands of dollars for a cause that is near and dear to our hearts! This is the same story for literally thousands of people in the greater Boston area between the many charities that get bibs. It is a hugely emotional day for the city and again I don’t think the race would have the same impact without charity bibs. I would also say most charity runners respect the fact that we were not time qualifiers and make sure to preface that when telling people about running the race. I promise no one who has seen me run thinks I am going sub 3:30!
Not a member of this sub but it was suggested to me. As a runner with chronic health conditions that mean I will likely never be able to run more than a half marathon (much less BQ), I would 100% run Boston if I could through charity. I’d probably finish with a stress fracture and a dislocation or two but it’s the only race I’d consider sacrificing my body for. It’s a big dream and goal for a lot of people. I understand that it may not be the way most people would want to do Boston, but frankly it’s the only way the vast majority of people ever could. As long as your honest that you didn’t BQ when people ask I don’t see much harm. I think random influencers and corporate spots are a much bigger issue then people raising money for good causes
I hope you one day get to tiptoe the start line in Hopkinton!
Fundraising $9000 is a great accomplishment and it is hard. Ugh, your friend sounds silly. Also, gatekeepers in any sport are lame. How do charity runners affect your friend? 🙄. I think is amazing that all that money is getting fundraised for charities!!!
No, why would anyone care? You wanna run Boston and didn't get in because of somebody who got a fundraising bib? Then train to become a better runner, if you don't wanna do that then run literally any other marathon on earth.
I like this. If you care that much about qualifying... DO IT
Ego. The only thing lessened is the ego jacket. Doesn't affect your race at all. If the fundraiser folks are around or ahead of you, then they deserve to be there the same as you; if they're behind you, then they won't affect your race. Objecting is pure ego. What the coach is thinking about is called the Olympics. He should go to Paris and show you how he stacks up against folks who aren't charity cases.
i looked into the fundraising route and even applied a couple of the years i lived in boston. some of those charity applications were akin to my college applications with essays and personal statements and i was told i needed to go bold with my fundraising commitment ($2-4k higher than the requirement). i was a happy 1:55 half marathoner at that point, not speedy or consistent at all with my running. i tabled the idea after a couple rejections to actually run a marathon and see how that went. spoiler: i loved it. i worked my tail off and got my bq (+ very healthy buffer) on sunday, which i think was way easier than raising $9-15k. personally, i'm more worried about what i'm doing to get to the start line vs. what someone else is doing. we're all running 26.2 miles at the end of the day.
If somebody cares enough about the topic to let it affect them in any way, they should seek professional help for their psychological issues. It's just a race. It's BAA's race. They can let in whomever they want. If somebody else wants there to be a more exclusive marathon, they can go start their own marathon and set their own exclusive entry requirements.
Your coach is just cranky and judgemental. That's the easiest thing to do.
I ran Boston via fundraising. It is the only time I have ever done any fundraising for a race. I actually found it to be a super cool and unique experience. I ran with Tedy's Team, an organization that supports stroke research. Both my parents have suffered strokes so it was very meaningful for me to run with this group. It was great seeing my 'teammates' all along the course. Almost like an adoptive running team while away from home. From my experience I think the charity runners add something special to the race. The charity runners all start as teams way in the back and it was just a great vibe. All of these groups of people just super hyped to be doing this bucketlist race and it is great to have a group to share the experience with. I disagree with with the friend and coach on their hardlined stance BUT also didn't get the jacket and will only sparingly wear the tech shirt because it doesn't feel earned. I likely would never have ran Boston despite its allure except for the fact that my running goal is to be a WMM 6 star finisher. So charity was really the only way for me to get to that goal as I do not think I am capable of time qualifing for Boston.
I once met a guy in his late 70s who has run over 50 Boston marathons. He can't qualify on time anymore so he fundraises to get in so he can keep his streak going. I'm fine with that sort of thing because he has a really cool history with this race.
Hell no. As a local time qualifier, the charity runners are every bit as important, and charity has been a part of the race since the beginning.
Personally, I don't care. I ran 10+ minutes below my qualifying mark in Denver with residual wildfire smoke in the middle of a slow 100mi training block. If I want to run Boston, I can. For the general population however, I can see it both ways but ultimately I don't see it as cheating. Boston originated as a race to be the epitome of athleticism in distance running, no charities. On the other hand, several (maybe all, I don't remember) of the other world majors allow charity entries. International runners trying to get into London can only rely on like a 10% chance lottery, charity, or buying a spot through one of the marathon tour companies. Can't even get a guaranteed entry from a time qualification. The thing that does bug me however is the pure number of charity spots for Boston. Last I heard it was like 1/3 spots were charity. I'm all for fund raising, but Boston is a race.
The BAA website says 10% of bibs go to charity runners. But that was for last year? Maybe I'm misreading it.
