Should CIM not count towards Boston qualifying? 32 % is the field BQ

Yes and every last one of them should also be arrested as well.

LOCK CIM UP!!!

I'm sure people's 14 minute PRs were entirely due to the 300 foot drop, and not just an increase in fitness.

reed wrote:

LOCK CIM UP!!!

I'm sure people's 14 minute PRs were entirely due to the 300 foot drop, and not just an increase in fitness.

Wow. Truly amazing that someone could write and really believe that. Good for you!

CIM is flat,

CIM usually has favorable running conditions

CIM has attracts a quality field of runners

So possibly if 32% of the crowd got a BQ, do you think that perhaps it's cumulative??

You could go to say... any RnR series and run a crap course in a field of walkers and joggers where if you are running close to a BQ you'll essentially be running by yourself; or pick a race like CIM where there are optimal conditions for a positive result.

Oh look, another CIM is cheating thread!

I would say nah, this course should stand. People will just find the next fastest course and run there

This really strikes me as a troll post, but I am going to respond anyway.

What struck me about CIM is the number of fast people that showed up for the race compared to your typical marathon. Most everyone there was serious about hitting some goal time whether it be a BQ, OTQ, or a personal time goal. Keep in mind that everyone looking for an OTQ or were participating in the USATF marathon championship is going get a BQ unless something goes horribly wrong for them in the race. Also, it does seem that a lot of people show up to the race for a BQ attempt whether it is a first time BQ or a repeat BQ. For me I ran it for a personal time goal. While a BQ was not my goal I did get a 2020 BQ by a large margin.

Why CIM? Because it is a fast course that is nearly equivalent to a flat course. Because the weather there is quite consistent and very favorable to running a marathon. And for some it is timing as well. It is late enough in the year where you don't have to do the bulk of your training through the searing summer heat that most of the US experiences.

Anyone that says that CIM is a gimmick course is either trolling or is someone that has not run the course and has a mistaken impression of the course. Those that have run the course would not consider it a gimmick and probably have more respect for the course than they did prior. While it does have a 340' net elevation loss, it does have almost 800' of total elevation gain which balances out the elevation loss. Lastly, don't go buy the elevation profile on that find my marathon page. Look at it on something like Strava and you will give you a better profile.

CIM participant wrote:

What struck me about CIM is the number of fast people that showed up for the race compared to your typical marathon. Most everyone there was serious about hitting some goal time whether it be a BQ, OTQ, or a personal time goal. Keep in mind that everyone looking for an OTQ or were participating in the USATF marathon championship is going get a BQ unless something goes horribly wrong for them in the race. Also, it does seem that a lot of people show up to the race for a BQ attempt whether it is a first time BQ or a repeat BQ. For me I ran it for a personal time goal. While a BQ was not my goal I did get a 2020 BQ by a large margin.

Yeah it's definitely not a destination race, you don't go there for the spectator crowds and shwag.

I'll bite. 32% meeting the Boston standard is a cumulative effect.

1. CIM is not a destination race, nobody goes to "scenic" Folsom to finish in Sacramento. People show up to run fast.

2. The weather is consistently favorable, little wind, temperatures in the 40s to low 50s, infrequent rain.

3. A wealth of talented runners. Threads like this are free publicity that in turns attracts more runners seeking to run fast.

4. 2017 and 2018 were USATF championship years, guaranteeing a large(r) elite field.

5. NET drop of 320' While it descends closer to 1000' feet, there's about 680' of climb.

At this year's USATF meeting, which was the same weekend as CIM, the board wanted to eliminate the race as a valid qualifier for national teams. Because it was the American championship, the motion was revised to keep CIM included for qualifying purposes, but the line was drawn for anything with a greater percentage of decline than CIM (roughly .23% ) to be discounted for the purpose of making a national team.

I'm all for eliminating Revel-style courses, but what happened was there were too many Boston qualifiers, so they simply revised the qualifying times to narrow the field to the desired size.

So basically "people going there to run fast became a self fulfilling cause of people running fast at CIM.

Nothing to do with it's downhill. Nothing.

Did someone say CIM?

Actually, there are a lot of spectators at CIM and Sacramento looks good with Fall colors- it is surprisingly nice in addition to the reliably (80%) optimal weather.

As someone who has ran CIM and a completely pancake flat course (Skagit) - CIM is more difficult. So if you think CIM should not count then flat courses should also not count.

I PRed by over 30 minutes at CIM with carbon fiber plates in my shoes AMA.

SlopeDoper wrote:

I PRed by over 30 minutes at CIM with carbon fiber plates in my shoes AMA.

How did it feel to make a mockery out of the hard work of so many other people who had to actually try for their BQs?

Should we not count track PRs because those are on plates as well?

moongrey wrote:

SlopeDoper wrote:

I PRed by over 30 minutes at CIM with carbon fiber plates in my shoes AMA.

How did it feel to make a mockery out of the hard work of so many other people who had to actually try for their BQs?

It was great. Same feeling you get as passing a test you didn't study for.