Full of 'It'... ?

In lieu of the Boston Marathon Massacre which recently affected so many runners, those of us interested in this historical race have had to wrestle with our own ideas of what this race means.  How can the organizers best accommodate people fairly?  What should the qualifying standards be?  Perhaps most controversial... where do the charity organizations fit into the equation?

Johnny Kelly (Boston Legend)



With the motivation to understand the overall picture of how the field is assembled and how "non-qualifiers" reach the line I came across an article from the 2010 Boston Marathon which addresses the statistics and the process for the selection of charities given contracts to participate in the race.  Take 3-5 minutes to look this article over... you may come away with a slightly different perspective after learning more about the actual facts of the matter.

I know that I have long relied on the knowledge and opinions of runner friends.  While we all mean well, it is usually best to go to the source and hear what the organizers have to say for themselves. This is a world class event with demands in all directions.  It seems they do so well within restrictions to make this a positive event, resulting in the massive draw of enthusiastic people. And let's not forget the commitment of time and energy to raising money WHILE training for the event itself, along with the demands of life, work and family...  

I am left wondering still... what will they do.  It seems something has to be done... doesn't it?  Not sure, except for public opinion's sake.  For that reason I wonder about standards themselves and what the science has to say about adjustment for various age and gender which may or may not be appropriate.  Seems there must be a more level playing field out there...  Does anyone have any information to share on this topic?