I can’t wait to see the hundreds of runners that will run 2 minutes faster than they will ever run on a legitimate course.
I can’t wait to see the hundreds of runners that will run 2 minutes faster than they will ever run on a legitimate course.
Aided beyond belief wrote:
I can’t wait to see the hundreds of runners that will run 2 minutes faster than they will ever run on a legitimate course.
What’s your personal vendetta with CIM?
Why no threads about Dubai? St George? Berlin?
Aided beyond belief wrote:
I can’t wait to see the hundreds of runners that will run 2 minutes faster than they will ever run on a legitimate course.
Ok Addled beyond belief. Loser.
This post was removed.
CIM is worse than the rest of them because it's such a manufactured race that whores itself out to fastish sub-elites. They actually pay runners who hit the Olympic B-standard $500 ($1500) for the A-standard) if they apply in advance. The women's B-Standard of 2:45 is especially soft, so you end up with a bunch of moderately above average ladies who can afford to fly to a part of California that no one actually wants to go to for a weekend and spend $270 on shoes they'll wear once running 2:44 and change in super shoes so that they can go around calling themselves 'elite' and getting the running media all hyped about women's empowerment that really only benefits a tiny affluent subset of women. The purpose of the Olympic marathon trials is to pick a competitive Olympic team, not to help your hobbyjogger wife show off to her running friends.
The same thing happens at the BQ level, but is possibly worse, because it makes the buffer harder for people who ran legitimate courses.
Aided beyond belief wrote:
I can’t wait to see the hundreds of runners that will run 2 minutes faster than they will ever run on a legitimate course.
You sound bitter and upset that you’ll never be as fast as they guys and gals running CIM. Go take a bath, you stink loser.
LA Marathon is also a big race with net downhill, point-to-point course. The only uphill worthy of note is in the beginning of the race when you're still fresh, and the final miles are more of ski slope than any part of CIM. Yet there are no OTQ / BQ crowds over there and not much whining about 'aided course'. I'd bet there are plenty other races like that.
I'd say that the RDs in Sacramento did an excellent job about advertising their race as being super fast and attracting all those runners wanting to set a personal best. Heck you and OP might actually be a part of that advertising, adding to the hype.
Wow, imagine sitting next to you at a dinner table.
can tell you've never ran the cim course
Boston is net downhill. Why doesn't anyone every complain about Boston being a "farce" course?
joe mother wrote:
can tell you've never ran the cim course
So true. Anyone that complains that people are getting a huge downhill advantage at CIM clearly has never been on it.
coachy wrote:
joe mother wrote:
can tell you've never ran the cim course
So true. Anyone that complains that people are getting a huge downhill advantage at CIM clearly has never been on it.
World Athletics considers it aided because the drop exceeds the 1m per km limit. It can’t be used as a qualifier for World/Olympic teams. Anyone denying it’s aided is kidding themselves.
ButActually wrote:
CIM is worse than the rest of them because it's such a manufactured race that whores itself out to fastish sub-elites. They actually pay runners who hit the Olympic B-standard $500 ($1500) for the A-standard) if they apply in advance. The women's B-Standard of 2:45 is especially soft, so you end up with a bunch of moderately above average ladies who can afford to fly to a part of California that no one actually wants to go to for a weekend and spend $270 on shoes they'll wear once running 2:44 and change in super shoes so that they can go around calling themselves 'elite' and getting the running media all hyped about women's empowerment that really only benefits a tiny affluent subset of women. The purpose of the Olympic marathon trials is to pick a competitive Olympic team, not to help your hobbyjogger wife show off to her running friends.
The same thing happens at the BQ level, but is possibly worse, because it makes the buffer harder for people who ran legitimate courses.
You need to get out more if you think that 2:45 is only moderately above average for women (or that people are throwing away Alphaflys after one wear).
cim is aided. wrote:
coachy wrote:
So true. Anyone that complains that people are getting a huge downhill advantage at CIM clearly has never been on it.
World Athletics considers it aided because the drop exceeds the 1m per km limit. It can’t be used as a qualifier for World/Olympic teams. Anyone denying it’s aided is kidding themselves.
So is Boston.
