Of course, the BAA also helped create the early rush by sending out that email last week. I would guess that without that email, the closeout would have happened 2 or 3 weeks later.
Of course, the BAA also helped create the early rush by sending out that email last week. I would guess that without that email, the closeout would have happened 2 or 3 weeks later.
Just get rid of spotting runners the 59 seconds over the entry standard.
That should help a little bit.
Charge slower runners more money as they take longer and use up more resources.
BAA is already giving away money by not charging $200 like NYC (ludicrous as I think that amount is).
As I recall 2009 was $105, this year 130. I would not be surprised if it is 180 next year.
Precious Roy wrote:
What the races that sell out quickly should do is create an accessible sub-elite standard that allows runners who can run a sub 3, 2:50, 2:40 certain registration privileges, like a guaranteed bib if you register by a certain date or even a gauranteed bib if you register at the expo (more for the 2:40-2:30 guys). There are very few people out there who run that fast and those people deserve to be allowed to the front of the line.
Agree 100%. Or runners should form a union (with RRCA or USATF or create an organization) to negotiate for these types of things. If road racing had a true governing body in the US then we might see a healthier, more competitive sport.
Precious Roy wrote:
What the races that sell out quickly should do is create an accessible sub-elite standard that allows runners who can run a sub 3, 2:50, 2:40 certain registration privileges, like a guaranteed bib if you register by a certain date or even a gauranteed bib if you register at the expo (more for the 2:40-2:30 guys). There are very few people out there who run that fast and those people deserve to be allowed to the front of the line.
Why? Any of those times and a buck fifty will get you a cup of coffee at Dunkin Donuts. They're not so fast that they offer any benefit to race sponsors or the race itself. Why do they deserve anything?
Precious Roy wrote:
What the races that sell out quickly should do is create an accessible sub-elite standard that allows runners who can run a sub 3, 2:50, 2:40 certain registration privileges, like a guaranteed bib if you register by a certain date or even a gauranteed bib if you register at the expo (more for the 2:40-2:30 guys). There are very few people out there who run that fast and those people deserve to be allowed to the front of the line.
get over yourself... wrote:
Why? Any of those times and a buck fifty will get you a cup of coffee at Dunkin Donuts. They're not so fast that they offer any benefit to race sponsors or the race itself. Why do they deserve anything?
Are you intentionally acting obtuse or can't you help it? Your thinking is flawed from the point of thinking about running as a business before considering that it is a sport. The sport may not thrive without financial support, but when you make the finances too high of a priority with respect to sporting considerations then you subvert the quality of the sport. It's a balancing act and for the better part of the past two decades we've botched it all up here in the US.
2:50 marathoners push 2:45 marathoners who push 2:40 marathoners who push 2:35 marathoners who push 2:30 marathoners who push 2:25 marathoners who push 2:20 marathoners who push 2:15 marathoners and hopefully you get the picture by now. With a big gap between the invited elites and the midpackers, there is a a big hole in the sport. The hole has been somewhat shored up (and far less than it could be in a country of our resources and talent pool) by McMillan Elite, Hansons, Zap, Team USA Minnesota, et al. Unless someone jumps forward with the money to create a dozen more training centers like that, we need some other strategies to help move the sport forward.
Another factor is that most 2:25-2:40 male (2:35-3:00 female) marathoners are often pretty serious runners and may not want to have to devote a large chunk of cash (especially in this economic climate) to a race that's over half a year away with the potential pitfalls of injury that accompany serious training along the way. With the no-transfer policy that these major marathons have, injury means kissing that $150-$200 goodbye. For guys and gals for whom free or even just discounted shoes is an aid to help keep them in the sport, $150-$200 is not chump change.
Shoe companies have decimated the strong club system that we had in the 70s and 80s and could have been grown over the past few decades if not for said decimation. Marathon organizers less and less make their decisions based on what serves well the health of the sport, there is no mechanism in place to check them and hold them accountable to truly support the sport that they capitalize on.
It's not about whatever respect and status you imagine would go with guaranteed entries for performance marks being held to a later date than applies to the general population. It's about a way to support the sport that some of us happen to love; maybe that's not you. If not, feel free to remove yourself from discussions of this nature from now on, the rest of us won't miss your worthless input.
MarathonMind wrote:
Of course, the BAA also helped create the early rush by sending out that email last week. I would guess that without that email, the closeout would have happened 2 or 3 weeks later.
If the BAA didn't send out the warning e-mail then there would be even more people complaining that they were "completely taken by surprise." The BAA was smart to send out the warning so that anyone who was qualified and able to register did so without being shut out. It's a no win for the BAA, damned if you do, damned if you don't.
And I doubt that the "e-mail warning" really made the close-out come 2-3 weeks earlier. Word was already out on the Runners World's board and on the internet prior to the BAA's email that the race would be full by mid-November.
Too bad my wife ran a 20 min PR breaking 3:00, just off the "elite" mark and got closed out a week later. The whole point was to run Boston. Hell an /e-mail would have been great.
hardset nipples wrote:
Precious Roy wrote:What the races that sell out quickly should do is create an accessible sub-elite standard that allows runners who can run a sub 3, 2:50, 2:40 certain registration privileges, like a guaranteed bib if you register by a certain date or even a gauranteed bib if you register at the expo (more for the 2:40-2:30 guys). There are very few people out there who run that fast and those people deserve to be allowed to the front of the line.
Agree 100%. Or runners should form a union (with RRCA or USATF or create an organization) to negotiate for these types of things. If road racing had a true governing body in the US then we might see a healthier, more competitive sport.
Yeah, that would work. Form a union.
Then Boston would completely ignore you and sell out just as fast.
Union = negotiating power
If you don't know how these things work then it's best to just STFU.
r.t.i. wrote:
Yep* wrote:I'm so glad it did fill up. I was almost tempted to run that joke of a marathon, 2000 runners and 18000 wannabes
Try closer to 200.
The distinction between runners and wannabes is invariably determined by the speed of the runner making the judgment. Everyone your speed and faster is a runner.
Why did you not sign up in September when it opened? If you waited you are slow or dumb or both. If you want to buy tickets to a good concert you don't wait until 2 months after they go on sale. Stop being idiots and register in the first hour like myself and my friends do.
No, in this case it's determined by how this race used to look 20+ years ago.
800 dude wrote:
r.t.i. wrote:Try closer to 200.
The distinction between runners and wannabes is invariably determined by the speed of the runner making the judgment. Everyone your speed and faster is a runner.
Check it out. It's two days before Boston. $40. Qualifiers only.