MSCoach wrote:
So if the timing system is "off" and they don't follow USATF rules but the race distance is USATF certified, times are official for Boston, road race championships, etc.? And it's sanctioned?
There's no proof timing was "off", and Boston accepts chip times for qualification. So yes to that part. Some champtionships may acess chip times for seeding and qualification. So a maybe to that. USATF sanction is different that certification. Certification says the course is the right length and adheres to separation and drop standards. So certified, yes, sanctioned, apparently not.
That makes no sense. In essence you are saying that I can get my course certified by USATF, not follow their rules, and still qualify people for Boston.
Yes, you can, and the vast majority of marathons in the US do exactly that. Boston doesn't give a rip how the race you ran gives out awards (and why should they?). They care that the course is the right length (certified) and that timing is accurate. Still no real proof timing was inaccurate in this case as far as chip time, since it's just a she said, she said situation about who started in what position.
I'll note that many marathon used to require USATF membership. You signed up, if you didn't have a USATF number you paid an extra $15 that made you a USATF member. At one point marathoners forced to join USATF were a majority of USATF members but had little voting power. Runners as a group protested this requirement, and marathons (NYC started the ball rolling) stopped requiring USATF membership.
Marathons got their own insurance (the primary reason to get a sanction) and did things their own way. That's exactly what happens with 90% of the road races. They don't get USATF officials, bother with sanctions, rules, etc, they just get the course measured and call it a day.