IMHO, the dept of major marathons like Boston just below the top has decreased
due to many reasons. Some that come to mind are:
1 - The previously mentioned change of Culture/Lifestyle/Interest
in running at the grass roots has decreased the numbers, decreasing potential
numbers at the elite level.
2 - With the advent of prize money, many 2:15 to 2:25 types run in lower
profile races where they have a better chance of winning. Prior to the mid 80's
prize money was scarce to non-existant, and people competed for the
competition first.
3 - The second running boom is more geared towards participation than competition.
During the first running boom, more was better. Today less is better (According
to magazines like RW, and programs like those of Galloway).
Heck all over the country runners in their 40's (Late blooming first running
boom runners) are scoring very high in many races.
I am sure there are lots of other reasons.
....Harry
Tom Derderian wrote:
Boston 1981, Winning times were similar, But back in 50th place Matsuo of
Japan went 2:18:45. The last sub 2:20 was Gerry Deegan of Ireland in 64th.
The last sub 2:20 this year was Mark Coogan in 19th place. But in 1981 I
considered myself in bad shape and only participated in the race with a
2:26:46 in 191st place too far back among Americas to count or even score on
the Greater Boston team. That time in 2001 would have been about what Danny
Reed ran for 35th place overall and 7th American.
Those are the numbers. That difference IS cultural. The interesting
question is why.
...Harry Welten,
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ESN 395-4943 / 613-765-4943.
