This is an L.A. Marathon?
After signing up for the 2010 L.A. Marathon early this morning and studying the course map -- which was unveiled today -- I remembered a piece on the 2007 race by then-Times Deputy Editorial Page Editor Michael Newman, my boss at the time. After finishing the marathon, Newman panned race organizers for ignoring L.A.'s best asset (the ocean) in routing runners from Universal City through Koreatown, Boyle Heights and other inland neighborhoods on their way to downtown L.A. Newman garnered his share of provincial scorn for declaring, based on his race experience, that "much of L.A. isn't very pretty."
I thoroughly agreed with Newman at the time -- that much of L.A. is ugly -- and I still do. But having actually signed up for the 2010 L.A. Marathon, my thoughts on the "stadium to the sea" route are mixed; perhaps bipolar would be a better way to put it. As a first-time marathoner, I look forward to the beach finish providing a major psychological boost to those of us pounding our feet on pavement for 26.2 miles. But putting on my lifelong Southern Californian hat -- which comes with a deep "warts and all" affection for Los Angeles -- the new route strikes me as ... just not right.
Despite its Hollywood-inspired reputation, Los Angeles has always struck me as a city unafraid to put its gritty face forward. Past marathon routes -- which started and ended in downtown L.A. -- reflected this attitude. Sure, runners would bisect tonier neighborhoods such as Hancock Park and Larchmont Village. But this is L.A., a city whose wealthy enclaves are often adjacent to or surrounded by working-class neighborhoods. Running in Hancock Park and Larchmont Village practically requires passing through Koreatown or the yet-to-be gentrified areas of Hollywood.
Looking at the route closely, and how magnetically it seems to abut the Hollywood Hills and Santa Monica Mountains for much of the race, it's hard not to come away with the impression that race organizers deliberately avoided areas some may not consider "nice" (Rodeo Drive -- really?). You can call this the Los Angeles Marathon if you want, and come race day, I'll gladly run. But I won't be surprised if, for much of the race, some Southern Californians viewing the event from home on March 21 wonder what marathon they're watching.
-- Paul Thornton
Photo: The start line at the 24th annual Los Angeles Marathon on May 25, 2009. Credit: Liz O. Baylen / Los Angeles Times.
Paul, marathons are run with feet, not eyes. Focus on your training and enjoy the fact that the city hosts such an event. Or go run the Pasadena Marathon in February.
Posted by: Rich N. | November 16, 2009 at 10:49 AM
"...Los Angeles has always struck me as a city unafraid to put its gritty face forward."
What LA are you from?
In my opinion, the premise of this opinion piece is inaccurate.
LA always prefers to showcase its pretty places and pretty people as opposed to its core of diversity and poverty.
The 2010 marathon route is aligned with the City of Los Angeles' business as usual.
Posted by: Meghan Hanford | November 16, 2009 at 10:13 AM
I'm from Upstate New York and I CAN'T WAIT to run this marathon. I just completed the New York marathon and I'm looking forward to the LA experience. I don't care if I'm running laps around Skid Row in downtown L.A., just give me a reason to get out of Albany in March! At the very least, credit the marathon organizers for switching the marathon from May back to March. The new course looks beautiful, and I'll be loving the downhill glide to the finish line.
Posted by: Anne-Marie | November 12, 2009 at 04:40 PM
This is the most discriminatory route I have ever seen from the organizers of the LA Marathon. It does not even come close to many of the areas that were associated with past LA Marathons. If the excuse is that there are not enough miles in the LA Marathon to go through all the areas that were included in past Marathons and go to the beach areas, then skip the beach areas or lengthen the LA Marathon.
Discrimination in sports is outrageous. Inclusion is the real story. Rethink the 2010 LA Marathon route.
Posted by: Gordon Potik | November 12, 2009 at 01:34 PM
Ungrateful bastard! Ok, I am only kidding. Look, it would have been great to have had the marathon going through the many diverse communities of L.A., but as you should remember, one big reason the course shifted is because of complaints from church leaders who didn't like how the marathon was affecting their Sunday church services. The new course will pass much fewer churches. L.A. is HUGE, and there's no way the course could cover its wide geography. I mean, it's never come close to where I grew up in NELA (correct me if I'm wrong). And what about the SF Valley or South L.A.? I'm happy it goes as far north as it does. This point-to-point race actually covers a lot of the city. Yes, while there may be ritzy places to run past this time around, believe me when I say that everyone on the East Coast thinks Hollywood and most of L.A. is dirty. (I know - I had to defend my hometown all the time when I live in NY.) I've always wanted to run the L.A. Marathon and would have loved to have run the old one. Regardless, the new route is pretty damn exciting, so I've just signed up for my first marathon. I'm looking forward to running from the Dodger Stadium (sort of close to where my parents are) all the way to Santa Monica (near where my brother is) and running past numerous places that have meaning in my Angeleno soul. I love L.A., but yeah, I might be sad if no one's passing out beer at mile 22 or whichever one it was. But my guess is that it'll be a good crowd, and we'll have fun in our pain :)
Posted by: michelle | November 11, 2009 at 07:18 PM
Sorry to hear that they have changed the course. The LA marathon was my sister's first marathon 7 years ago -- since then she has talked me into joining her for the half marathon five times. One of the reasons I agreed was due to her experience running through LA. She described the enthusiasm with which she was greeted in each of those parts of LA that makes LA what it is -- a wonderfully diverse city.
