Boston Separates Elite Men's Start from Wave 1 Corral 1 by two minutes

rojo wrote:

One of the biggest appeals of a Boston or any major is you are running the same race as the pros. Now, you are not. How these people don't intuitively recognize this is beyond me.

Exactly.

Why would they do this?

Tell me it wasn't because of that garbage Buzzfeed article, right? I assumed no one in the running world took that seriously. But I can't think of any other reason for this.

rojo wrote:The idea that everyone in the sport has to be treated the same is absurd.

rojo wrote:One of the biggest appeals of a Boston or any major is you are running the same race as the pros. Now, you are not. How these people don't intuitively recognize this is beyond me.

smh

I've always liked watching the guy in bib #1548 take the lead for a minute or two. I'll look him up, tweet at him and look up his time and see that he ran a 2:58 after qualifying with a time 30 minutes faster.

Cash me out wrote:

#2, so true...

See the new BAA "Unicorn Club", exclusively available to people who have run 5 or more consecutive Boston Marathons. People who have already dropped at least $5,000 to run this race five years or more now have the "opportunity" to drop another $250 to be personally bused to the start line and have access to an indoor staging area at the Athletes Village.

You'd think the BAA would thank their returning customers by providing them something not available to other runners, free of charge. But NOPE! The BAA is happy to thank you for all the money you've spent by giving you the opportunity to spend more money.

I'd love that. I' m a rich assed hobby jogger. I'd happily spend $250 to not worry about standing in line with the plebes for hours to sh!t.

$250 would've been worth it last year.

What Boston organizers don't realize is West coast people are seriously jet lagged. 6am to catch the buses is like getting up at 3am in the morning for the west coast.

Start it at noon again. Toughen up, enjoy the sun.

Start everyone at the same time.

100% in agreement.

I think BAA is missing the point. They got called out when they did not want to pay someone coming out of the mass start who finished higher up than some of the elite women. It's actually super cool when that happens on the men's or women's side. It's great to see someone working hard, and in the sub elite category, place well & earn some prize money at Boston. It might be even more inspiring than the elite who finished one spot in front of them who's only job is to run. We were mad about their response to want to not pay that woman last year. The solution isn't to tighten the field and create 3 separate races. It seems to me that you either start everyone together or soften the elite standards to ensure only people invited will finish top-15. I like having a woman's only start but tv coverage is often bad even when we're trying to highlight them. In a race like Chicago, everyone starts together and you beat who you beat. Are there going to be three separate result lists? If you're a woman in the 2:50ish range or a man in the 2:25ish range, you need to be encouraged to stick with the sport and chase an OTQ. At least a 2:50 woman can pack up at a race like Boston. A ton of people will go through halfway in 1:22. What do you do if you've run 2:19:40? You have to run 1:09 by yourself when the people you want to run with started 2 minutes in front of you. It makes no sense.

Start a petition using a Google Doc or a website like change.org. Advertise it on the homepage. Print out paper copies and deliver it in person in Boston, maybe even with some elite athletes who are on the same page. Again, I agree with wanting to know who was asking for this. We weren't mad at what happened last year. It was cool to see a woman run fast out of the mass start. I was made that they wanted to be cheap and not pay her. Just pay both athletes. Surely they have the money for when this happens. It's not going to happen too much that you need to make changes nobody asked for.

+3. I'm tired of these twitter whiners getting their way. Suck it buzzfeed! Wrecking our marathon. We need to speak up or it's gonna get worse.

That’s one of the magical things about our sport, that someone totally unheard of can come out of nowhere to place. Talk to anyone at Boston in wave 1, and they’re stoked to be a part of the action. Even though most everyone in corral 1 is not going to place, to completely rule out that possibility definitely takes some of the shine off the actual competition part.

Seems like BAA is human after all and has alas, made a mistake.

Petition BAA Yes wrote:

+3. I'm tired of these twitter whiners getting their way. Suck it buzzfeed! Wrecking our marathon. We need to speak up or it's gonna get worse.

Just to clarify I have zero problems with the Buzzfeed article. It was on point. I thought Boston was just trying to be cheap. They could have just paid the women & now they came up with this trash plan. I would think anyone close to an OTQ should be in the elite field and get to compete for money. The whole point of Boston is to see where you stack up in a field of most of the best marathoners in the country. It's really cool to see a local club runner beat a big name and look at the results list and see some people have their breakthrough moment. Have a sub-elite standard like 2:25 & 2:50. With those times, nobody should be in the top-15 outside of everyone in those groups and then you can just start the elite men with the masses. If a woman runs sub-2:50, great, they can be in the elite corral next year. It gives sub elites something to aim for. What do you do if you've run 2:19:40? It's not outrageous to think that person could pop off a 2:16-18 & crack the top-15. This move by the BAA makes that impossible. Now that person has to run ahead of the mass start when they want to be running with a pack two minutes ahead of them.