Ho Hum wrote:
ButActually wrote:
CIM is worse than the rest of them because it's such a manufactured race that whores itself out to fastish sub-elites. They actually pay runners who hit the Olympic B-standard $500 ($1500) for the A-standard) if they apply in advance. The women's B-Standard of 2:45 is especially soft, so you end up with a bunch of moderately above average ladies who can afford to fly to a part of California that no one actually wants to go to for a weekend and spend $270 on shoes they'll wear once running 2:44 and change in super shoes so that they can go around calling themselves 'elite' and getting the running media all hyped about women's empowerment that really only benefits a tiny affluent subset of women. The purpose of the Olympic marathon trials is to pick a competitive Olympic team, not to help your hobbyjogger wife show off to her running friends.
The same thing happens at the BQ level, but is possibly worse, because it makes the buffer harder for people who ran legitimate courses.
You need to get out more if you think that 2:45 is only moderately above average for women (or that people are throwing away Alphaflys after one wear).
It was an obvious troll job. Try to keep up.
Anyway, I've done CIM. I also live in a very flat area. The last 10k of CIM is advertised as flat. It's not. People have a weird idea of what flat is. I recently did the savannah course too. Also considered flat. It's flattish. But not flat. Otherwise CIM was incredibly hilly for me and the last 10k was rolling. You guys need to go some place actually flat to get perspective.
Yes, but the top 10 qualify for World/Olympic Team, as rightly so being a World Marathon Major.
cim is aided. wrote:
Yes, but the top 10 qualify for World/Olympic Team, as rightly so being a World Marathon Major.
Are you concerned that someone is going to qualify for a World team at CIM that normally would not?
No they can’t, but sub-elites exploit CIM since USATF allows it as a qualifier for the Trials. We can expect much tighter time standards for 2024 because of the massive number of qualifiers at CIM.
ButActually wrote:
CIM is worse than the rest of them because it's such a manufactured race that whores itself out to fastish sub-elites. They actually pay runners who hit the Olympic B-standard $500 ($1500) for the A-standard) if they apply in advance. The women's B-Standard of 2:45 is especially soft, so you end up with a bunch of moderately above average ladies who can afford to fly to a part of California that no one actually wants to go to for a weekend and spend $270 on shoes they'll wear once running 2:44 and change in super shoes so that they can go around calling themselves 'elite' and getting the running media all hyped about women's empowerment that really only benefits a tiny affluent subset of women. The purpose of the Olympic marathon trials is to pick a competitive Olympic team, not to help your hobbyjogger wife show off to her running friends.
The same thing happens at the BQ level, but is possibly worse, because it makes the buffer harder for people who ran legitimate courses.
Your reasons sound like a silly thing to get angry about. What really is driving this? Seems like there’s something deeper.
picking and choosing wrote:
ButActually wrote:
CIM is worse than the rest of them because it's such a manufactured race that whores itself out to fastish sub-elites. They actually pay runners who hit the Olympic B-standard $500 ($1500) for the A-standard) if they apply in advance. The women's B-Standard of 2:45 is especially soft, so you end up with a bunch of moderately above average ladies who can afford to fly to a part of California that no one actually wants to go to for a weekend and spend $270 on shoes they'll wear once running 2:44 and change in super shoes so that they can go around calling themselves 'elite' and getting the running media all hyped about women's empowerment that really only benefits a tiny affluent subset of women. The purpose of the Olympic marathon trials is to pick a competitive Olympic team, not to help your hobbyjogger wife show off to her running friends.
The same thing happens at the BQ level, but is possibly worse, because it makes the buffer harder for people who ran legitimate courses.
Your reasons sound like a silly thing to get angry about. What really is driving this? Seems like there’s something deeper.
Great question. I do suspect that it is the race promoting itself in a creative manner. That would be ok with me. The race is great. The weather usually is great. The course would be faster if it were perfectly flat (you don’t gain as much on the downhills as you lose on the uphills), but there are few flat courses with typically great weather.
BREAKING: Leonard Korir not going to Paris! 11 Universality athletes get in ahead of him!
What is the threshold that separates a "hobbyjogger" from a "sub-elite" runner?
Hicham El Guerrouj is back baby! Runs Community Mile in Oxford
What is the most stupid running advice you've ever heard?🤣(It can be funny)
Are Asics, Saucony, and New Balance envious of Brooks, Hoka ,and On?