Since we knew people would probably ask...
Q: What about the difference in field sizes? The Men’s & Women’s open divisions have more competitors, so don’t they deserve more prize money?
A: While it’s true that field sizes vary greatly between Para and non-disabled categories, let’s look at this closer. The B.A.A. has already determined that men and women deserve equal prize money despite there being a large difference in field sizes between the two (The 2022 Boston Marathon saw 16,425 male entrants and 12,155 female entrants, a difference of 4,270 athletes).
If it’s already established that male and female champions deserve equal prize money, even with differing field sizes, then why isn’t this same logic and respect applied to athletes in other categories? We (rightly) don’t use field size to argue that women deserve lesser prize money. So any claims that prize money should differ for athletes with disabilities based on field size should be discounted based on that grounding. It’s a double standard.
Q: What about the overall public interest and revenue generated by the Men’s and Women’s open divisions compared to the other categories?
A: The B.A.A. already compensates high-profile and elite athletes in this manner through the use of appearance fees. Athletes who bring significant media attention and revenue to the race are compensated as the B.A.A. sees fit for showing up and racing, whether they win or not.
However, prize money should not be based on these same factors. Prize money is intended to be a reward for an athlete’s race execution on that given day. It’s not about how well known someone is, whether or not they’re sponsored, or how many social media followers they have. Prize money is about performance.