Boston Marathon Qualifying Standards Revisited???

Joe Wants to Know wrote:

Since the recent US Olympic Trials in the marathon included runners who qualified on the basis of having achieved a half-marathon standard only, will the BAA institute a similar protocol in the near future? The NY marathon offers half-marathon time-qualifier standards for guaranteed entry into their race also. For masters and super masters runners, in particular, I think it would be an excellent alternative to having to race the full 26.2 in order to qualify. Thoughts?

that would help me, but I think it is against the spirit of Boston.

But yeah - I'm in my late 40s and ran an 80 minute half last year - I might have signed up for boston if that would have counted. Marathons mess me up so I don't want to do 2 in a year.

I doubt the B.A.A. would do this.

But if they went with a half marathon qualifying time how would those runners be placed in a corral?

Would the half marathon time be multiplied by 2.12 in order to convert it to a marathon time?

Why would Boston need to? They sell out and are at max every year. The Trials isn't about "selling entries"

You can qualify for Boston based upon your half-marathon time. I know someone who has done it. BAA just doesn't publicize that they may make exceptions for fast sub-elites.

Blah Blah Blah Blah wrote:

You can qualify for Boston based upon your half-marathon time. I know someone who has done it. BAA just doesn't publicize that they may make exceptions for fast sub-elites.

yep, agreed. I know someone as well.

If you're hoping to qualify based on a mediocre half time though, forget it. There's no need for them to ADD a new qualifying standard for the masses. If anything the qualification standards are likely to be tightened across the board since to maxed out registration at qualifying time -2.5 minutes this past year.

Joe Wants to Know wrote:

Since the recent US Olympic Trials in the marathon included runners who qualified on the basis of having achieved a half-marathon standard only, will the BAA institute a similar protocol in the near future? The NY marathon offers half-marathon time-qualifier standards for guaranteed entry into their race also. For masters and super masters runners, in particular, I think it would be an excellent alternative to having to race the full 26.2 in order to qualify. Thoughts?

They already have this. I know of a master's runner who qualified on have half marathon time.

Pete Best wrote:

I doubt the B.A.A. would do this.

But if they went with a half marathon qualifying time how would those runners be placed in a corral?

Would the half marathon time be multiplied by 2.12 in order to convert it to a marathon time?

NYC and Chicago seem to have figured it out with their HM autoquals. Not exactly complicated.

The change I would want to see is for the BAA to open registration in November. This would allow BQs achieved in September and October to be included within the immediate qualifying window.

BAA sure screwed all the fall marathons too when they did this.

indeed wrote:

BAA sure screwed all the fall marathons too when they did this.

How so?

tycobb wrote:

Why would Boston need to? They sell out and are at max every year. The Trials isn't about "selling entries"

Thanks to foreign runners and charity runners.

koja konera wrote:

indeed wrote:

BAA sure screwed all the fall marathons too when they did this.

How so?

Lots of Fall Marathons were built up on the idea of being fast races in cool weather where one could qualify for Boston.

The year I ran Boston, I qualified at Bay State in October, and then registered.

Now, if I qualify at Bay State in 2016, I cannot run Boston until 2018.

Since Boston used to fill up in January, I see no reason not to wait to open registration until December 15 and fill up in 2 minutes then instead of filling up in 2 minutes in September.

whatsupchuck wrote:

Blah Blah Blah Blah wrote:

You can qualify for Boston based upon your half-marathon time. I know someone who has done it. BAA just doesn't publicize that they may make exceptions for fast sub-elites.

yep, agreed. I know someone as well.

If you're hoping to qualify based on a mediocre half time though, forget it. There's no need for them to ADD a new qualifying standard for the masses. If anything the qualification standards are likely to be tightened across the board since to maxed out registration at qualifying time -2.5 minutes this past year.

Do you have any insight on this? Did they just sign up and submit their Half time? Or did they email someone before. I'll be running Berlin this fall but it's after registration, so that would mean 2018. But I'm also running the Berlin half in 6 weeks and shooting for sub 1:20 (possibly), which should be sufficiently below 3:05 even as an equivalent.

phillypharm wrote:

whatsupchuck wrote:

yep, agreed. I know someone as well.

If you're hoping to qualify based on a mediocre half time though, forget it. There's no need for them to ADD a new qualifying standard for the masses. If anything the qualification standards are likely to be tightened across the board since to maxed out registration at qualifying time -2.5 minutes this past year.

Do you have any insight on this? Did they just sign up and submit their Half time? Or did they email someone before. I'll be running Berlin this fall but it's after registration, so that would mean 2018. But I'm also running the Berlin half in 6 weeks and shooting for sub 1:20 (possibly), which should be sufficiently below 3:05 even as an equivalent.

They only make exceptions for "fast sub-elites." I'm not trying to put you down; I run a HM in the same range. But they won't make an exception for a 1:19 for a man - or woman, for that matter.

If you run 1:19, it wouldn't take much for you to run sub-3. Just find a late spring marathon if you want to qualify for Boston.

What I would like to see the BAA do is to give back the ten minutes to the men's qualifying standards and therefore make it only a 20 minute difference between the sexes. It seems to allow for medium-okay females but makes it fairly difficult for males, which seems unfair to me (I'm a female). Also, they should eliminate a huge number of the slots for charity runners and make them for qualifiers. I know they don't have a reason to do it, other than fairness to those who train and qualify. As for allowing fairly decent recreational runner's half marathon times to be used, forget it. Do the work.

OOPS I meant 5 minutes, not ten. My bad.

I don't think they'll open a publicized half marathon BQ time, but I think they might tighten the standards soon, if the cutoffs keep getting bigger.

I barely got in this year, and I'm not sure my time would get me in next year.

Would not be surprised if they made all the times 5 minutes faster in the next few years if the current running boom continues.

phillypharm wrote:

whatsupchuck wrote:

yep, agreed. I know someone as well.

If you're hoping to qualify based on a mediocre half time though, forget it. There's no need for them to ADD a new qualifying standard for the masses. If anything the qualification standards are likely to be tightened across the board since to maxed out registration at qualifying time -2.5 minutes this past year.

Do you have any insight on this? Did they just sign up and submit their Half time? Or did they email someone before. I'll be running Berlin this fall but it's after registration, so that would mean 2018. But I'm also running the Berlin half in 6 weeks and shooting for sub 1:20 (possibly), which should be sufficiently below 3:05 even as an equivalent.

not a chance.

somebloke wrote:

Do you have any insight on this? Did they just sign up and submit their Half time? Or did they email someone before. I'll be running Berlin this fall but it's after registration, so that would mean 2018. But I'm also running the Berlin half in 6 weeks and shooting for sub 1:20 (possibly), which should be sufficiently below 3:05 even as an equivalent.

not a chance.[/quote]

3:05 and 1:20 are NOT sub-elite. Stick with your 2018 plan, but realize if you're under 35 you'll need at least sub 3:02 to get in (not just qualify) with the current qualifications, and possibly sub 3:00 if the BAA tightens the standards by another 5 minutes (which I think is 75% likely given their history).