December's Cal International Offering $1000 For US Olympic Trials Qualifying Times

[/quote]

Would the first half of a marathon be eligible? For example, could one run 1:05 for the first half of Chicago - no elevation loss, close enough to the start line - and OTQ?[/quote]

No.

malmo wrote:

road rashed wrote:

Flatulus was talking about the Average person trying to qualify for Boston not entering CIM anymore as Boston closed this year before CIM was run. Maybe the extra Oly Trial Q will stir up some excitement

If your goal is a qualifying standard for Boston, you don't have a realistic chance at the CIM $1000 bonus do you? The people trying for OT standards and Boston standards are from two entirely different zipcodes.

Another way of stirring the pot and raising the profile of the CIM now that it WILL HAVE LOST ALL IT'S LUSTER AS A BOSTON QUALIFIER? If Boston doesn't do something about the qualifying window closing up before CIM is even run, this race's supply of average entrants will dry up big time. CIM is known a a Boston Qualifier race. 2 year qualifying window isn't what most Ma and Pa marathon runners are looking for, so that ain't gonna entice anyone to run CIM.

You are aware that the majority of people who run "Boston qualifiers" don't actually run the Boston Marathon, at least not every year. For a lot of people, they want to say they ran a qualifier and maybe do Boston a time or two but not every year they qualify. We are talking about a race on the West Coast, not the Baystate Marathon. Obviously, you are much more likely to run the race if you qualify and live in New England.

Flatulus wrote:

Another way of stirring the pot and raising the profile of the CIM now that it WILL HAVE LOST ALL IT'S LUSTER AS A BOSTON QUALIFIER? If Boston doesn't do something about the qualifying window closing up before CIM is even run, this race's supply of average entrants will dry up big time. CIM is known a a Boston Qualifier race. 2 year qualifying window isn't what most Ma and Pa marathon runners are looking for, so that ain't gonna entice anyone to run CIM.

Given that only 15K people each year get into Boston, qualifying is not on the radar for the vast majority of entrants to any marathon, fast or otherwise. For most rational thinkers (even those living in Mass and Penn) can figure out that a time from CIM will be good for the next two Boston marathons if they haven't managed to run a qualifying time before it fills up for the following year. I am sure that CIM will be just fine despite a handful of desperate souls not being able to eek out a qualifier within 6 months of running Boston. Somehow Rocket City and Houston will be alright, too. Really, some of you people dramatically overstate the importance of qualifying for Boston.

wow what a great challange. This is what we need to keep post-grads motivated to stick with the sport. $1k isn't the world but it is still a challenge. Last year they had 7 guys under, 4 Americans.

Hopefully this year will be more!

I may have to sign up IF there is a big enough group thats what we need

27th Annual California International Marathon

Presented by Kaiser Permanente

December 6, 2009

Official Results

Marathon by Overall Finishers (1 to 3,000)

PLACE O'ALL FIRST LAST BIB DIV DIV PL M/F PL M/F AGE FINAL(GUN) PACE 5.9 13.1 20.5 FINAL(CHIP) CITY STATE COUNTRY

1 TESFAYE BEKELE 2 M25-29 1 M 1 27 02:13:42 00:05:06 00:30:00 01:06:55 01:45:02 02:13:42 BRONX NY ETHIOPIA

2 JOSH COX 17 M30-34 1 M 2 34 02:13:51 00:05:06 00:29:47 01:06:54 01:45:02 02:13:51 MAMMOTH LAKES CA USA

3 KIPYEGON KIRUI 15 M25-29 2 M 3 29 02:14:59 00:05:09 00:30:06 01:06:55 01:45:02 02:14:58 CHAPEL HILL NC KENYA

4 MIKE MORGAN 18 M25-29 3 M 4 29 02:15:27 00:05:10 00:29:32 01:06:20 01:44:27 02:15:27 ROCHESTER MI USA

5 FIKADU LEMMA 25 M25-29 4 M 5 25 02:15:50 00:05:11 00:30:14 01:06:55 01:45:03 02:15:50 BRONX NY ETHIOPIA

6 TRENT BRINEY 9 M30-34 2 M 6 31 02:16:30 00:05:12 00:30:15 01:06:54 01:45:10 02:16:30 FLAGSTAFF AZ USA

7 CHRISTOPHER PANNONE 20 M20-24 1 M 7 23 02:18:24 00:05:16 00:30:58 01:09:01 01:47:46 02:18:24 LAMBERTVILLE NJ USA

I agree, this is a great move by CIM.

If you're within spitting distance of the standard and need a fast marathon, CIM just turned into a great option. Sure, if money's tight it's a gamble (make the standard and travel is essentially free; miss it and you might be out big bucks), but it's great to see a marathon put up some green.

As a former sub-2:19 guy, Mansoor seems to be plugged in to the needs of the sub-elite.

Are people under the impression that $1000 is going to make that big a difference in the life of a person a few years out of college who's trying to train at a high level? I'm surprised by this thread so far. I mean, it's a nice honorarium and gesture, but some of you are acting like it's a life-altering amount.

Condescending much? wrote:

Red Glare wrote:

Like I care what you think?