No other place where we have run has come close to that experience she had in Los Angeles.
Posted by: Anna | November 11, 2009 at 07:16 AM
I am one of the rare runners who loved the previous route. I have run 18 marathons with LA being the only one where I felt it was a city event. To have little children in their front yards, offering little dixie cups of gatorade, was very uplifting. Seeing the beautiful houses in Hancock Park having fancy "marathon parties" in their front yards with white linen table cloths and champagne glasses was hilarious. All of the neighborhoods that we went through were proud of LA and wanted desperately to show off their hospitality. What kind of message do we show them by avoiding them like the plague? The view of downtown coming over the historic bridge at mile 22ish will always be one of the most beautiful sights I have ever seen. I loved that I could take the metro from Pasadena to the start and home! Finally, has anyone thought about the traffic at the finish? It would probably take me as long to get home from Santa Monica as it would to run the race and I am not fast! They have lost me as an annual runner but I don't imagine they really care.
Posted by: Tamera Brown | November 11, 2009 at 06:06 AM
This marathon is without a doubt the most discriminatory marathon that I have seen in the "City of Angels". Rather than going through the proud neighborhoods it appears like L. A. is soliciting for tourist. The route chosen is terrible. Come on Marathon Board rethink this route to be a tour through all the life styles of Los Angeles.
Besides, what is this Marathon, it is nothing but a Soap Box Derby for runners. It is all down hill. What a disgrace for the Marathoners. LOL LOL LOL!!!
Posted by: Gordon Potik | November 10, 2009 at 04:42 PM
When the course was a loop A LOT of people were trapped on marathon day. A straight line course eases traffic and people don't have to plan ahead to get the heck out of Dodge prior to this rediculous event. Besides, I'm sick of being wakened on a Sunday morning by spectators cheering and clapping at 7am. If I had my way, the marathon would be run in the warehouse district where it wouldn't disturb people who work 60 hour weeks and would like a little peace and quite on a Sunday morning.
Posted by: Sue | November 10, 2009 at 02:52 PM
LA is a beautiful place even if some of the beauty is on the inside. That internal beauty can't be see when you're running past it doing a nine and a half minute mile. Be a tourist in your own city and check out the neighborhoods you wanted to run past with a slow pace. Take an afternoon to stop in the shops, eat at the restaurants and talk to the neighbors.
Come race time you'll be focused on your tree-lined downhill run and kept cool thanks to the ocean breeze.
Posted by: Jason | November 10, 2009 at 01:11 PM
No one is ever happy with anything. This course showcases the beauty of the city, and while it IS a gritty city too, it's also beautiful. Too much emphasis is placed on the negative here, and not enough on the positive. Focus on the positive. They'll probably change the course again next year, so enjoy it this one time.
Posted by: Sue | November 10, 2009 at 10:59 AM
I think it is a great way to show how beautiful LA can be....bravo to the marathon organizers!
Posted by: JD | November 10, 2009 at 10:16 AM
But just think of what it will do for the city. So many people will come to run this amazing course instead of running through unknown areas of not-so-nice LA. I moved here 2 years ago and I am so excited for this marathon-- because really, an ocean finish is what southern California is all about. The route really does show the best -- albeit stereotypical "best" -- of the sprawled-out city.
Posted by: Kristen | November 10, 2009 at 09:23 AM
There is nothing inspiring about the new course. What was dull about running the race this year was that with the date change, there were 1/3 fewer runners and very few spectators.
What is exciting about Santa Monica Bl? What's exciting, architecturally, about the Sunset Strip? And really, San Vicente in WLA is dull, it's just downhill.
I'm waiting to see what McCourt comes up with for parking. Are there 25,000 parking spaces to be had in Santa Moncia? If he doesn't pull off the transport back to the start line flawlessly, then two years in a row of bad marathons will wipe LA off that map.
Posted by: Carol | November 10, 2009 at 08:10 AM