For those who don't click links on Letsrun, the post is:
"Imagine two runners who run a BQ. One has run Boston six times and the other has never run it before. Currently, the bib goes to the faster runner, and we never _ever_ question whether that is the right result. I think we can do better. I think the Majors can do better."
Is there a better way? Is there a point when veterans who are fast enough to get in every year without worry should step aside and let a newcomer enjoy Boston's famous revelry?
----
For transparency, I'm in the former group mentioned in the threads post. Not the latter, so this isn't a gripe post. I'm a multiple-time prior finisher who has a 14:33 cushion over my age group's 2025 qualifying standard. Barring some crazy cutoff, I'm not worried about missing out and plan to return. I booked my hotel months ago.
Yes, I know he's a shoetuber/influencer. I hope we can look past that moniker and discuss the point he's making. There's a healthy forum on this platform for shoetuber discussion.
I am 55 and ran a 328 flat in my qualifier, do you think that is going to get me in?
So close on 328. Hope you get in.
For perspective on the topic, at 55 my 331 got me in with a 9 minute cushion ...10 years ago. Next year that wouldn't even be a BQ.
For those who don't click links on Letsrun, the post is:
"Imagine two runners who run a BQ. One has run Boston six times and the other has never run it before. Currently, the bib goes to the faster runner, and we never _ever_ question whether that is the right result. I think we can do better. I think the Majors can do better."
Is there a better way? Is there a point when veterans who are fast enough to get in every year without worry should step aside and let a newcomer enjoy Boston's famous revelry?
----
For transparency, I'm in the former group mentioned in the threads post. Not the latter, so this isn't a gripe post. I'm a multiple-time prior finisher who has a 14:33 cushion over my age group's 2025 qualifying standard. Barring some crazy cutoff, I'm not worried about missing out and plan to return. I booked my hotel months ago.
Yes, I know he's a shoetuber/influencer. I hope we can look past that moniker and discuss the point he's making. There's a healthy forum on this platform for shoetuber discussion.
I have an idea. Why don't you give up your spot for him?
Classic Letsrun post. Obviously that's on my mind, as I wrote it.
I ran Boston in 1982 and I had to run sub 2:50 to qualify so I don't understand the fuss about running 2:55 to qualify. I don't care for the 6 hour charity runners who bought their way in but I doubt they'll do anything to change that because of the money.
For those who don't click links on Letsrun, the post is:
"Imagine two runners who run a BQ. One has run Boston six times and the other has never run it before. Currently, the bib goes to the faster runner, and we never _ever_ question whether that is the right result. I think we can do better. I think the Majors can do better."
Is there a better way? Is there a point when veterans who are fast enough to get in every year without worry should step aside and let a newcomer enjoy Boston's famous revelry?
----
For transparency, I'm in the former group mentioned in the threads post. Not the latter, so this isn't a gripe post. I'm a multiple-time prior finisher who has a 14:33 cushion over my age group's 2025 qualifying standard. Barring some crazy cutoff, I'm not worried about missing out and plan to return. I booked my hotel months ago.
Yes, I know he's a shoetuber/influencer. I hope we can look past that moniker and discuss the point he's making. There's a healthy forum on this platform for shoetuber discussion.
BAA should make it harder to get in. Get rid of the charity hobby joggers who brag about "running" Boston.
I keep it to my self about being a runner. But due to my career and age it always come up how "do you look so young and thin?"My response, "I make time to run".
inevitably the person says, " I've run Boston". I ask what's their BQ? and they say, "what's a BQ I got in donating to charity". Oh wow I say. Then ask what'd ya run? Broke six hours. Or, ranges of 4 -5 hrs.
Then the person finally asks, " have you ran a marathon ? Yes, only three when I was 36-39 years old. BQ'd all three 2:33, 2:50 and 2:36. But I never ran Boston.
At that point you can see in their face they are not worthy of bragging about " running Boston" and understand what "hobby jogger" is.
Keep Boston as something to truly "brag" about ! Otherwise, my 10 handy cap is enough to get me into Augusta ;)
Honestly do you get that excited bragging to other hobby joggers? oh boy.
I couldn't care less about telling other random runners about my times and I just positively reinforce what they say. If they truly ask my paces I will tell them and they quickly realize 'boston' isn't the only thing in this world.
But that conversation is truly boring. "oh you're so fast!" "oh you're elite!" blah blah. It gets hard to relate when they don't want to listen. But what we can relate about is getting up early, running 1,000s of miles solo, and the drive to get better.
I have an idea. Why don't you give up your spot for him?
Classic Letsrun post. Obviously that's on my mind, as I wrote it.
The idea of giving up your 'streaker slot' for those that have not yet managed entry is most admirable. I've entertained the thought myself. That first Boston is indeed most exciting on so many levels and seeing that excitement in them is, in itself, neat to see.
BUT, we must be careful to not gradually let that run be diluted to a less than premier athletic event. I've watched it migrate from 'a premier athletic event' to a seemingly 'social event' in just 15 short years. Think about it, a cap of 30,000 runners and only (+/-) 22,000 qualified runners; where it once was '100% the best runners'.
So, I will continue to bust my old ass, train even smarter every year to do my best to contribute to keeping the Boston Marathon at a level it was meant to be.
Is there a better way? Is there a point when veterans who are fast enough to get in every year without worry should step aside and let a newcomer enjoy Boston's famous revelry?
No, this would strip Boston of what gives it it’s “famous revelry” in the first place.
Is there a better way? Is there a point when veterans who are fast enough to get in every year without worry should step aside and let a newcomer enjoy Boston's famous revelry?
No, this would strip Boston of what gives it it’s “famous revelry” in the first place.
