Design the perfect marathon

Bib numbers issued according to a previous marathon or half marathon time,similar to Bostons system. Strict enforcement of corral entry which will make the start smoother. Course closes in 5 hours. No exceptions.

These simple rules for the race would make it a better experience for all levels of runners. First time marathon runners should have no trouble finding a half to get a entry time, and the time has to be under 2.5 hours. I know that's slow, but Penguins pay for a big portion of the race and it still keeps the real whales on the sidelines.

1. Limited to ~2500 entries.

2. Admission based on time which must be verified with previous results at the marathon or shorter distance down to 5K. (~1500 fastest male times and ~1000 fasters female times gain entry regardless of age)

3. At least 150 spots reserved and left open until race morning. 150 fastest people regardless of gender who show up (with proof of results) unregistered on race morning get in. All other spots assigned 2 weeks out from raceday regardless of when application was submited so no one can get bumped on raceday, but you don't have to sign up months before hand.

4. Seeding on the start line is in corrals based on time. Seeding is actually enforced.

5. All corrals assigned a warm-up area near that area of the starting line so people can keep warming up until minutes before the gun. Porta Johns are plentiful in this warm-up area.

6. Prize money is substancial and deep (Say 25K for first down through 1K for 25th) for both genders.

7. Course is accurately measured with accurate splits a each mile (or K if held in Europe).

8. Course is fair, with some hills and turns. Not ridiculous, but not a drag strip either.

9. No finishers medals, age-group awards, clydsdale awards, etc. Bring the overall top 25 in each gender on stage at awards ceremony. Say there times so people can hear as they come up.

10. No race expo, T-shirt, goodie bags, etc. Put that money toward prize money.

11. Live television coverage of entire race with no human interest stories - just the race from start to finish.

12. Free all you can drink beer at finish.

13. Last finisher gets "pantsed" (shorts to the ankles in front of everyone) at the finishline regardless of gender.

Its a pipe dream, but thats what I'd like to see.

I like this. However:

\"All other spots assigned 2 weeks out from raceday regardless of when application was submited so no one can get bumped on raceday, but you don\'t have to sign up months before hand.\"

----> people are gonna want to know more than 2 weeks out if they\'re running your marathon or not. I like to know many months in advance!

Awards ceremony no more than 4 hours after the start. Otherwise, nobody is around to see the awards.

No sissy beer. You just ran a marathon; if you want to drink at all, you deserve Guinness, or something quality and substantial, not piss-in-a-can.

Agreed: not a frickin\' dragstrip. Bill McKibben quotes somebody in \"Long Distance\", who points out that \"The average running marathon has maybe 600 feet of climbing, while the avg. ski marathon has 6,000.\" Plus, we\'ll weed out some Oprathoners this way. \"Hills? Jeeze...Galloway didnt tell me how to walk up those!\"

I dont mean to play devil's advocate but your idea sounds AWEFUL.

First, how could your sign up system work? It is good to sign up months in advance and know you are in so that you can train for that race. With your system there would be people who dont even know if they make the cut until 2 weeks before. Not good.

Second, there is a thing called title IX that was made for people like you. Why 1500 men with only 1000 women?

No finishing medals is a good thing. Everybody doesnt always win. I like to emphasize that. But "pantsing" the last guy? What if your cut-off system had the last guy running 2:20? Does someone that fast really deserve this?

And finally, the expo is to keep sponsors. Without their money there is not prize money and a generally worse race.

AWEFUL?

What we all really want to say wrote:

6. Prize money is substancial and deep (Say 25K for first down through 1K for 25th) for both genders.

You realize you're giving out $668,000 to a race with only 2,500 runners? I'd hate to be paying the race fee.

I'd find a course that has some moderate, rolling hills for the first 10-13 miles, where you end up about 200 feet above the starting elevation. Then in the next 13-16 miles, you gradually come back down to the starting elevation. If this was not possible, I'd opt for a 2-loop course, and if you get lapped, you are removed from the course.

I'll address your critisms, but first I want to point out that this is my dream marathon - it doesn't have to be fair, financially feasible, or even physically possible.

First - Ok the sign up system might need work. Maybe a auto/provisional qualifying scheme would work better? I don't know. The point I was going for is that anyone fast enough can get in spur of the moment if they want.

Second - Womens marathoning is not as deep or competative as mens. The top end is just as strong (hence equal prizr money), but it drops off much more quickly (hence the less open slots). If the situation reversed so would the number of slots for each gender.