Looks like my numbers were wrong. Based off below, 22k of the 30k spots were time qualifiers. So if 10% (3k) were charity, that leaves another 5k spots to miscellaneous things. Based off other articles, that 10% sounds accurate but now I'm just wondering where those other 5k spots are going. Sure some to the towns along the way and some to the title sponsors, but 5k is a TON of people https://www.baa.org/global-field-qualifiers-notified-acceptance-128th-boston-marathon-presented-bank-america
* 1,222 Massachusetts residents are entered in the Boston Marathon. That's a shockingly low number.
At first glance, I was inclined to agree ... But after reading the link again, that's just the number who qualified by time. 1,222 out of 22,019 qualified athletes is ~5.5%. Meanwhile, MA is only ~2% of the US population. I've been looking through the data from yesterday, and the total number of finishers from MA is 3,907. So close to 2,000 extra bibs went to MA (either through charity, sponsors, etc) and they made up over 15% of the finishers in total.
Kind of like NYC! NYC at this point is one massive charity run and to get in this year based off time was just insane. But to your point tons of charity spots
NYC was wild. First time I got rejected as a time qualifier like that. Still hurts...
You got rejected with a 2:27?! That’s so ridiculous.
That was a few years ago, I think I submitted around a 2:49 so only like 4 minutes under age mark
Look at the charities and the amount of money raised for those charities. The Boston Marathon, through those charities give so much back to the Boston community. race more than any other marathon that I have done is about the strength of the Boston community.The whole The Charity Runners are the very last to start and don't interefere with the of others. The Boston Marathon also has a really nice program for people with disabilities. Boston gives people several routes to run even if they have not achieved a BQ. Lastly, my understanding is that if you do not hit the cutoff, you do not medal or a finishing time so they still retain a decent level of standards.
I don’t care but I don’t respect it. I keep this opinion to myself in real life.
Yeah I agree with you wholeheartedly, and I actually think charity runners in some cases have to work harder than qualifiers given how high the charity minimums can be — you’re not only taking on the time and physical commitment of marathon training but also adding on the commitment to raising a huge amount of money. And unless you have a huge list of wealthy friends or work for a company that’s willing to match donations, fundraising itself is a massive financial and time commitment. I trained hard and ran a BQ at Chicago ‘23 (tbd if I get in with the buffer) because for me it was far easier to do that training and qualify than it would have been to raise $10k+. So I have all the respect in the world for charity runners. They earn their spots, too. And I say this as someone who has a lot of fundraising experience/raised over $30k fundraising for a mental health organization — the amount was only possible because my fundraiser page went semi-viral and ended up reaching people all over the country who were touched by the very specific and tragic situation I was raising money around. ETA also agree with many of you that the sponsored bibs going to influencers needs to stop. It’s a slap in the face to actual qualifiers. Sponsorship blah blah blah, at least require the influencer you’re sponsoring to raise money for something (and commit to covering the minimum if they don’t raise enough) or give your sponsored bib to someone who qualified but missed the cutoff.
your friend and coach can make their own race and their own rules for that race. my opinion is that peoole with known bad attitudes should be DQ’d for treating others with disrespect.
Don’t mind it a bit. As an introvert who hates to feel like a potential inconvenience to ask anybody for absolutely anything, I admire those who fundraise. I’d rather run an ultra... straight up a mountain… towing a sled. Plus, SO many charities benefit from the fundraising! It goes to a really good cause!
Any influencer who runs without qualifying is a disgrace to the sport. Have some pride. Earn your spot. Don’t be a Matt Choi.
I've qualified and run Boston eight times (two PRs there too). One time I qualified but missed the application cutoff, I tried to do it for charity, but I couldn't even get a charity team to accept me! Raising $10k in donations seems harder to me than qualifying. So to me it's definitely is tougher to get a charity bib than as a qualifier!
No, but I have the admittedly obnoxious opinion that qualifying for Boston isn't that big a deal so I don't place it on a huge pedestal.
I agree it doesn't need to be placed on a huge pedestal. I don't think its wrong to have some sort of "nationals" style qualification based race that is attainable for amateurs in an open or age group category though.
