Boston Marathon qualifying articles

A comfortable place for anyone and everyone to talk about running

User avatar
Doonst
Abby Hoffman
Posts: 10598
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 10:17 pm
Location: the corner of Sixth and Where Do I Go?
Contact:

Re: Boston Marathon qualifying articles

Postby Doonst » Mon Dec 20, 2010 5:20 pm

-5 minutes reduction across the board.
-shorter 12 or 13 month qualifying window, so you only get one Boston per qualifier. maybe Dec 01-Dec 01.
-some tightening of unqualified runners.
next up:


This broken wing will fly again
One fine day
This blackbird's mute gonna sing again
One fine day

So all you sinners come out
And all you drunkards crawl out
Come into the light of one fine day

User avatar
Hammie
Jerome Drayton
Posts: 6712
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2008 5:43 pm
Location: Out West

Re: Boston Marathon qualifying articles

Postby Hammie » Mon Dec 20, 2010 5:35 pm

I wonder if they might start making people run qualifying times based on their age on qualifying day, not Boston Marathon day (ie if you're 39 on your BQ day, you need to qualify as a 39 year old, even if you're 40 on race day). I would be curious to know how many people that would affect.

Otherwise, I'd expect:
5 min decrease for women <40, but not for men <40
5 min decrease for everyone >40
Lose the 59 seconds grace
12 month qualifying period
2014: the year of new awesomeness!
Rogers Insurance Run for L'Arche Half March 22 - done
Calgary Marathon Wild Rose 50k June 1 - done
Stampede Road Race 5k July 6 - done
Magrath sprint tri July 12 - done!!
Jog for the Bog 10k July 27 - done
Seawheeze Half Marathon August 23 - done
Subaru Banff Sprint Triathlon September 6 - done
Blitz Duathlon September 21 - registered
Portland Marathon October 5 - registered

User avatar
La
Kevin Sullivan
Posts: 47990
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 9:11 pm
Location: Lesleyville!

Re: Boston Marathon qualifying articles

Postby La » Mon Dec 20, 2010 6:51 pm

My votes are for:

12-month qualifying window (but grandfathering those who've already qualified for 2012).
Losing the 59 seconds
Age on qualifying race day (not BQ race day)
Reduction of 5 minutes for the 45-49AG.
"Maybe I will be my own inspiration." - UltraMonk (Laura)
"Everywhere is walking distance if you have enough time." - Steven Wright

User avatar
Tori
Jerome Drayton
Posts: 7551
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 5:28 pm
Location: Orleans, Ontario

Re: Boston Marathon qualifying articles

Postby Tori » Mon Dec 27, 2010 2:42 pm

My guess is:

-Reduction of 5 minutes across the board for males
-Reduction of 10 minutes across the board for females
-Lose the 59 seconds grace

I don't think they will go as low as the 1980's qualifying times though.

User avatar
canalrunner
Bill Crothers
Posts: 1422
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: Ottawa

Re: Boston Marathon qualifying articles

Postby canalrunner » Wed Dec 29, 2010 9:09 am

Good ideas.

My guesses/suggestions are:

-Reduction of 5 minutes for males starting at 45 year old males (3:30 becomes 3:25)
-Reduction of 10 minutes across the board for females
-Lose the 59 seconds grace (and lose the ablity to write in and explain another minute--what is this, Oprah?)
-One year qualifying period
-One BQ time gets you one BQ --likely solved by shorter qualifying period (no more fall marathon BQ gets you two Bostons)
-BQ time needed based on age when you run qualifying time
-Preference to faster BQ times regardless of age or gender (this isn't New York)
-Hybrid entry (combo BQ and charity bibs)
-Slight increase in field--slight decrease in non-qualifying entrants
-No grandfathering/mothering, no transition period: need to run a BQ in 2011 for 2012 (maybe harsh but even typing this, it seems silly that you can already be qualified for the 2012 Boston Marathon given the problem and need for change)

They need to get this done.
The longest journey begins with a single step.
2016 Races
May: Ottawa Marathon


User avatar
Jwolf
Kevin Sullivan
Posts: 37476
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 10:02 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: Boston Marathon qualifying articles

Postby Jwolf » Wed Dec 29, 2010 11:39 am

canalrunner wrote:-Lose the 59 seconds grace (and lose the ablity to write in and explain another minute--what is this, Oprah?)

