jtrb23 wrote:
My plan for Rupp wrote:From a money standpoint, you might be right. Part of the issue is that Nike sponsors Chicago, while adidas sponsors Boston and NB sponsors New York. I still expect the NYRR would give him a big appearance fee.
From a sport standpoint, running NY in 2018 would be the better for the sport than repeating Chicago and would likely be against better competition than Chicago. Of the the 3 American World Marathon Majors, Chicago is usually #3 in depth. It's the fastest course, but without pacers you see winning times like yesterday at 2:09 so it doesn't have the appeal of fast times any more. And running in Berlin in 2018 with pacers and what will likely be the fastest runners in the world would likely get him a better time than Chicago.
Running NYC in 2018 wouldn't be any better for the sport. The general public doesn't think there's any difference between the two - both are just marathons in big cities that are usually won by Africans. Unless you're a running junkie you don't know the difference between the competition, and Chicago's field this year was/is better than New York's anyways. Both races are on national TV on Sunday mornings during football season, so media coverage is roughly the same. Rupp running either one over the other is going to change nothing for the status of distance running in the US. Not many people have successfully defended a major marathon title recently; I think it's an attractive option.
New York has an INTERNATIONAL audience on a pretty amazing course. Chicago is a flat snoozefest with what, 300 spectators, total? GTFO.
New York & Boston are everything-- and New York is better / harder, with a larger audience in (for better or worse) the media capital etc.
Chicago has OK pizza and hotdogs, its marathon is garbage.