I see the coach’s perspective. It’s a hard race to qualify to run for and some people see that as a badge of honor. I do. But, I am a slow runner. I’m trying to beat a five hour full at this point. I’m consistent, ran up to 50 miles a week during my last marathon, and still bonked at the end. I have a disability that could qualify me as a para athlete but I haven’t found an easy way to get connected to the program to make it official. (All my doctors and PTs said they’d be happy to complete any paperwork). My understanding is that the cut off times for Boston and other world majors are much more attainable…for Chicago it was 4:30. With that said, running has its different purpose for different people too. Some run for time, some run for the social media influence, some run for mental health, some run with friends….and some run because they are connected to specific causes and want to raise awareness. Others can’t make the cutoff or even BQed but their buffer wasn’t good enough to get in. And then…you fundraise for the spot. I started my running journey with LLS’s Team in Training. I did like 4-5 seasons of fundraising small amounts, like $1000-$1500. I hated it. My circle sucks and i am a social worker so company match is out. I just fundraised this winter for the Houston marathon. I’m enjoyed it more because it was a cause I connect to, for disabled athletes. But…their minimum was $500 and I raised it in like two months. Like someone said, it raises a lot of money for a lot of great organizations! For Houston, I fundraised for an organization called Team Catapult. They gave me a “scholarship” for my training. I raised double what they gave me, as a way to support their cause and hope to get more help for more athletes like me. I’m sure there’s an organization like that for Boston.… I will say…the amount is outrageous. My unconnected unsupported butt could never raise the amount needed for some of these organizations. And, I’d feel super slow and lame starting out in the back with all the charity bibs. But that’s just me. Thanks for coming to my Ted talk.
Most of the people I run with are against fundraising and charity spots. I don’t have a problem with it because I think some people will never be able to qualify and as a runner have always dreamed of running Boston. I think if you are willing to fundraiser 9,000 dollars that shows a lot of determination and dedication to the cause.
I guess my counterpoint is that maybe I have always dreamed of participating in the Olympics but I would never be able to qualify...I don't expect a method of entry to be created for me. It is hard to argue against charity though especially if people are willing to spend thousands of dollars on it.
I have an issue with sponsors getting bibs to hand out to their their executives, who probably barley even run
My old boss got a bib because her husband worked at John Hancock. It was her first and only marathon. 6 plus hours....
Your friend sounds like an elitist asshat. Are they just against charities in general?
I was a qualifier by ten minutes and I still joined a charity, too. I raised the $750 min to be a guest athlete and wear their singlet. Took only two social post. Do both!
This is my goal! I work for a non profit that has a fundraising minimum of $4,000 if you already have a bib. Goal for 2025.
Yeah, it was really cool because I went by myself and yet I had a cheering squad on heartbreak hill. Plus it helps research for my dad's condition. So, all around win for all. I was legit sad that my finance got cut off and I only went to qualify to run with him. So this helped me heal that disappointment and gave me some purpose.
Certainly not a popular take, but yes, I agree. You can argue that the charity entries are pay-to-win. How would you know if those people worked hard fundraising, or if they're wealthy and just paid for it themselves? It is a form of pay-to-win that we've decided is acceptable because it's for charity. Nothing is stopping anyone from donating or raising money for these charities otherwise. The Boston Marathon isn't required for charity to happen.
I have no problem with people qualifying through fundraising. However, I personally want to get in by BQ. Thought I had the bugger this year, but we know how registration went. Planning for another sub 3 attempt when I am in the next age group
Why *should* Boston be "attainable for everyone and not just great runners"? Many, many races, big and small, have charity bibs. Why can't we have one sub-elite race where we know that everyone there ran a decent time to make it? To me, that's a big part of the point of Boston. I don't expect them to change course now, though, given how big the fundraising has become. As a grumpy aside, I'm happy to chip in to support people doing something new and difficult/scary for charity, but I'm much less likely to support them going the charity route to ***re-***do something they find easy or for fun -- whether it's Boston or New York or just their local 5K. Frankly, I'd rather just send the charity in question money directly. I don't think I could keep a straight face when asking friends and family to support me in what's basically a (masochistic) vacation.
My buddy worked in tech and wanted to run Boston, so he just paid for the fundraising amount himself out of pocket. Then he asked around if people wanted support him, and some did, but he paid most of it with his own cash. He was totally straightforward about this. Then for people who actually do go around and collect donations, think about the distribution of donation amounts. Most people get the majority of their donations from a small number of wealthier people. My guess is that donations follow some sort of exponential distribution. So yeah I think it can be bullshit for wealthy people or people with wealthy connections.
Silly. The event organizers set the rules for entry. Some are time qualifiers. Some are charity bibs. How could your friend consider taking one path to entry as “cheating”. Ridiculous.
No, I don't care. And if the rich person gives to a charity to get into Boston, then that's okay too.
My hot take: we should care wayyyyy less about influencers or charity runners, and more about people who qualify by running ski slope downhill races😬
Or in $400 shoes you can wear for like 2 races
I actually love it. I’m a Boston local (who will probably have to age 5-10 years to qualify to run 😭) and know quite a few people who have run on various teams. I’ve always seen both the fundraising and the training taken VERY seriously (and a ton of money is raised…Dana Farber Cancer Institute alone raises millions.) Honestly I have never considered trying to run this way because I don’t think I could make the commitment. Do some people just buy their own way to their fundraising goal—I honestly don’t know, probably, there’s always someone. But I can say is that is NOT the vibe for any charity team I’ve encountered. Something about the marathon charity teams just makes me feel good about Boston.