To be fair, there never was any "explaining". You just simply sent in the entry. That has already been eliminated anyway, since the race filled up on-line.
Support me in my fundraising for the Boston Marathon, Boston Public Library team:
https://www.crowdrise.com/o/en/campaign ... iferwolf11

User avatar
canalrunner
Bill Crothers
Posts: 1422
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: Ottawa

Re: Boston Marathon qualifying articles

Postby canalrunner » Wed Dec 29, 2010 2:08 pm

Jwolf wrote:
canalrunner wrote:-Lose the 59 seconds grace (and lose the ablity to write in and explain another minute--what is this, Oprah?)

To be fair, there never was any "explaining". You just simply sent in the entry. That has already been eliminated anyway, since the race filled up on-line.


To be fair, it made no sense either way. :D

Whatever changes they make, it is likely that there will be more time than this year, but it will likely not return to earlier when you could run the Houston Marathon at the end of January and register.
The longest journey begins with a single step.
2016 Races
May: Ottawa Marathon


User avatar
SteveF
Bill Crothers
Posts: 1043
Joined: Sat May 23, 2009 7:46 am
Location: Ottawa

Re: Boston Marathon qualifying articles

Postby SteveF » Thu Dec 30, 2010 7:53 am

I agree about the shorter qualifying window - I had no idea that a fall BQ could work for two Bostons!
Tighten the standards for all under 40s, the 18-34 MENS should be 3:00 at the most, 35-40 closer to 3:05. Tighten the 18-34 FEMALES alot, at least to 3:20.
No extra :59s, no write ins.

alexk
Bill Crothers
Posts: 1202
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 8:33 pm

Re: Boston Marathon qualifying articles

Postby alexk » Thu Dec 30, 2010 5:07 pm

Steve, 3:20 for F 34 and under - that's fast. I don't know too many women who can run that (could count them on one hand) and I know lots of women runners (of all ages). Maybe keep M at 3:10 and change F to 3:30 (34 and under)? NYC's Q time for F 39 and under is 3:23; men is 2:55...but they also have a lottery. I think Boston has grown because its Q times, though tough, are attainable. It'd be nice if they stayed that way.
Last edited by alexk on Thu Dec 30, 2010 8:16 pm, edited 2 times in total.
We train more joyfully and productively when we focus on the now, rather than on our future race day performance. It's a long road from here to there with many miles to go. We need to run each one. Accept where you are today and simply be thankful for the work you've accomplished. KA

User avatar
Jwolf
Kevin Sullivan
Posts: 37476
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 10:02 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: Boston Marathon qualifying articles

Postby Jwolf » Thu Dec 30, 2010 5:22 pm

Those suggestions (Steve's) are decent good ones but would likely limit the field too much. The BAA has to find a balance between times that are more challenging but not so much that they shrink the field too much. And enough such that they don't have this problem again in a few years.

I really doubt that any age-group would tighten by 20 minutes.
Support me in my fundraising for the Boston Marathon, Boston Public Library team:
https://www.crowdrise.com/o/en/campaign ... iferwolf11

rambo999
Johnny Miles
Posts: 104
Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 7:19 pm

Re: Boston Marathon qualifying articles

Postby rambo999 » Thu Dec 30, 2010 7:34 pm

SteveF wrote:Tighten the standards for all under 40s, the 18-34 MENS should be 3:00 at the most, 35-40 closer to 3:05.


Are you kidding? :shock:
I think the 3:10 is a big big challenge already and you want to shorten TWO age categories faster than that?! :?

User avatar
canalrunner
Bill Crothers
Posts: 1422
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: Ottawa

Re: Boston Marathon qualifying articles

Postby canalrunner » Fri Dec 31, 2010 9:19 am

New York has those type of qualifying standards and doesn't draw that many qualifying runners. Aside from their bizarreness in allowing qualifying through a half marathon time, the NYQ times would be the extreme limit of lBQ times. To get 20,000 qualified runners at Boston, you probably want slightly easier times. You could add 5 iminutes, perhaps 10 minutes, to the times below and come out with reasonable BQ times. Definitely challenging but likely appropriate. Also note that for New York there is no 59 second gift and it is age on the day of the qualifying race.