I'm on board with this as long as I can call myself the Boston Marathon Wave 1 Champion if I beat everyone else that doesn't start in the elite field.

NewtotheSouthSide wrote:

...

...

I like having a woman's only start but tv coverage is often bad even when we're trying to highlight them.

....

The TV coverage problems are a lot more severe than anything this (separating elite from regular men) affects.

What if we have a situation like just happened in the NYC half marathon(some elite runner running under a hobby jogger bib)? Let's assume a runner from corral one runs it in 2:07, and the person in the elite corral 'wins' it in 2:09. Let us assume they both finish within 10 seconds of each other. The tv broadcast would look weird. And, who would technically be the winner? Should it not be the guy who ran it faster?

hypothetical ..................... wrote:

What if we have a situation like just happened in the NYC half marathon(some elite runner running under a hobby jogger bib)? Let's assume a runner from corral one runs it in 2:07, and the person in the elite corral 'wins' it in 2:09. Let us assume they both finish within 10 seconds of each other. The tv broadcast would look weird. And, who would technically be the winner? Should it not be the guy who ran it faster?

Nothing wrong with the winner being not in the prize pool as long as they did not ask to run for the money and were not allowed to be in the money race.

By not asking you selfselect not to run for money and that choice should be upheld by not forcing them to take the winners money.

if you ask you should be included just because you asked wrote:

hypothetical ..................... wrote:

What if we have a situation like just happened in the NYC half marathon(some elite runner running under a hobby jogger bib)? Let's assume a runner from corral one runs it in 2:07, and the person in the elite corral 'wins' it in 2:09. Let us assume they both finish within 10 seconds of each other. The tv broadcast would look weird. And, who would technically be the winner? Should it not be the guy who ran it faster?

Nothing wrong with the winner being not in the prize pool as long as they did not ask to run for the money and were not allowed to be in the money race.

By not asking you selfselect not to run for money and that choice should be upheld by not forcing them to take the winners money.

BS, if you win the race than you win the race. And, if you win the race you deserve the reward that comes with it. I know if I technically won by time and I didn't get the prize money,I would lawyer up.

rojo wrote:

One of the biggest appeals of a Boston or any major is you are running the same race as the pros. Now, you are not. How these people don't intuitively recognize this is beyond me.

First of all I appreciate the brojos recognizing this and jumping on board.

This point of Rojo's is also a really good point. It's also made me realize that, while not being impacted by this directly, why I have such a problem with it and why I started this thread in the first place.

After college, I got into cycling and reached Cat 1. But theres so much bullsh!t in that sport. Getting into the right races is about getting on the right team, hoping your team gets selected to race, hoping you get selected by your team for that race... Each of these aspects has layers of political bullsh!t involved. I left cycling with a lot of "what ifs." What if I had gotten on a different team, what if my team had gotten into X race, what if my team had selected me for Y race. All of that just to find out whether or not you're really any good (which I probably wasn't).

That's one thing I really love about running, that bullsh!t doesn't exist. You pay your entry fee, and you show up and you just fuc%ing race. There are no what ifs. If you think you're the best cross country runner in the country, you can pay your entry and get lapped by whoever at US Cross. You think you can hang with Jared Ward for 26.2, go for it. Everyone has a chance to prove themselves. It's truly a no excuses sport.

Last year, my friend, mentioned earlier, tried to get into BAA elite and was denied based on his recent times (rightfully so). I told him "Fuc% them, go prove 'em wrong, it'll be that much sweeter when you place high" and he did, finishing in the money out of Corral 1. That's part of the beauty of this sport. There is nothing to prevent you from finding out how you stack up against the competition. This move goes against one of the best parts of running.

Timing wrote:

Will they reset the clocks on the course? It will be even more frustrating trying to determine pacing if the clocks are 2+ minutes off from corral 1 start-time.

ifonly wrote:

If only there was a device you could put on your wrist to figure this out!

And this rocket science math of subracting 2 minutes.

Do you think the women's elite start should be done away with as well? Because under the old system, the men in wave 1 were "running the same race as the pros" but the women weren't.

They are allowing everyone that has run under 2:19:40 in the first Wave.

Not just elites. Not just pros. Not just John Hancock athletes. Not just BAA athletes. EVERYONE that has run under 2:19:40.

You disagree with the cutoff for wave one.

Just state the correct facts. In 2019 the Boston Marathon has become more elite and you don’t like it.

You sound no different than the people who missed getting into the race because of the changed entry times.

Before you start a campaign, please consider that this has suddenly become a problem when it affects men, when it's been exactly the same for women all along. If you're nearly elite, but not quite, you have to run with the mass start, and that's going to put you at a disadvantage compared to those who made the cut. That has always been the same for women in races with split starts.