I hear you and feel bad for everyone caught up in this. I have good friends that have qualified for 2021 and now are in greater jeopardy of missing acceptance because of the decision to at least extend qualification for 2020 entrants. There's really no win win situation here, it's all about mitigating as best as possible. From what I'm hearing though there's a good shot 2021 isn't happening either, at least not in April. Obviously a lot can change in between though and hopefully it will.
wejo wrote:
Maybe we can hold it in Texas:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston,_TexasAnyone know of other "Bostons" in the US?
NO
Well crap, now I guess I'm holding out for CIM, not likely given Newsome's leadership.
Any meet directors for any early fall marathon, or half(I'm getting desperate), think they'll be able to host their race or would plan an elite only race and will make room for a 2:17 guy?
They should NOT allow just anyone to run the virtual race. Limit the race to just participants and qualifiers. Its a slap in the face if they allow random people to run it.
The real problem for people who were in for 2020 will be the people who will now age up.
You have the people who got in already for 2020 who now have 5 or 10 minutes added to their cushion, bumping up the cut off. Then you have people who were cut from 2020 but now qualify as a result of aging up. Then you have all the people who didn't bother applying because they didn't qualify before but they qualify now . And you've got all the applicants who qualified for the 2021 qualifying period.
The cut off is going to increase dramatically.
Working Harder wrote:
I hear you and feel bad for everyone caught up in this. I have good friends that have qualified for 2021 and now are in greater jeopardy of missing acceptance because of the decision to at least extend qualification for 2020 entrants. There's really no win win situation here, it's all about mitigating as best as possible. From what I'm hearing though there's a good shot 2021 isn't happening either, at least not in April. Obviously a lot can change in between though and hopefully it will.
This is me. Ran 2:56:53 for the 2021 window, and now skeptical of making it unless they add to field size/cut down on charity runners. There’s also bad PR if people who made it for 2020 get left out. The BAA may be willing to put up with that, but people will react irrationally and angrily if they’re in that group.
Working Harder wrote:
There's really no win win situation here, it's all about mitigating as best as possible. From what I'm hearing though there's a good shot 2021 isn't happening either, at least not in April. Obviously a lot can change in between though and hopefully it will.
I agree, there is no perfect scenario. I think doing 2020 virtually and allowing those that qualified for 2020 to try for 2021 make sense. I'm glad they are doing refunds if you don't want to do the virtual race.
It will give everyone peace of mind when they update the qualification times for 2021. I feel bad for people with a bubble time, because I know how hard they worked. But we are all just speculating right now, who knows what they'll do for the qualification times.
I was 7 min under, but I'll be in the next age bracket for 2021, so I guess for those of us getting bumped up an age bracket, there is a small consolation if they do lower the time qualifications as we will have even more of a cushion. And yeah, we'll see about 2021 anyways. I'm staying hopeful and will keep on running.
? wrote:
The real problem for people who were in for 2020 will be the people who will now age up.
You have the people who got in already for 2020 who now have 5 or 10 minutes added to their cushion, bumping up the cut off. Then you have people who were cut from 2020 but now qualify as a result of aging up. Then you have all the people who didn't bother applying because they didn't qualify before but they qualify now . And you've got all the applicants who qualified for the 2021 qualifying period.
The cut off is going to increase dramatically.
Yeah. This, right here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_(disambiguation)wejo wrote:
Maybe we can hold it in Texas:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston,_TexasAnyone know of other "Bostons" in the US?
I'll put in my 2 cents worth, since that's all it's worth:
1. BAA should hold a Tokyo-style elites only in September, top 20-30 men and women, with prize money; change the course to multiple loops within Boston city limits so no other towns will have to approve. This keeps the longest-running marathon streak alive (no one said it has to be "exactly" the same course every year; it wasn't even the same distance every year at first) and gives elite athletes something to train for and keep competitive.
2. Open the virtual marathon to anyone who wants to pay for it. I don't like the concept of virtual races, but they're all we've got right now. I didn't run a BQ for 2020 and have probably lost my opportunity to BQ for 2021, so what harm is there in opening it up? I've got a bunch of real Boston medals, would be kind of cool to have a virtual one to add to it, for heritage.
I love all of these people that have run multiple Boston races telling all of first-timers to essentially "get over it."
Its just the principle of it. People who ran the time or at least raised money "earned" their spots. Part of the appeal of the race is that its hard to get into.
Working Harder wrote:
I wonder if they'll increase the field size to be more in line with what they did in 2014 with 36k.
Field will be limited to 10. From now on.
I wonder what the cutoff will be?
My26cents wrote:
Wejo,
You know better than this, this post is shortsighted. It's not just about X number of runners but the amount of people who would be on the race course gathering/supporting the event.
We are already seeing reports of how it can spread for small social gatherings. Imagine if you had 1000's of small gatherings on the course. How big of a public health workforce would you need to potentially trace the spread if an outbreak occurs?
What happens if one volunteer at the finish line who was an active carrier handing out medals to over 1,000 participants. We don't have the current capacity to track this information down.
My26cents wrote:
What happens if one volunteer at the finish line who was an active carrier handing out medals to over 1,000 participants. We don't have the current capacity to track this information down.
Is this a joke?
1) Yo don't hand out medals at the finish during a pandemic. There is something called the USPS.
2) You could also ban fans like they are doing in every other sport.
What happens if the one cash register lady at the supermarket has Covid and hands a receipt to 250 people on her shift?
My26cents wrote:
I saw the front page about Boston and wanted to point a few things out.
Each of those years Boston was still small. 1919 only had 49 runners which were down from the 78 in previous years. Additionally, 1918 there was a relay race instead of a true marathon. For WWII numbers dropped into the low 70s from 130-140s people.
The sheer number of trying to hold a 35,000 person race compared to under 200 is not a fair comparison.
Why does it have to be a 35,000 person race? Tokyo 2020 was held - with just the elites.
Have a relay race. Do something besides raise the white flag.
stop the panic wrote:
2) You could also ban fans like they are doing in every other sport.
Walk me through the logistics of locking down 26.2 miles to everyone in Boston?
I just wonder if Boston canceling will be the first domino to drop and a bunch of other races will follow here shortly. Hopefully not. Bekele is getting old, and Kipchoge is already like 52, so the clock is ticking here on another WR attempt.
They should allow anyone registered for 2020 and who has never run Boston before to defer their entry to 2021. All others have to have bq from 9/18 or after and are subject to the cutoff, whatever that may be. I think it would be particularly cruel to subject these folks to another round of entry/cutoff drama. I know, it’s only the Boston Marathon. I’ll shed no tears however it shakes out, but I think that’s fair.
no doubt 1 wrote:
They should allow anyone registered for 2020 and who has never run Boston before to defer their entry to 2021. All others have to have bq from 9/18 or after and are subject to the cutoff, whatever that may be. I think it would be particularly cruel to subject these folks to another round of entry/cutoff drama. I know, it’s only the Boston Marathon. I’ll shed no tears however it shakes out, but I think that’s fair.
That is actually a great idea. I hope Tom Grilk reads this thread!!!
Will a great number of people really be able to qualify for 2021? In what marathon will they make this qualification?