B.A.A will consider re-configuring the qualification times for Boston

others wrote:

The qualifying standards are a bit odd.

A typical 54 year old man is supposed to be faster than a typical open woman. I wonder how the age graded tables find that to be true.

Here you go. The dividing line between men's and women's BQ standards is age 49. Prior to 49, women have it easier according to AG PLP. After 49, women have it tougher according to AG PLP. Also for comparison are included AG WR's and the difference between BQ and the AG WR.

Men . . . BQ . . . . . PLP . . . . AG WR . . . . Diff . . . | Women . . . BQ . . . . . PLP . . . AG WR . . . . Diff . .

21 . . . 3:10:59 . . . 65.70 . . . 2:05:24 . . . 1:05:35 . . | . . 21 . . . 3:40:59 . . . 61.28 . . . 2:23:11 . . . 1:17:48

22 . . . 3:10:59 . . . 65.44 . . . 2:05:10 . . . 1:05:49 . . | . . 22 . . . 3:40:59 . . . 61.28 . . . 2:21:51 . . . 1:19:08

23 . . . 3:10:59 . . . 65.41 . . . 2:05:19 . . . 1:05:40 . . | . . 23 . . . 3:40:59 . . . 61.28 . . . 2:21:21 . . . 1:19:38

24 . . . 3:10:59 . . . 65.41 . . . 2:06:13 . . . 1:04:46 . . | . . 24 . . . 3:40:59 . . . 61.28 . . . 2:19:39 . . . 1:21:20

25 . . . 3:10:59 . . . 65.41 . . . 2:05:35 . . . 1:05:24 . . | . . 25 . . . 3:40:59 . . . 61.28 . . . 2:19:41 . . . 1:21:18

26 . . . 3:10:59 . . . 65.41 . . . 2:04:26 . . . 1:06:33 . . | . . 26 . . . 3:40:59 . . . 61.28 . . . 2:20:43 . . . 1:20:16

27 . . . 3:10:59 . . . 65.41 . . . 2:05:42 . . . 1:05:17 . . | . . 27 . . . 3:40:59 . . . 61.28 . . . 2:19:12 . . . 1:21:47

28 . . . 3:10:59 . . . 65.41 . . . 2:06:05 . . . 1:04:54 . . | . . 28 . . . 3:40:59 . . . 61.28 . . . 2:17:17 . . . 1:23:42

29 . . . 3:10:59 . . . 65.41 . . . 2:05:15 . . . 1:05:44 . . | . . 29 . . . 3:40:59 . . . 61.28 . . . 2:15:25 . . . 1:25:34

30 . . . 3:10:59 . . . 65.41 . . . 2:04:26 . . . 1:06:33 . . | . . 30 . . . 3:40:59 . . . 61.30 . . . 2:19:26 . . . 1:21:33

31 . . . 3:10:59 . . . 65.41 . . . 2:04:56 . . . 1:06:03 . . | . . 31 . . . 3:40:59 . . . 61.38 . . . 2:17:42 . . . 1:23:17

32 . . . 3:10:59 . . . 65.41 . . . 2:05:48 . . . 1:05:11 . . | . . 32 . . . 3:40:59 . . . 61.49 . . . 2:21:25 . . . 1:19:34

33 . . . 3:10:59 . . . 65.41 . . . 2:05:56 . . . 1:05:03 . . | . . 33 . . . 3:40:59 . . . 61.67 . . . 2:19:36 . . . 1:21:23

34 . . . 3:10:59 . . . 65.41 . . . 2:04:26 . . . 1:06:33 . . | . . 34 . . . 3:40:59 . . . 61.89 . . . 2:22:42 . . . 1:18:17

35 . . . 3:15:59 . . . 63.74 . . . 2:03:59 . . . 1:12:00 . . | . . 35 . . . 3:45:59 . . . 60.78 . . . 2:21:30 . . . 1:24:29

36 . . . 3:15:59 . . . 63.80 . . . 2:05:27 . . . 1:10:32 . . | . . 36 . . . 3:45:59 . . . 61.10 . . . 2:19:18 . . . 1:26:41