Open (Age 18-39) Masters (Age 40+) Veterans (Age 50+) Veterans (Age 60+)

NYQ Men 2:55:00 3:10:00 3:30:00 3:45:00
Women 3:23:00 3:38:00 3:52 4:13.00

* All times must be run at, or faster than, the posted time.
** Your age on the day of the qualifying race.

They really need to get on with the decision and they should forget a transition period. There are still at least two marathons (spring and fall 2011) for people to qualify for 2012 if they set the deadlines right. No need to allow 2010 times.
The longest journey begins with a single step.
2016 Races
May: Ottawa Marathon


User avatar
mcshame
Sylvia Ruegger
Posts: 8480
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 12:05 pm
Location: St-Lazare, Quebec
Contact:

Re: Boston Marathon qualifying articles

Postby mcshame » Fri Dec 31, 2010 9:29 am

canalrunner wrote: No need to allow 2010 times.


Booo!!! Hissss!!!! I'm glad you don't run the organization there. They need to find a balance in the transition not to piss a bunch of people off. People like me training in 2010 with the goal of qualifying. to throw away that year of my life and accomplishment would not be well received.

User avatar
Jwolf
Kevin Sullivan
Posts: 37476
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 10:02 pm
Location: Vancouver

Boston Marathon qualifying articles

Postby Jwolf » Fri Dec 31, 2010 9:47 am

mcshame wrote:
canalrunner wrote: No need to allow 2010 times.


Booo!!! Hissss!!!! I'm glad you don't run the organization there. They need to find a balance in the transition not to piss a bunch of people off. People like me training in 2010 with the goal of qualifying. to throw away that year of my life and accomplishment would not be well received.

+1

In the article they indicate that they intend to honor times run in the traditional qualifying window for 2012-- but I hope that means the old times as well as the old window.
Support me in my fundraising for the Boston Marathon, Boston Public Library team:
https://www.crowdrise.com/o/en/campaign ... iferwolf11

chunkymonkeymelonhed
Lynn Williams
Posts: 17817
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 9:13 pm
Location: B.C.

Re: Boston Marathon qualifying articles

Postby chunkymonkeymelonhed » Fri Dec 31, 2010 10:22 am

mcshame wrote:
canalrunner wrote: No need to allow 2010 times.


Booo!!! Hissss!!!! I'm glad you don't run the organization there. They need to find a balance in the transition not to piss a bunch of people off. People like me training in 2010 with the goal of qualifying. to throw away that year of my life and accomplishment would not be well received.



DOUBLE Boo !!!! Hiss!!!!!!!!

They definately don't want to piss off me or Lorne :twisted: :evil: :wink:
On the books for 2017:
50th Birthday!!
Boston Marathon- April 17th what a day- DREAM COME TRUE :dance:
Run for Water 10K- May 28th
Scotia Half - June 25th
Trail River Run half marathon- Sept. 30- CANCELLED
MEC 10K Race 10- Nov. 5

User avatar
canalrunner
Bill Crothers
Posts: 1422
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: Ottawa

Re: Boston Marathon qualifying articles

Postby canalrunner » Fri Dec 31, 2010 11:09 am

mcshame wrote:
canalrunner wrote: No need to allow 2010 times.


Booo!!! Hissss!!!! I'm glad you don't run the organization there. They need to find a balance in the transition not to piss a bunch of people off. People like me training in 2010 with the goal of qualifying. to throw away that year of my life and accomplishment would not be well received.


I hear you and they may not do it for that reason and because so many people who had qualifying times for 2011 got shut out by the one day sell-out. That was unfair to both spring and fall Boston qualifiers. That being said, people who qualified in fall 2010 and are running in the 2011 Boston, shouldn't be able to run again in 2012 based on the same BQ race.