Hell no to "stepping aside". Boston is an annual pilgrimage for my running group. Dear to our hearts, a rite of spring and an affirmation of our love for the sport. It beckons to us for months and pulls us though cold wet and and dark winter runs. No marathon comes close. First time I ran it, I resolved to do it every year for as long as possible. I have only missed 2 in 20, when injured, and plan to keep at it until I can't qualify. Don't give me any break and don't give any break to the "newcomer" who can't cut the mustard.
No, this would strip Boston of what gives it it’s “famous revelry” in the first place.
Hell no to "stepping aside". Boston is an annual pilgrimage for my running group. Dear to our hearts, a rite of spring and an affirmation of our love for the sport. It beckons to us for months and pulls us though cold wet and and dark winter runs. No marathon comes close. First time I ran it, I resolved to do it every year for as long as possible. I have only missed 2 in 20, when injured, and plan to keep at it until I can't qualify. Don't give me any break and don't give any break to the "newcomer" who can't cut the mustard.
The thing is, when you are young and it is easy to run sub-3, you don't care about Boston.
But then, when you are a Masters runners with ten half-healed injuries and can't touch your toes, all your co-workers are asking you each year, "Are you doing Boston?" and you think, I'd like to give it a shot.
So you take your injured dad-bod out for a 10 miler at 6:45 pace and realize it feels like an all-out workout. Oof.
this is really stupid but wouldn't expect anything else from rojo
the only real change that needs to be made is to disallow all the downhill qualifier races
I looked at the USATF certified course database to see what marathons in Utah would even be allowed if races more downhill than Boston were banned for qualifying, and the options get very slim. You have Logan/Top of Utah, Antelope Island, tosh Jordan River which I can't verify even exists anymore, Legacy marathon which find my marathon has listed as cancelled, and Heber Valley, which is net uphill and I also can't verify it still exists. The link on gohebervalley.com takes you to some weird anime girl website. So as far as races that are actually verified to exist, Top of Utah and Antelope Island is it. These are both quite small races. 158 finishers at Top of Utah last year, Antelope Island is on a Friday, had 96 finishers last year, and was won in 3:04. Even Salt Lake is more downhill than Boston. So the whole state of Utah has only 1 marathon that would qualify under that system that takes place on a weekend. Top of Utah is a fine race, but idk if it could logistically handle being the only one in the state to BQ at, barring a Friday race.
I'd be in favor of the change just so there'd be less interest in these downhill races, and then (hopefully) they'd start to die out or change the courses to be qualifiers. I have no interest in running one, as I want an accurate measure of my fitness (and don't want to deal with the pounding). The two main marathons in my state are both downhill races and it'd be nice to not have to plan to travel out of state.
BAA should make it harder to get in. Get rid of the charity hobby joggers who brag about "running" Boston.
I keep it to my self about being a runner. But due to my career and age it always come up how "do you look so young and thin?"My response, "I make time to run".
inevitably the person says, " I've run Boston". I ask what's their BQ? and they say, "what's a BQ I got in donating to charity". Oh wow I say. Then ask what'd ya run? Broke six hours. Or, ranges of 4 -5 hrs.
Then the person finally asks, " have you ran a marathon ? Yes, only three when I was 36-39 years old. BQ'd all three 2:33, 2:50 and 2:36. But I never ran Boston.
At that point you can see in their face they are not worthy of bragging about " running Boston" and understand what "hobby jogger" is.
Keep Boston as something to truly "brag" about ! Otherwise, my 10 handy cap is enough to get me into Augusta ;)
Honestly do you get that excited bragging to other hobby joggers? oh boy.
I couldn't care less about telling other random runners about my times and I just positively reinforce what they say. If they truly ask my paces I will tell them and they quickly realize 'boston' isn't the only thing in this world.
But that conversation is truly boring. "oh you're so fast!" "oh you're elite!" blah blah. It gets hard to relate when they don't want to listen. But what we can relate about is getting up early, running 1,000s of miles solo, and the drive to get better.
The problem, as I see it, is not the time qualification. It's that every course (certified by USATF or AIMS) is seen as the same. There should be a course coefficient. Any marathon, that meets the above qualification should pay BAA $350 to evaluate the course and provide a coefficient to the times from that course. The REVEL Mt. Charleston course should be much lower than the Chicago Marathon since RMC has 5000+ ft of drop.
This gets the BAA more money and evens the playing field with these ridiculous courses and people chasing a silly time.
Hell no to "stepping aside". Boston is an annual pilgrimage for my running group. Dear to our hearts, a rite of spring and an affirmation of our love for the sport. It beckons to us for months and pulls us though cold wet and and dark winter runs. No marathon comes close. First time I ran it, I resolved to do it every year for as long as possible. I have only missed 2 in 20, when injured, and plan to keep at it until I can't qualify. Don't give me any break and don't give any break to the "newcomer" who can't cut the mustard.
The solution is to get the relatively fast people to run another big race in the spring. The only thing that Boston has going for it is that there are hordes of good amateur marathoners running the race. If you run a 2:45 in Boston, you will have dozens of runners around you throughout the race and will never be running alone. And the pack just gets bigger around 3 hrs and onward.
If there was another big race in the spring that catered to faster amateurs, they could potentially be a relief valve for Boston. Boston is a very expensive race. Hotels are very pricy. It is also a difficult race logistically. There is a long bus ride to Hopkinton and then you sit around forever waiting to start. And while the course has lots of history, it is painfully hilly, especially for people who live where it is flat and cannot effectively train for the race. The race route is just a tour of Massachusetts' generally dinghy lower/middle class suburban neighborhoods (although it gets better once you get to Newton to the Back Bay). The finish has been ruined a bit by the bombing. So, it is certainly possible to put on a race with a better experience for faster runners than Boston.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.