37 . . . 3:15:59 . . . 63.99 . . . 2:07:05 . . . 1:08:54 . . | . . 37 . . . 3:45:59 . . . 61.47 . . . 2:21:29 . . . 1:24:30

38 . . . 3:15:59 . . . 64.32 . . . 2:07:12 . . . 1:08:47 . . | . . 38 . . . 3:45:59 . . . 61.89 . . . 2:24:14 . . . 1:21:45

39 . . . 3:15:59 . . . 64.77 . . . 2:09:24 . . . 1:06:35 . . | . . 39 . . . 3:45:59 . . . 62.37 . . . 2:26:45 . . . 1:19:14

40 . . . 3:20:59 . . . 63.69 . . . 2:08:46 . . . 1:12:13 . . | . . 40 . . . 3:50:59 . . . 61.54 . . . 2:27:42 . . . 1:23:17

41 . . . 3:20:59 . . . 64.21 . . . 2:11:18 . . . 1:09:41 . . | . . 41 . . . 3:50:59 . . . 62.14 . . . 2:28:06 . . . 1:22:53

42 . . . 3:20:59 . . . 64.75 . . . 2:11:51 . . . 1:09:08 . . | . . 42 . . . 3:50:59 . . . 62.79 . . . 2:26:51 . . . 1:24:08

43 . . . 3:20:59 . . . 65.29 . . . 2:11:45 . . . 1:09:14 . . | . . 43 . . . 3:50:59 . . . 63.50 . . . 2:29:25 . . . 1:21:34

44 . . . 3:20:59 . . . 65.85 . . . 2:15:24 . . . 1:05:35 . . | . . 44 . . . 3:50:59 . . . 64.26 . . . 2:29:43 . . . 1:21:16

45 . . . 3:30:59 . . . 63.27 . . . 2:14:16 . . . 1:16:43 . . | . . 45 . . . 4:00:59 . . . 62.34 . . . 2:32:37 . . . 1:28:22

46 . . . 3:30:59 . . . 63.81 . . . 2:15:24 . . . 1:15:35 . . | . . 46 . . . 4:00:59 . . . 63.10 . . . 2:30:26 . . . 1:30:33

47 . . . 3:30:59 . . . 64.37 . . . 2:16:20 . . . 1:14:39 . . | . . 47 . . . 4:00:59 . . . 63.89 . . . 2:28:59 . . . 1:32:00

48 . . . 3:30:59 . . . 64.93 . . . 2:20:07 . . . 1:10:52 . . | . . 48 . . . 4:00:59 . . . 64.69 . . . 2:41:04 . . . 1:19:55

49 . . . 3:30:59 . . . 65.51 . . . 2:19:47 . . . 1:11:12 . . | . . 49 . . . 4:00:59 . . . 65.51 . . . 2:30:17 . . . 1:30:42

50 . . . 3:35:59 . . . 64.57 . . . 2:19:29 . . . 1:16:30 . . | . . 50 . . . 4:05:59 . . . 65.00 . . . 2:31:05 . . . 1:34:54

51 . . . 3:35:59 . . . 65.15 . . . 2:24:18 . . . 1:11:41 . . | . . 51 . . . 4:05:59 . . . 65.85 . . . 2:35:46 . . . 1:30:13

52 . . . 3:35:59 . . . 65.75 . . . 2:22:14 . . . 1:13:45 . . | . . 52 . . . 4:05:59 . . . 66.72 . . . 2:48:47 . . . 1:17:12

53 . . . 3:35:59 . . . 66.35 . . . 2:23:44 . . . 1:12:15 . . | . . 53 . . . 4:05:59 . . . 67.61 . . . 2:53:38 . . . 1:12:21

54 . . . 3:35:59 . . . 66.96 . . . 2:26:35 . . . 1:09:24 . . | . . 54 . . . 4:05:59 . . . 68.53 . . . 2:54:16 . . . 1:11:43

55 . . . 3:45:59 . . . 64.61 . . . 2:25:56 . . . 1:20:03 . . | . . 55 . . . 4:15:59 . . . 66.76 . . . 2:52:14 . . . 1:23:45

56 . . . 3:45:59 . . . 65.22 . . . 2:27:05 . . . 1:18:54 . . | . . 56 . . . 4:15:59 . . . 67.69 . . . 2:59:23 . . . 1:16:36