They definitely need to fix this for 2012. My comment is that from a logic, numbers and opportunity to requalify for 2012 in 2011 perspective, they likely don't need to have transition measures. At some point, a change in BQ times will be 'unfair' to someone and someone will be pissed off. New times--old window, new times--new window, old times--new window, old times, old window. It is bound not to work for someone. I am not a big fan of temporary measures. Regardless of what they do, your runs in 2010 were stellar and certainly nothing to throw away. If you are not running in Boston 2011, I certainly would want you running in Boston 2012.
Last edited by canalrunner on Fri Dec 31, 2010 11:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
The longest journey begins with a single step.
2016 Races
May: Ottawa Marathon


User avatar
Jwolf
Kevin Sullivan
Posts: 37476
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 10:02 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: Boston Marathon qualifying articles

Postby Jwolf » Fri Dec 31, 2010 11:18 am

canalrunner wrote:At some point, a change in BQ times will be 'unfair' to someone and someone will be pissed off.

There will definitely be people upset no matter what, but it would be pretty bad form for them to not allow those that think they've already qualified for 2012 to be able to register. That would include anyone that ran what they thought were qualifying marathons from late Sept 2010 to whenever they announce the changes. Most of these people will NOT be running Boston 2011 since the qualifying window for 2012 started just weeks before the registration date for 2011. Most ran after 2011 was full, assuming they were aiming for the next year anyway.

Of course they can do whatever they want, but they want to keep as many people happy as possible. They also want to make sure they don't have to make changes again soon. But a transition year seems inevitable.
Support me in my fundraising for the Boston Marathon, Boston Public Library team:
https://www.crowdrise.com/o/en/campaign ... iferwolf11

User avatar
mcshame
Sylvia Ruegger
Posts: 8480
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 12:05 pm
Location: St-Lazare, Quebec
Contact:

Re: Boston Marathon qualifying articles

Postby mcshame » Fri Dec 31, 2010 11:59 am

canalrunner wrote:
mcshame wrote:
canalrunner wrote: No need to allow 2010 times.


Booo!!! Hissss!!!! I'm glad you don't run the organization there. They need to find a balance in the transition not to piss a bunch of people off. People like me training in 2010 with the goal of qualifying. to throw away that year of my life and accomplishment would not be well received.


I hear you and they may not do it for that reason and because so many people who had qualifying times for 2011 got shut out by the one day sell-out. That was unfair to both spring and fall Boston qualifiers. That being said, people who qualified in fall 2010 and are running in the 2011 Boston, shouldn't be able to run again in 2012 based on the same BQ race.

They definitely need to fix this for 2012. My comment is that from a logic, numbers and opportunity to requalify for 2012 in 2011 perspective, they likely don't need to have transition measures. At some point, a change in BQ times will be 'unfair' to someone and someone will be pissed off. New times--old window, new times--new window, old times--new window, old times, old window. It is bound not to work for someone. I am not a big fan of temporary measures. Regardless of what they do, your runs in 2010 were stellar and certainly nothing to throw away. If you are not running in Boston 2011, I certainly would want you running in Boston 2012.


I'm just playing ;) , a bit. It's difficult to do be detached from this decision emotionally as so much of us goes into achieve the qualifying time. Being at the end of the season, I'm tired and the thought of re-qualifying at a higher standard is sobering. But I'm sure if they were to change it, I would find the fire and reserves to do it again.

If I were the BAA, I would do what was necessary to maintain the organizations integrity and business model.

alexk
Bill Crothers
Posts: 1202
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 8:33 pm

Re: Boston Marathon qualifying articles

Postby alexk » Fri Dec 31, 2010 12:12 pm

I didn't know you could use a Q time twice if it was a fall marathon. They should dump this one, for sure. I'm using my Chicago 2009 time this year because it's the best of my 3 times and will give me the best start but I didn't run last year; if I did, I don't think it would have been fair for me to use it again. No double dipping, I guess!
We train more joyfully and productively when we focus on the now, rather than on our future race day performance. It's a long road from here to there with many miles to go. We need to run each one. Accept where you are today and simply be thankful for the work you've accomplished. KA