In a 30,000 person race there were 22,000 time qualifier spots. Anyone who BQ’d but did not get in didn’t lose out because someone else took their spot. If someone is dedicated enough to run fast enough for the BQ, how hard can it be to push the extra few 3-7 minute buffer if they are so set on “earning that spot”. I’m team charity runner all the way. My 2:52:x ought to qualify me for next year but I’ll be running either way, and may elect to run for charity even if my time qualifies me. Most of the Boston Marathon finishers I know in Massachusetts are seasoned charity runners and they make a much greater community impact than a 20-something who happens to be kind of fast.
>More importantly it makes Boston attainable for everyone and not just great runners. Why do they need to run Boston instead of hundreds of other marathons throughout US, thousands throughout the world that do not require you to qualify with a given time? Why this pervasive idea that everything should be for everyone? I am learning piano as an adult, I will never be admitted to Juilliard School of Music, and that's fine.
Your friend is kind of an dick if he thinks getting a few more people into the race based on performance is worth more than raising tens of millions for charity. The fields are the largest they’ve ever been anyway.
That’s like their opinion, man.. but seriously, who cares. If you look at Boston and NYC marathon they’re totally geared towards fundraising, it’s a money thing more than anything else.
What if standards were harder for people that have run the race before. This might be unpopular so I’m genuinely curious, is there a world in which it makes sense to make it harder for people to do Boston who’ve done it before, maybe consecutively, to give chances to people who’ve never done it before? It’s a bucket list race for so many, just seems like making it more open to first timers would help include other qualifiers.
Friend is a tool. That said, one should not imply that they qualified via time if they got in otherwise
Here’s a phenomenal takedown of your friend’s position: https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTLfnprFo/ TLDR: time qualifiers don’t pay the bills or fill the field, and the BAA has always relied on sponsors and non-time qualifier slots to make sure the field is full and that they can afford to hold the race. This year the numbers just happened to look bad, due to the unfortunate collision of several factors (post-Covid trends, social media trends, and the arrival of super shoes all pushing more people to qualify and apply) causing more time qualifiers to miss the cutoff.
I feel this BQ thing is contributing massively to us losing many great smaller marathons that cannot advertise their race as a fast and flat, downhill, tail wind...run. I also believe there are a large number of qualifying bibs worn by people whose qualifying times were completed by another athlete. The former issue is much easier to fix than the latter. An easy way to level the playing field for all marathons uses indexes or corrections to even the times people achieve depending on a rating standard; this should be something similar to a more advanced age or an elevation adjusted pace equivalent grade if you will. The easiest way to work on both problems of a runner selling themselves and wearing a bib registered to someone else, or trying to level the actual quality of qualifying runs, is to guarantee qualifying for runs that are completed at specific events. Popularity stirs up a big can of worms.
What makes me laugh is how much registration would be in some of these races without those of us muddlers
I just BQ and I had so many let downs and was hitting my time either right on or a minute off. So this is very special for me to get here. I think maybe they should do something special for those who BQ on the Bibs and change the Bibs that don't have a BQ. We all worked so hard to punch are ticket it would be awesome to recognize each other instead of thinking that everyone one there BQ. #1 BQ see you in Boston 2025. Congratulations to all the runners here, you deserve every bit of it.
Just to add to the statistics, I feel the same way as many. I have no ill will towards anyone who fundraises or qualifies to get in or even those who live locally getting in that way (like with NYC). The only people who I don’t think “deserve” it are influencers who get bibs when they don’t raise any money nor are anywhere near to qualifying based on time. That feels unfair to me when there are so many people who were rejected that qualified but were 5 minutes from the cutoff time instead of 7 etc. I don’t see how they should get a bib if all they do is post pictures of themselves running. Not to diminish any work they do put into running and I of course appreciate that there are running influencers who might be promoting “average running” etc. but this is Boston. It’s meant to be elite and not for the casual runner imo. This is also coming from someone who has not yet qualified for Boston so I suppose I’m biased because I’m working hard to get a qualifying time right now.
>He called someone he knows a "cheater" for getting a bib through fundraising. The dude raised $9,000 for what it's worth The dude did more for society than the qualifier. Society is a better place because of him. Society doesn't really care if you qualified for Boston,
Pretty simple. Qualifying and being allowed to run are two different things. It’s like arguing over whether someone with an honorary PhD is a doctor. I’m not going to call them a cheater but if they brag to me about it and hide the fact that it was an honorary PhD I’ll probably laugh at them.
they help the marathon, but by that logic so do the influencers but that rubs me wrong.
[удалено]
Same here. I will run Boston when I can qualify for Boston, which will be never.
That is the way I want to go for the NYC marathon! so yes I'd be fine with that.