Third - The "pantsing" would make for some good battles at the pack of the pack and encourage people to stick around for the end of the race and the awards ceremony. Plus, most everyone would already be drinking and it would all be in good fun. Lighten up, if your so uptight (or so out of shape) that you really fear having your pants pulled down this isn't the marathon for you.

Finally - About the expo, I hate that commercial shit. This is my fantasy marathon, the funding and extrevegant prize money for this marathon will come from a weathly, altuistic, running obsessed benefactor.

In light of my last post I should add that this race would cost about $25 bucks per person - all of which will be put toward beer.

the answer wrote:

Second, there is a thing called title IX that was made for people like you.

There is a thing called "researching something before you expound upon it" which was made for people like you.

Title IX refers to activities receiving Federal Financial assistance.

I know of no marathon (excepting perhaps the OT marathon) which fits this category.

This thread was inspired by this month's RW which had an article about "fun" marathons...of course, all the emphasis was on expos, post race parties, number of bands on the course, ect. It's as if they've completely forgotton that the marathon is actually a sporting event.

26.2 miles. No more, no less.

1) A looped scenic mostly flat and fast course closed to traffic with a large enough parking area for all entrants vehicles.

2) Limited field of say 2000 runners first come first serve.

3) Lined up corals of 250 each based on times from a recent previous marathon with one side roped off and the other side lined with porta potties.

4) Mid Oct 9 am start.

5) Bottled water, Powerade and gels every mile.

5) Post race free hot and cold food and beer.

6) Lockers and shower facilities.

7) Live band at the finish.

8) Video taping of all runners at select locations with all runners receiving a copy.

9) Running jackets to all runners.

There is a thing called "reading comprehension" that is not practiced by people like you.

Saying Title IX was created for people like you (i.e. with minds/thoughts like yours) is not saying it is directly applicable to your marathon. What it means is that it is people like yourself, that limit the equal participation of females because you dont think the womens race is as competative, are the reason for the creation of such laws.

First of all your replying to two different people and assuming that the comments of one reflect the comments of another. You'll notice I responded to your critisms with a civil explanation of each of your greivances (though this was all for fun and I really didn't have to justify my dream marathon to anyone).

Second of all, I am not limiting equal participation for females - if all the applications were gathered and it turned out that way more quality women applied than quality men then, as I said in my response to you, the numbers would be reversed. If a field of equal depth in each gender applied they would get an equal number of slots. The point being that a 3:00 women wouldn't get in before a 2:20 man because fewer fast women applied the fast men. I didn't really think that deeply about it, just went on what one generally observes at most marathons (greater male depth) and then explained my reasoning.

If it will make you happy I'll lay out different criteria for you. How about this: The womens world record is ~10 minutes slower than the mens so 10 minutes is subtracted from the time of every women that applies and then all times (actual male and corrected female) are thrown in the same pool. The 2500 fastest times are chosen (actual male and corrected female) are then selected and then the people who have run those times are addmited to the race.

How about a race with NO DRUG CHEATS

1) Different T-shirts/medals for different finishing times. (ie, "under 3:00" or "under 2:30" etc.)

2) Relatively flat for the first 10, short rolling hills for the second 10, then half incline, half decline for the final 10k.

3) Start in the city center, go out to the country for several miles, then a finish near the start in the city.

4) Segregated portapotties - crapping only and pissing only designations (plus, guys get a piss trough which is conveniently located near the start).

5) Stratified start with a strictly enforced corrale system (based on submitted times from 10k up)

Space Lord wrote:

1) Different T-shirts/medals for different finishing times. (ie, "under 3:00" or "under 2:30" etc.)

This is an intriguing idea. NASTAR (a national recreational alpine ski racing program) uses an age, gender, and course difficulty graded system to award racers medals.

The charts are divised such that, nominally, the top 5% earn the Platinum level, the top 20% Gold, top 40% Silver, top 65% Bronze, and the rest get to come back and try to do better next time. Such a system might provide additional incentive for the mid and back of the pack runners looking to improve.

It would, of course, be harder to administer than handing everyone the same medal in the finish chute. There do exist age/gender grading tables for running that could be applied and there are at least a few races that use age/gender grading to determine "adjusted" finishing time and to award prizes.

I'd like to somehow guarantee that at least one American runs 2:08, (preferably 3), and that he wins.

A friend of mine actually ran a race similar to that in Michigan, where they used similar tables to determine a percentile rank for all participants. So basically, the final results would show a 50 year-old with a time of 40:00 finishing ahead of a 21 year-old with a 39:00. Very interesting - you are right, that it would be difficult to determine this immediately following the race, so maybe awards would have to be mailed.