Boston 2017 time cutoff

Bump

Looks like you don't even have to break 3 hours to qualify...

3:07

Anticipate changes the qualifying times for 2018.

I wouldn't be surprised to see 5 minutes taken off all qualifying times, but I hope they'll actually make some effort to even things out a little across age groups and genders. Yes, I know it's very open to criticism but better to try to balance it out a bit. For instance I'm a mid 40's male and I just don't think I need to go from 3:15 all the way to 3:25 at age 45. If they just keep cutting 5 min across the board it tends to hurt the youngest age groups the most as 5 minutes off 185 minutes (3:05) is a bigger percentage drop than 5 minutes off 240 minutes (4 hour).

BQ - 24 seconds.

Huge BQ downwards for all major fall 2015 races(Chicago and NYC)

Only 2 races(Houston and LA) that saw an increase of BQ

There was a deficit of about 400 before Boston Monday and they only 8951 people that requalified. Boston had over 12700 requalifiers in 2015. That's a 3800 deficit from last year.

That's a deficit of over 4000 from last year at this time.

There are maybe 3 major races left till September that is fast. Toledo is tomorrow, Grandma is full, Erie is going to fill up soon. So the odds are against having a qualifying time that's more than a minute.

Amazing considering the cutoffs of the past couple years:

http://bqrun.com

“Boston Marathon 2017 cutoff prediction: -49 seconds, or NO CUTOFF!”

http://www.namethatbostonmarathoncutoff.com

Also agrees with no cutoff.

Erie and Lehigh Valley weather looking less than optimal too.

Current running fad is waning. Rock and Roll Denver cancelled it's fall marathon--only runs a half, because that's where the money is. My kids's elementary school cancelled their 5K-fall fundraiser is a run laps for pledges instead. A 52 year old man won last years version of the 5K in 19 and change. 25 years ago, that would have been unheard of.

The 24 hour relay races that were all the rage a decade ago grew too much. In Colorado, there are four of them-and combined they attract fewer teams than did the Colorado Relay in 2005. I'll bet next year, there are only two.

trying to run a BQ when you don't know the actual BQ number is BS IMO - I would be devastated to think I sacrificed time with my family and friends and wasted all that effort if I ran a 3:04:59 and then didn't get in. BAA MUST FIX THIS.

Just train to run 5 minutes faster than the qualifying time and go out and do it. Then you don't have to worry about it.

BostonBaby wrote:

trying to run a BQ when you don't know the actual BQ number is BS IMO - I would be devastated to think I sacrificed time with my family and friends and wasted all that effort if I ran a 3:04:59 and then didn't get in. BAA MUST FIX THIS.

I could never understand how people train to run exactly 3:05. It's such an odd standard.

7:03/mile, 4:23/km, 21:54 5k.

Why not shoot for 7:00/mile or 4:20/km?

Why? Because the BAA says the cut off is 3:05 - if your goal is to BQ then why wouldn't you train for 3:04:49?

Yeah but those projections were not even close.

Well they've also pretty clearly explained that merely achieving the standard isn't necessarily good enough to run the race. I would take all of the past years into consideration and then try to run at least a -5 or -10. Why settle for barely good enough?

BostonBaby wrote:

trying to run a BQ when you don't know the actual BQ number is BS IMO - I would be devastated to think I sacrificed time with my family and friends and wasted all that effort if I ran a 3:04:59 and then didn't get in. BAA MUST FIX THIS.

It's an easy fix. Just eliminate this generous allowance: "qualifying times are based upon each athlete's age on the date of the Boston Marathon".

Yeah, and then the race would be filled(?) with 85%-90% males - most of whom couldn't care less about buying BAA merchandise.

HobbyJ wrote:

Well they've also pretty clearly explained that merely achieving the standard isn't necessarily good enough to run the race. I would take all of the past years into consideration and then try to run at least a -5 or -10. Why settle for barely good enough?

You ever tried it? Obviously not, because first off, the difference between the standard and the -10 you cite is substantial. For example it's the difference between a 3:10 and approaching sub 3. Pretty far apart, dumb ass.

HobbyJ wrote:

Yeah, and then the race would be filled(?) with 85%-90% males - most of whom couldn't care less about buying BAA merchandise.

Please explain.

The latest predictions are 20-30 seconds.

The time standards were also announced to be the same in 2018.

Does anyone know when they will respond if I make the entry or not? I registered last Monday with a BQ time of 55 sec under the BQ time for my Age group.

Check the entry list for the hell of it they already have a lot of runners listed.