57 . . . 3:45:59 . . . 65.84 . . . 2:33:12 . . . 1:12:47 . . | . . 57 . . . 4:15:59 . . . 68.65 . . . 3:04:59 . . . 1:11:00

58 . . . 3:45:59 . . . 66.47 . . . 2:35:51 . . . 1:10:08 . . | . . 58 . . . 4:15:59 . . . 69.63 . . . 3:03:43 . . . 1:12:16

59 . . . 3:45:59 . . . 67.12 . . . 2:34:23 . . . 1:11:36 . . | . . 59 . . . 4:15:59 . . . 70.65 . . . 3:07:05 . . . 1:08:54

60 . . . 4:00:59 . . . 63.56 . . . 2:36:30 . . . 1:24:29 . . | . . 60 . . . 4:30:59 . . . 67.74 . . . 3:01:30 . . . 1:29:29

61 . . . 4:00:59 . . . 64.19 . . . 2:38:12 . . . 1:22:47 . . | . . 61 . . . 4:30:59 . . . 68.79 . . . 3:15:32 . . . 1:15:27

62 . . . 4:00:59 . . . 64.84 . . . 2:41:07 . . . 1:19:52 . . | . . 62 . . . 4:30:59 . . . 69.88 . . . 3:15:18 . . . 1:15:41

63 . . . 4:00:59 . . . 65.49 . . . 2:46:50 . . . 1:14:09 . . | . . 63 . . . 4:30:59 . . . 71.04 . . . 3:14:56 . . . 1:16:03

64 . . . 4:00:59 . . . 66.16 . . . 2:42:44 . . . 1:18:15 . . | . . 64 . . . 4:30:59 . . . 72.27 . . . 3:26:37 . . . 1:04:22

65 . . . 4:15:59 . . . 62.93 . . . 2:41:57 . . . 1:34:02 . . | . . 65 . . . 4:45:59 . . . 69.70 . . . 3:12:56 . . . 1:33:03

66 . . . 4:15:59 . . . 63.59 . . . 2:42:49 . . . 1:33:10 . . | . . 66 . . . 4:45:59 . . . 70.98 . . . 3:35:49 . . . 1:10:10

67 . . . 4:15:59 . . . 64.26 . . . 2:51:07 . . . 1:24:52 . . | . . 67 . . . 4:45:59 . . . 72.35 . . . 3:40:37 . . . 1:05:22

68 . . . 4:15:59 . . . 64.94 . . . 2:51:02 . . . 1:24:57 . . | . . 68 . . . 4:45:59 . . . 73.79 . . . 4:01:53 . . . 0:44:06

69 . . . 4:15:59 . . . 65.64 . . . 2:52:50 . . . 1:23:09 . . | . . 69 . . . 4:45:59 . . . 75.30 . . . 3:35:54 . . . 1:10:05

70 . . . 4:30:59 . . . 62.69 . . . 3:00:23 . . . 1:30:36 . . | . . 70 . . . 5:00:59 . . . 73.10 . . . 3:45:04 . . . 1:15:55

71 . . . 4:30:59 . . . 63.39 . . . 3:00:58 . . . 1:30:01 . . | . . 71 . . . 5:00:59 . . . 74.72 . . . 3:48:14 . . . 1:12:45

72 . . . 4:30:59 . . . 64.16 . . . 2:59:09 . . . 1:31:50 . . | . . 72 . . . 5:00:59 . . . 76.45 . . . 3:46:03 . . . 1:14:56

73 . . . 4:30:59 . . . 65.01 . . . 2:54:48 . . . 1:36:11 . . | . . 73 . . . 5:00:59 . . . 78.30 . . . 3:59:04 . . . 1:01:55

74 . . . 4:30:59 . . . 65.95 . . . 2:58:40 . . . 1:32:19 . . | . . 74 . . . 5:00:59 . . . 80.27 . . . 4:01:54 . . . 0:59:05

75 . . . 4:45:59 . . . 63.47 . . . 3:08:34 . . . 1:37:25 . . | . . 75 . . . 5:15:59 . . . 78.46 . . . 3:57:30 . . . 1:18:29

