In this year’s New York City marathon the prize money for the women is $30k more than the men. The men will get $100k while the women receive $130k.
I’m all for equal prize money, but this seems a little strange…$30k more for going 10-15 minutes slower??
Why would they do this?
Are they giving more money to each place holder or are they going deeper into the women’s field? My thinking is if the prize money is going deeper, it is to attract a larger field.
Dunno, just a thought.
Brett
It’s simple. Equal pay for equal work. Since the women run longer (time-wise) they get paid more. If you divide the mens prize money by the mens winning time and the womens prize money by the womens winning time, it should come about the same amount per hour.
They are giving more money to each placeholder:
1st man=100k, 1st woman=130k
2nd man=45k, 2nd woman=65k
3rd man=30k, 3rd woman=40k
.
Is it to attract bigger names to the women’s field? New York doesn’t have the kind of money and a fast enough course to attract the big men’s names like Tergat, Gebresellasie, Kanoucci etc. as they all go to Chicago or London, so maybe they are trying to bring in some of the top women. I doubt London has equal purses for men and women, and if they do they are paying out some huge appearance fees for their top tier men.
Yup. ;^)
The obvious answer to me is that more recognizable elite women run NYC than men. Catherine, Deena, Paula, Marla. Can you name 4 men that are household names that have run NYC in the last 5 years?
This will stir up the bee hive but I will say it, I am all for EOE and title nine to a certain degree but there is a point where things get out of balance because of it. I am willing to bet that there are more women making triathlon a lively hood than men. Why, not as many competing so when a tri pay’s out equally the chance for a women to get money is easier. A race I did-30 pro men, 8 pro women, payed out top ten. So as a woman if you finished you got money, I say pay the same percentage deep (minimum 3 deep though M/F), 1/3 or the the men so 1/3 of the women, men 10 deep pay women 3 deep, pay the places equal, it isn’t equal prize purse but you paid based up on your competition which is what matters. IMO it is easier for women to get sponsorship as well why this is because of society, sex sells, can’t argue with it, but that is another topic.
Another example two friends, gal finishes 7th-9min back from the leader, guy finished 17th 9min back of leader, she got money he didn’t, exact same thing the next year at the same race, you can look at any race and see this. The competition is tougher in mens IMO because there are more men in the field in the majority (I’d say 99%) of races. You want to make things equal then lets make them equal. Thats my take, like it or not.
You’re probably right that your approach is more fair, but isn’t it up to the race organizers to decide how to dole out money? If they have a bigger purse, then they’ll attract more racers. Perhaps they are thinking about 5 years down the road and they’re trying to develop the women’s field. Who knows, but I believe it’s still up to the ones who are running the race to decide.
Dawn
I say pay the same percentage deep… pay the places equal.
This is the way the XTERRA championship races do it.
This is pretty much bullshit. I am boycotting this race. If this was the other way around, believe me, some women’s group would be lodging a protest.