NERunner03533 wrote:
Nobody cares except you if you finished 20,000 & 19,999 overall. There's a lot that athletes can do to make gains. Time should be spent there instead of on stuff like this.
You've literally just made the same done-to-death point that I addressed only one page ago:
"They always use the "oh big deal, you came 901st instead of 900th", tacitly acknowledging that being knocked down a position doesn't matter if you're not at the upper echelons and therefore, the same rules of fairness that Nikki benefits from in her races don't apply to ordinary runners. What if a woman was knocked down from 18th to 21st at Boston because of trans athletes? What if they were pushed out of the top 10 or podium? At some arbitrary point in performance, I'm sure even Nikki will say "ah ok, steady on, we can't have this male taking my women's first place for this road race". So who gets to decide where it doesn't matter anymore? 10th place? 20th place? 1000th place? Or, you know, it might just make more sense to keep it consistent and have everyone compete within their immutable binary sex category."
Unless you have the authority to decide the exact arbitrary point where fairness doesn't matter for female athletes then please stop flogging this dead horse.