76 . . . 4:45:59 . . . 64.56 . . . 3:04:53 . . . 1:41:06 . . | . . 76 . . . 5:15:59 . . . 80.60 . . . 4:49:08 . . . 0:26:51

77 . . . 4:45:59 . . . 65.74 . . . 3:33:27 . . . 1:12:32 . . | . . 77 . . . 5:15:59 . . . 82.91 . . . 4:11:28 . . . 1:04:31

78 . . . 4:45:59 . . . 67.04 . . . 3:36:59 . . . 1:09:00 . . | . . 78 . . . 5:15:59 . . . 85.39 . . . 5:00:37 . . . 0:15:22

79 . . . 4:45:59 . . . 68.47 . . . 3:49:23 . . . 0:56:36 . . | . . 79 . . . 5:15:59 . . . 88.04 . . . 5:03:54 . . . 0:12:05

80 . . . 5:00:59 . . . 66.55 . . . 3:39:18 . . . 1:21:41 . . | . . 80 . . . 5:30:59 . . . 86.81 . . . 4:36:52 . . . 0:54:07

They should start the race earlier in the day and spread it out by having more waves. That's one reason we have chip timing. You have to be fast if you want to hear the Wellesley girls scream before they lose their voices or make it for the BoSox game. Though I'm sure that makes it logistically more difficult.

They also should only allow OTQ courses. Some people (like me) qualify on courses that drop 2000+ feet in elevation. That doesn't seem fair, even if you are starting above 5000 feet.

Oh, and by the way, why should the Boston qualifying times determine how fast you run your marathon? Shouldn't you be running your heart out no matter what the BQ time is? That's how I think it should anyway.

Why do the charity runners act like they are above us and have a RIGHT to be there at boston more so then those that qualified? I don't get it with them

You guys are a bunch of f@ckin' dorks. Stuck with match.com, I'll give you a little credit due to the fact that your trolling skills are impressive. You are like the pied piper of Letsrun dorks. Not that these guys are all that hard to troll. Anyway. Yeah. Boston Marathon should only be open to "fast" guys who run sub-3:00. Right on. What an injustice. Etc. etc. Yawn.

YOU are my hero. I agree with that. Keep up the good work and perspective.

stuck with match.com wrote:

Why do the charity runners act like they are above us and have a RIGHT to be there at boston more so then those that qualified? I don't get it with them

Because they are enabled constantly.

Look at race material, asking if you want to race "more meaningful" by running for a charity.

Charity runners are part of a lucrative business model for organizations that thrive on peoples goodwill.

If you try to question them or their motives you get a hysterical reaction and are called cruel.

The only bigger reaction will come if you ask why they don't forward %100 of the money they raise to the people they supposedly are so interested in.

great post. Thanks for the info.

Looks like cuts across the board by 5 or 10 minutes until about age 60 makes the most sense. There aren't that many runners over 60 that it would make that much an impact and it motivates me to know 70 year olds and above out there running.

Wasn't the qualifying time for Boton back in the 70's like 3 hours for men and 3:30 hours for women.

Maybe the times need to be lowered a little....

an older runner wrote:

Wasn't the qualifying time for Boton back in the 70's like 3 hours for men and 3:30 hours for women.

Maybe the times need to be lowered a little....

Re-posted from another thread...

It was the same for everyone in the period of 1971-1976 and then the universal standard was 3:30.

It was as low as 2:50 for a period of 7 years (1980-1986) and that was just for the open men. It was slower for others.

1980 2:50 open men, 3:10 40+ men, 3:20 women

1981-1983 2:50 open men, 3:10 40-49 men, 3:20 open women + 50-59men, 3:30 40+ women, 60+men

1984-1986 2:50 open men, 3:10 40-49 men, 3:20 open women + 50-59men, 3:30 40+ women, 60+men, 3:40 women 50-59, 3:50 women 60+

The truth is they have tried all sorts of qualifying standards and the mark has been all over the place. Just looking at the qualifying times for open men, you can see the fluctuation:

Open men qualifying times

1971-1976 3:30 (same standard for everyone)

1977-1979 3:00

1980-1986 2:50

1987-1989 3:00

1990-2011 3:10

The thing is that when standards were first used it was mainly to keep the field smaller and only to some extent to preserve the "seriousness"/competitiveness of the race.

Just look at the stats from 1972 (first year women could officially enter):

1220 official runners (including 9 women)

300 unofficial runners

~700 finish under 3:30. No times over 3:30 were recorded.

So it is not like everyone was running sub-3 or anything, but it did keep the field size down. Now they actually want the large field size so the qualifying time is mainly for the prestige factor and where you set that mark for "prestige" seems quite arbitrary.

I think it is a little misguided to tie the speed of the registration filling to the qualifying standards. Unless they make the standards so strict that you have way less than 20,000 people able to make the mark (which they won't do, because they still want to fill the race), then you are always going to have more demand than open spots. And if people think others are going to sign up on the first day, then so will they -- creating a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The only thing that has really changed over the past few years is the perception of how quickly registration would fill. 3+ years ago everyone thought they could wait until February -- so it did not fill up until then or later... Each year since, it has filed up earlier -- so each time, people sign up earlier to beat the perceived rush. I don't think tightening the standards will change that perception much.

Why should they change? I qualified with my 2010 time and will be using it for 2012's Boston when I entered into another age bracket.

Rules are rules.

there are no rules for 2012 yet

Then all these "rumors" and "chatters" NEEDS TO STOP. I am not getting any faster! This will be my only chance to run Boston!

Everyone NEEDS to STOP SPECULATING

parker wrote:

Why should they change? I qualified with my 2010 time and will be using it for 2012's Boston when I entered into another age bracket.

Rules are rules.

Then simply run the new qualifying time (whatever they are)

Then I will NOT do that. I worked so hard and busted my butt off to run under 3:40. I missed it, but my time is good once I turn 35 in 2012. Rules are rules. I don't need to run another qualifying time to validate myself.

This is such a high school mentality where there is a cool and awkward crowd. I worked so hard to squeak under 3:45 and the rest of you are creating rumors and speculation to lower the standards? Sorry but I don't run as fast as you, but I DESERVE to be in Boston and toeing the line with the current standards.

Please end the rumors NOW

take the wambulance to the runners world forum. i hope you get in. boston is an awesome experience that you worked hard for, but there is obviously a problem here. my suggestion? keep training and be ready to rip if they do change it

parker wrote:

Then I will NOT do that. I worked so hard and busted my butt off to run under 3:40. I missed it, but my time is good once I turn 35 in 2012. Rules are rules. I don't need to run another qualifying time to validate myself.

This is such a high school mentality where there is a cool and awkward crowd. I worked so hard to squeak under 3:45 and the rest of you are creating rumors and speculation to lower the standards? Sorry but I don't run as fast as you, but I DESERVE to be in Boston and toeing the line with the current standards.

Please end the rumors NOW

O.k. Obviously you're just trolling. Well, at least I hope so.

P.S. Rules are rules? What rules? Technically, there are no standards set for 2012. Once the BAA announces the 116th edition (2012), they'll announce the qualifying standards for that race. This process happens on a yearly basis.

I posted this on another thread.....

Have seen no one mention that the BAA take a look at eliminating as "certified BAA courses" some of the more extreme (and easier) courses (in terms of percentage elevation drop). I think the US Olympic Committee addressed this after an inordinate number of women ran the 'A' standard out west at a race in Montana or Utah?

I am not trolling because the new standards will affect me. I don't think I can run a marathon so soon and hit a sub 3:40! I have no options.

parker wrote:

Why should they change? I qualified with my 2010 time and will be using it for 2012's Boston when I entered into another age bracket.

Rules are rules.

You mean assuming you are one of the ones lucky enough to get it when it closes in LESS THAN AN HOUR if they don't change anything.

No, for those that that have poited this out, Boston doesn't HAVE TO change anything. It is their race and they can do what they want. They have stated their goal is to put on the best possible event for those that qualify and get in (and yes, though raising money for a charity isn't the same as training, it still couns as a way of earning your way into the race and it isn't going to go anywhere). After last year (and even more so this year) they have thousands if not hundreds of thousands of potential customers who are ticked off. Long term, that is not a good position to be in and it is in their best long term interests to make some kind of adjustments.