That's your main problem, good sir. It's rather obvious that you don't care what anybody thinks! Intentionally exaggerating the facts, posting profanity-laden insults, and drowning in your own hyperbole aren't exactly the best methods to convince your target audience that your point of view is correct.

You are both quite boring. Do us all a favor and cease with your oh-so-pithy replies... chances are you have engaged in a battle of wits with a 15 year old.

On to a more "relevant" topic:

Solid run by Briney- not sure how I missed that the first time around, but good to see him apparently healthy.

Anyone know why Morgan (and the Hansons) wanted him running Cal International? Seems like a random choice.

malmo et al,

you are correct. oly trials qualifier and boston qualifier are 2 totally different time zones. Flatulus was just saying that the average person going for a BQ isn't going to be as likely to sign up for CIM now if they can't qualify then run Boston that spring. The 18 month rule gets Average Joe in the next year, but most folks aiming for a first time BQ on an easy course want that immediate gratification.

The Oly Trial Standard bonus money is nice and will hopefully get CIM some better fields, which will want to make Average folks want to run it even if they won't accomplish their immediate Boston Dreams.

I just wanted to let everyone know that we got a note from the nice people at the KeyBank Vermont City marathon today. They also are offering Olympic Trials bonuses. See their email below. LetsRun.com co-founder Weldon Johnson once won this race and I raced in it as well and we both loved the race and thought it was a great race for up and comers.

The Answer My Friend wrote:

Are people under the impression that $1000 is going to make that big a difference in the life of a person a few years out of college who's trying to train at a high level? I'm surprised by this thread so far. I mean, it's a nice honorarium and gesture, but some of you are acting like it's a life-altering amount.

As a former sub-elite guy, I can say that winning prize money had a magnified symbolic effect beyond its the obvious rent-paying. Winning some money provides a sort of tangible validation of what you're doing, something that your friends and family can understand.

I'm not saying it's rational (or universal) -- just saying that, for me at least, that sort of incentive would have been a draw.

Joe Connelly, you are fantastic! For those who are on the cusp, $750 will serve to offset some travel expenses to your event. You've done a great thing.

The sport needs more Joe Connellys and fewer Mary Wittenbergs.

Sub 3:00 wrote:

Does CIM get any kind of spectators?

I have run CIM 12 times. Regardless of the weather, there are people all along the course but crowds in only a few locations.

David Monti. wrote:

So does this account for the half-marathon too if someone runs under 65?

For Olympic Trials qualifying, a half-marathon must be run on a record-standard course i.e., with a net drop less than 1m/km and a start/finish separation less than 30% of the race distance.

DFM[/quote]

I'm glad to hear that. I don't think that I ever saw that in the USATF description of the new standards. A 1:05 on a point-to-point half-marathon course with a steady 3.25 m/km drop would have been, in my view, an inappropriate alternative basis upon which to qualify for the marathon trials. (I still don't like the inclusion of marathon courses that don't meet the IAAF's Olympic qualifying standards, but I understand that it's not easy to tell people that Boston can't be used to qualify for the U.S. trials.)

By the way, wasn't the IAAF's start/finish separation requirement changed to less than 50% (rather than 30%) at some point. I remember an article from the ARRS criticizing the change (although it's possible that it was merely a proposed change at that point).

I hate when race directors lie about there race. I have run this race the last four years and will run it again if I am in the USA. However in the last four years the start has not been above 34 degrees and it is not a down hill race. It is a fast(ish) course but in really cold years you lose time due to the temp.

Very well run race however just don't go and pick this race based on any lies. The temp is a factor as well as the hill until the half way point and the last hill at 20 or 21 (actually the last hill really isn't a hill expect for the fact you just ran 20 miles...

By the way, wasn't the IAAF's start/finish separation requirement changed to less than 50% (rather than 30%) at some point. I remember an article from the ARRS criticizing the change (although it's possible that it was merely a proposed change at that point).

Yes, but the Association of Road Racing Statisticians and USATF did not. The 30% had some decent research behind it, but the 50% was just arbitrary and, supposedly, favored ratification of a record by a Japanese ultra athlete.

dumbass wrote:

However in the last four years the start has not been above 34 degrees and it is not a down hill race.

Um, what exactly do you consider elevation loss? Uphill? And the RD never said it's around 50 degrees at the start.

dumbass wrote:

I hate when race directors lie about there race. I have run this race the last four years and will run it again if I am in the USA. However in the last four years the start has not been above 34 degrees and it is not a down hill race. It is a fast(ish) course but in really cold years you lose time due to the temp.

Very well run race however just don't go and pick this race based on any lies. The temp is a factor as well as the hill until the half way point and the last hill at 20 or 21 (actually the last hill really isn't a hill expect for the fact you just ran 20 miles...

There must be a full moon out today?

You've run the course 4 times? sure...

David Monti. wrote:[/b

Yes, but the Association of Road Racing Statisticians and USATF did not. The 30% had some decent research behind it, but the 50% was just arbitrary and, supposedly, favored ratification of a record by a Japanese ultra athlete.

I'd be interested in the 'research'?