Loose Ends of the Boston Marathon

The 115th running of the Boston Marathon is on Monday. For some folk, it’s a day off to enjoy watching what is to many the premier Boston sporting event. For others, it’s a good time to catch a mid-day game at Fenway. For me, it’s simply “Monday”.

I’ll admit it, I’ve never found anything much interesting about the Marathon. Unless you’re running in it or know someone who is, what’s the point in watching?

I realize I’m probably in the minority so, in preparation for the big day, here’s some stuff about the Marathon you may never have heard about.

• The Greater Boston Convention & Visitor Bureau sent out a press release yesterday, saying that there would be an estimated $132.2 million in “spending impact” from the event. This includes:
  • Total spending by 26,923 runners and their guests, including spending at the John Hancock Sports & Fitness Expo:  $91.1 million
  • Total spending by the Boston Athletic Association (BAA):  $6 million
  • Total spending by spectators: $10 million
  • Charity Fundraising events by marathon runners:  $15 million
  • Total sponsors & media Marathon-related spending: $10 million

Groups who put out these types of press releases often use wildly-inflated figures to impress the public and to offset any criticism, like the inconvenience of having 500,000 spectators clogging up the streets for 26.2 miles.

The $91.1 million probably includes hotel rooms booked by out-of-town runners and their fans plus an amount estimated to be spent on food and liquor by them during their multi-day stay. Hard to complain about that; this brings real benefits to Boston. Restaurants need waiters, hotels need chambermaids. We collect occupancy, meals and sales taxes on all that spending.

But, it’s a bit sketchy to include the money raised by charity runners in the “impact” total. I also have to take issue with the vistor bureau including “sponsors & media” spending in the total; it’s not as if anyone really benefits from this.

• Last October, many marathoners were disappointed when they were “frozen-out” from running this year. The BAA released 20,000 numbers on a “first-come, first-served” basis but the event “sold out” within eight hours, three minutes. Even though the BAA has tightened qualifying times over the years, in order to make the race more appealing to professional marathoners, there are still thousands of people who wanted to run but who cannot.

• Although it’s different now, the Boston Marathon has not always been known for its inclusiveness. Women were officially banned until 1972. Five years earlier, Kathrine Switzer, registered as "K. V. Switzer” in order to hide her gender, was the first woman to cross the finish line, despite an attempt by a marathon official to rip off her number, mid-race.

• While we consider Kenyans and Ethiopians to be the “ones to beat” these days, in the past, other nationalities ruled.
  
  • In 1897, the inaugural year of the Boston Marathon, a New Yorker finished first, but much was made of the entrance by Spiridon Louis, a Greek man who came in 5th. Louis had won the first modern-day Olympics marathon, the year before, even though he stopped during the race for a glass of wine. (His grandson says it was actually cognac.) In the second year, a foreigner won, from Nova Scotia.
  • Later, the Korean men were unbeatable, taking first, second and third places in the 1950 marathon (out of 131 entrants). But, in 1951, Koreans (and Korean-Americans) were forbidden to run the Boston Marathon.
  • Walter Brown, president of the BAA, said, "While American soldiers are fighting and dying in Korea, every Korean should be fighting to protect his country instead of training for marathons. As long as the war continues there, we positively will not accept Korean entries …”

Now, of course, there’s none of that.

This year, I’ll be out of town, again, but perhaps you’ll be watching, maybe hoping that something interesting will happen. If so, enjoy!

Here’s one Back Bay resident who will probably not be out enjoying the crowd, either.