Kimdawg
Tom Longboat
Posts: 227
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2007 8:39 am
Location: Mississauga

Re: Boston Marathon qualifying articles

Postby Kimdawg » Mon Jan 03, 2011 1:24 pm

I'm hoping to run Boston 2012. I qualified at the Hamilton marathon in November with a 3:56:27. It's funny, when we were running (I ran with 2 friends), I kept thinking in the back of my mind that we should be pushing for at least a 3:55 in case the qualifying times change but one of my buddies was having a rough time around the 32k mark so we stayed together and I'm really glad we did. It just wouldn't be the same if the 3 of us didn't go together. We just have to hope that they "grandfather" our times in if they change and that we all manage to get registered.

RayMan
Jerome Drayton
Posts: 4664
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 7:45 am

Re: Boston Marathon qualifying articles

Postby RayMan » Mon Jan 03, 2011 7:11 pm

alexk wrote:I didn't know you could use a Q time twice if it was a fall marathon. They should dump this one, for sure. I'm using my Chicago 2009 time this year because it's the best of my 3 times and will give me the best start but I didn't run last year; if I did, I don't think it would have been fair for me to use it again. No double dipping, I guess!


I always find this train of thought interesting - the BAA decides what's "fair", it's not meant to accommodate everyone's moral compass. When I played basketball a 10-foot rim seemed unfair but I tried my hardest anyway... :D

User avatar
mcshame
Sylvia Ruegger
Posts: 8480
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 12:05 pm
Location: St-Lazare, Quebec
Contact:

Re: Boston Marathon qualifying articles

Postby mcshame » Tue Jan 04, 2011 11:19 am

RayMan wrote:
alexk wrote:I didn't know you could use a Q time twice if it was a fall marathon. They should dump this one, for sure. I'm using my Chicago 2009 time this year because it's the best of my 3 times and will give me the best start but I didn't run last year; if I did, I don't think it would have been fair for me to use it again. No double dipping, I guess!


I always find this train of thought interesting - the BAA decides what's "fair", it's not meant to accommodate everyone's moral compass. When I played basketball a 10-foot rim seemed unfair but I tried my hardest anyway... :D


Tell me about it!

Geisha Girl
Johnny Miles
Posts: 112
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 2:50 pm
Location: Toronto

Re: Boston Marathon qualifying articles

Postby Geisha Girl » Tue Jan 04, 2011 12:26 pm

mcshame wrote:
RayMan wrote:
alexk wrote:I didn't know you could use a Q time twice if it was a fall marathon. They should dump this one, for sure. I'm using my Chicago 2009 time this year because it's the best of my 3 times and will give me the best start but I didn't run last year; if I did, I don't think it would have been fair for me to use it again. No double dipping, I guess!


I always find this train of thought interesting - the BAA decides what's "fair", it's not meant to accommodate everyone's moral compass. When I played basketball a 10-foot rim seemed unfair but I tried my hardest anyway... :D


Tell me about it!

Image

Just saying...
"Most people never run far enough on their first wind to find out they've got a second. Give your dreams all you've got and you'll be amazed at the energy that comes out of you." --William James

User avatar
mcshame
Sylvia Ruegger
Posts: 8480
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 12:05 pm
Location: St-Lazare, Quebec
Contact:

Re: Boston Marathon qualifying articles

Postby mcshame » Tue Jan 04, 2011 12:56 pm

I don't know what Ray is complaining about ;) I have a valid complaint!

RayMan
Jerome Drayton
Posts: 4664
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 7:45 am

Re: Boston Marathon qualifying articles

Postby RayMan » Tue Jan 04, 2011 2:15 pm

mcshame wrote:I don't know what Ray is complaining about ;) I have a valid complaint!


Ha ha but to get back to the topic of "fair", I played against a guy that was 6'11" and the ease with which he dunked a ball didn't seem "fair" to me. I could dunk with reckless abandon if that rim was just 6 inches lower!

Since the BAA (1897) has been around longer than the NBA (1946), I think their practice of allowing BQ times to be valid for 19 months is equally "fair" and simply part of the sport.


Return to “General Running Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests