Bayshore Marathon Short?

THIS IS EXACTLY RIGHT.

The full distance was not run because the qualifiers ran on the left side of the road.

CASE CLOSED

It doesn’t matter if it is the fault of the race or the athletes were not made aware.

THE ENTIRE DISTANCE WAS NOT COVERED

Thanks for the response. I empathize that it's not fun to read this thread coming off the high of the race this weekend when you'd rather be focused on celebrating it.

A few thoughts in response:

- As another poster mentioned, the thinking is not that there was something anomalous about this year - it's clear that people have been running on the wrong side of the road in prior years too since the short distance has been consistent across multiple years

- The reduction in distance isn't necessarily 0.15 miles at most. Most people actually run over 26.22 miles since they don't run tangents perfectly even within the designed course, and will often end up with measurements in the 26.3-26.4 range. So it's possible that you only cut off 0.18 miles (slightly more than 0.15 if you use exact math) but it's also possible it could be 0.25, 0.35, etc. - we just don't know

Like I said I empathize with how it likely feels while reading this, but I actually think these are important conversations to have - if races could get away with being short or people could get away with cutting courses, that'd be an issue for the sport - and that it's been a constructive conversation about what happened

Decent trolling. 8/10. Enjoy your meal.

The course was new version as of last year due to erosion and suffered from the same lack of communication about staying on the right side of the road (I was at the race). Any issues with people not running the full length occurred last year too I just didn’t look into it because no one OTQed. By the way all credit to Zach for a remarkable run this year, I’m not interested in tearing him down, just some accountability for the organizers as this is a beautiful race I’d like to do someday.

Maybe I’m wrong or misremembering, but like I said in a previous post I honestly remember running on the right side of the road for much of that section and still got 26.15 on my GPS. If you weren’t one of the leaders it honestly would have been very difficult to run on the left side of the road for that section because of oncoming runners, and yet we’ve consistently seen people say all their friends who ran had GPS distances < 26.2. I just don’t understand why people in this thread are refusing to believe it couldn’t be a GPS issue.

Again, like I’ve also said before, I’m not saying it’s impossible that the course is short or that everyone ran the course incorrectly; but based on what I’ve read I think there is enough plausible reason to believe it was a GPS issue. And for a USATF certified course to be short or for it to be so easily cut short by running it incorrectly (across several years by the way, as people have been reporting distances < 26.2 as far back as 2017) I kind of need all plausible reason it couldn’t be a GPS issue to be proven wrong. Basically, you need to prove a certified course is short; not the other way around.

I think the Course Crusaders should start checking EVERY USATF Certified Course across the ENTIRE NATION!! USATF's credibility is on the line!

Alan

*refusing to believe it could be a GPS issue

We aren’t saying we’ve completely ruled out that there was an issue with GPS. We’re saying we’ve ruled out that there was ONLY an issue with GPS. It’s not impossible that people both didn’t run the full distance and also had the GPS cut out some distance.

That said, I personally don’t buy it since the course looks pretty open, we have evidence of non-GPS issues causing the gap, and it sounds like it was accurate for half marathoners.

Alexi, since you said discussions are important to you and for our sport, can you share why you are so personally invested in this? Are you planning to run an OTQ and you're having difficultly finding good races? Did you recently miss an OTQ? I am curious why you seem to be on a small crusade about this one instance that produced 3 OTQs for some solid, hard-working runners, none of whom are probably looking to make the Olympic team this cycle.

Looking at the course, is it even possible to cut an entire 1/4 mile (or thereabouts) just by occasionally running in the left lane to cut a little more of the tangents? I get that if the course was measured in the right lane, then cutting over into the left lane once in awhile would cut a slight amount of distance. But seems like even over 26.2 miles that might add up to just a few fewer meters, not tenths of a mile. The course is relatively straight as far as marathon courses go, so I just don't see how the left vs. right lane issue discussed in this thread could make THAT much difference.

For a USATF certified course it’s simply illogical to not believe it was legit until proven otherwise (via overwhelming evidence or more realistically a statement from the race organizers and/or USATF).

This isn’t just about the OTQ runners. This is about all the runners who ran a PR, BQ, completed their first marathon, etc. assuming the certified course they ran on was legit. At this point I’m honestly hoping the race organizers/USATF say something to clear the air.

Also, this. Throughout this entire discussion I find it pretty hard to believe running on the left side would cut off as much as it would’ve needed to for it to be the issue.

I'm with you especially since you couldn't run the whole road the whole time. Once the half marathoners came down you had to stick to the right. There were some curves but not many.

For what it's worth my Garmin was pretty close to the mile markers, hitting very slightly early for some but others dead on. After the halfway point my Garmin was hitting a bit after the mile markers and at that point I had to stay to the right for most of the rest of the race.

I don't think I would hold my breath waiting for a comment from the race directors or USATF. But I could be wrong!

What I would expect is that next year there will be an endless row of cones that keep athletes on the correct (wide) side of the course around those long sweeping turns, statements in the race materials that explicitly tell the runners they need to stay in the correct lane and inside cones, and volunteers along those sections to remind them.

I have no doubt that the course was legit in the measurement. The problem seems to be that people weren't held accountable for running the course as measured.

Fair question - no reason other than general interest in the topic.

For what it's worth, I did the same thing for another race a few years ago where I ran a PR and it was confirmed to be short. In that case I even emailed the race directors directly too, which I'm not doing in this case. So not about personal gain at all, just interest in getting to the truth

It’s a different course. They changed it last year. I got 26.26 in 2019. The course is short

I would say check the marathon turnaround point. Also look at the half marathon GPS results. Almost all over 13.1 with a different start point, i.e. the half marathon start point and the marathon turnaround points are in different.

even if the darn thing is short, these run or shouldn’t be penalized. I agree with you, running the occasional tiny tangent is likely insignificant.

Has anyone reached out to USATF re: the course being short?

Has anyone here complaining ever run a race where the marathon merges into a half? Instant plugged up road...so for leaders/fast twitchers what do you do? Willing to bet you go a little outside the centerline to go past the slower dudes and dudettes. Even the little people on bikes cannot get the half/10kers to move over. So for Zach and the dozen+ racers that past me on the course (I did the half)...bravo on a well run race. Also I ran the full last year with my calibrated Stryd on and it registered 26.22...same course as this year.