Chicago vs New York

Before we get to the good stuff, I thought I would take a minute to compare Chicago Marathon to the New York City Marathon, both of which I have now done.

While my Chicago marathon was 4 minutes faster than New York (and should have been a LOT more), the New York experience (race wise) was much better.  It was cold and my family was there all along the course.  Both marathons were set in a city I had never been before and I have always dreamed of what New York City was like.  I never really thought of Chicago like that.

The courses:  New York has its challenges with the bridges, 2 of which can suck the life out of you if you arent prepared for them.  I was.  The Verranzano I barely blinked (its in the first 1.5 miles of the race and adrenaline makes you forget what you are doing at the time.  The Queensboro at mile 15-16 is a bitch.  And all the bridges are very lonely.  The Queensboro (among a couple of others) have to have carpet laid on it due to the grating.  There were a couple like this in Chicago as well, but the bridges in Chicago are like a speedbump at best.  Would still call it 'flat' as they tout.

New York does have a lot of spectators, but let me tell you what....Chicago spectators are the foshizzle!  It was indeed incredible.  For every step of those 26.2 miles there was not ONE place along that route that was not covered with screaming people.  In New York there were 'sections', mostly in Manhattan where the sound was that loud.  I still get chill bumps thinking about portions of Chicago and the loudness of all of them.  There were obviously sections that were WAY louder than others.  I have my favorites and one being at around mile 21-22 through Chinatown and the parade-like dragons where you turn right.  It was almost so loud you wanted to put your hands over your ears.  But by that point I needed my arms and hands right where they were...trying to propel myself forward step by step.

I wish I could remember all the incredibly cute signs, my favorite being:  RUN BITCH!   That made me laugh out loud.

New York is definitely more hilly, and also, at least to me, Central Park which everyone talks about...well I didnt think it was such a big deal.  By that time I knew I was going to get my goal time and I was on cloud nine.   Chicago is flat, sans the couple of speedbumps I mentioned and then the last 400m right before you turn to head for the finish you have to run up this damn ramp/overpass (not sure what you would call it).  You pass through the 800m mark and there is a huge screen (just like NYC as you get to Columbus Circle) and you see it to your right...and its obvious that its uphill as you can see people running UP.  By the time I got there, even though I was dying I ran that bitch like I was Deena Kastor.  Once you hit the top, you turn left and you can see the Finish line about 100m away.

The other thing about Chicago is that for the first half of the course you are pretty much in shade, some because its early but also because of the buildings and the neighborhoods.  Then its touch and go on the shade and since it was full sun this past Sunday, you sure needed it.  I ended up with some tan lines and a sunburn (mostly the face was the burned part).  In New York its a concrete jungle from start to finish, and no quaint little neighborhoods with people and their water hoses for you to run under.  Of course I didnt need those when I did New York, but Chicago had more of a 'homey' feel to it.

Also when you finish Chicago, you walk about 1/2 mile and you are right back where you started and you go to your hotel.  In NYC, you have to walk over 1.5 miles to get OUT of Central Park and then to get to your hotel is whole other animal.

The start?  Well...we walked 2 blocks to the Start at 6:15 and got right in front of the open corral with absolutely no issues whatsoever.  In NYC you catch a bus, and/or a ferry at 5:30am and you start your race HOURS later (for me it was 3 hours later).  Sitting out under a bridge...waiting...waiting...

So while NYC was a better race experience (time wise only), Chicago wins in my eyes.  It was easy, well run, and due to the conditions the race directors did a FINE job!  There were misters put up, baby wading pools of ice cold water and sponges out the yazoo.  The only bad part about that was having to run over a road made of sponges that were tossed once every single cold drop of water was squeezed out of it.  The water stop volunteers were generous (sometimes too much) with cups of ice water thrown over you...note to some:  you might want to tell someone you are about to throw water in their face :/ before you do it...just sayin'.

Both cities have amazing public transportation and easy to manuever.  Chicago is much more 'compact' therefore less miles to cover in sightseeing which I did all by foot on Monday (logging about 7 miles walked the day after the marathon; go me!)  I just never took the subway anywhere, relying solely on my phone app and that annoying womans voice telling me 'turn left at _____'..she only steered me wrong once, taking me around the same block once before she figured that shit out :)

Now I am completely serious when I say I am DONE with Fall marathons...BUT, if I had to choose one of these to do over again?

Chicago all the way baby...Chicago.

Before the race on our way to the Open Corral...More to follow...still in the process of 'borrowing' photos from the site :)
Most are not good, and I blame the MASSIVE amounts of fluids I took in for the spare tire around my middle section...at least my after i finished picture isnt bad!

 

 Done.  And D.O.N.E.