Should Boston’s Q Times be revised?

I think you'd wanna see a couple more years of big cutoffs before dropping the standards further. They were reduced by five minutes in 2020 after seven years of the previous cutoffs, so maybe they'd make this move in 2026 or 2027 if the current trends continue.

Yes, the times are significantly easier for women, but there are a lot more competitive male runners out there, so this is what they have to do to get a balanced field. I don't really have a problem with this.

They should absolutely ban any course with more net drop than Boston itself.

It seems to me BAA needs to clean up the process a bit.

One year I beat the qualifying time by 6:50 and couldn't run, because the "cutoff" was 7:XX minutes. The next year I trained harder, got faster and beat the qualifying time by 15 minutes, but the cutoff was 00:00, so I had 15 minutes to spare. If I throw on a dress and lipstick, all of a sudden I can run with both of those times because now they're 36:50 and 45:00 faster than I need. This process no longer makes sense.

Might your process benefit from an injection of common sense, BAA?

The BAA is not going to make women's BQ times any closer to the mens because, even with the 30 minute split, more men finish than women every year (with a couple of exceptions).

These downhill races hardly move the needle when it comes to BQs. Also, they require just as much training because of the quad pounding. Many people dnf or are spotted walking by mile 18. It blows my mind that there is so much misinformation about these races.

If anything, the super shoes have a far greater impact and EVERYONE is wearing them.

This is only said by those who're looking to legitimize their cheater races. I see more runners with a massive PR like 2:45 runner becomes 2:29. Or 4hr runner becomes 3:20 etc.

They're only less popular because not everyone wants to be associated with a circus.

Strengthening your quads is something very easy to overcome. Ever heard of skiing?

Listen if you can't even cheat your way with a massive 5000ft drop successfully, then marathon running isn't for you.

It would be nice if they had some kind of scaling system for cutoffs. Like if everyone that breaks 3:00:00 and applies can be fit into the race we don’t have a problem, but when there are too many applicants, maybe let’s take the guy that ran a 2:58:45 on a net neutral course instead of the guy that fell down a mountain in 2:58:22.

I think the sheer amount of people that run way slower than BQ times at Boston would be enough data to figure out said scaling system for cutoffs. Say if the average qualifier running big cottonwood hits 2:56:00 and then averages 3:09:00 at boston maybe we should take that into consideration before kicking someone that ran something like the Houston marathon in 2:59:20 and would be statistically likely run that or faster at Boston out of the race.

Nah. I've never run a revel race. I'm pretty sure I would DNF. I BQ'd on another course this year with a 7+min buffer. But if I don't get it, its not bc of the Revel type races.

I suspect there will be a shift to more and more people running downhill courses to pad their qualifying times moving forward.

Also, c'mon, man. If you train properly (namely, some downhill specific running & more quad work, etc.), these courses are significantly faster than flat or hilly marathons.

Here, as someone who has ACTUALLY ran a Revel race (Big Cottonwood) and doesn’t need to speculate what it feels like based on other people’s finish times..

The steep downhill 18 or so miles are so aerobically undemanding that I was splitting 5:40s/5:50s and holding full conversations with other people splitting 5:40s/5:50s as if we were all jogging at 8:00 pace and enjoying a recovery run together.

Interestingly enough you still hit the wall like a truck around mile 20 even though you’ve felt completely unfatigued most of the race. I had a violent bonk and split something like 8:00-10:00-12:00-10:00-10:00-9:00 over the final 6 miles. It’s the worst wall i’ve ever encountered and the only time i’ve walked during a race. I also could not walk for about 2 days and was extremely sore for a week. I never felt aerobically taxed at any point during the race. This race was just as many posters have said to slip under a BQ for me which I somehow managed to pull off despite my egregious final 10k, as my peak race will be later in November and therefor not a BQ for next year.

I think these races are good for someone that hasn’t done much to develop their lactate threshold, but you still need to develop the pure muscular endurance and your glycogen stores, because the wall is evidently waiting for you around mile 20 no matter how easy those downhill miles felt, and the absolute beating your legs take going downhill dont mix well with your body running out of glycogen. I think I saw more high caliber runners walking towards the end of this race than I have during any other marathon.

Boston 'qualifying" is a joke now. Fat people who run 5+ hours can line up next to a 2:44 guy becuase they raised $$ in a charity. Where is the "qualifying"? Where is the pride of wearing the Boston Marathon shirt? Where is the pride of knowing you are of the 5% in your age group in the country? Gone. just like everything else that takes hard work in this country. Make it easier for the soft people. The entire world.

That makes the Top of Utah marathon in Logan like the only one in the state that would be legal. I guess some courses could be changed, but ToU is pretty flat, so even with changes it would go from a very small race to competing for being the most popular one in the state.

That was in response to the not more than Boston itself thing. I need to learn how to use this site properly

As i mentioned in another thread, trans men have a 30 minute buffer. No questions asked. Just that you “FEEL” different.

Why do you hate women so much? The one’s that spend the $$$. The one’s that tie your shoes. The one’s that pick up after you and watch your kids while you’re out with your buddies. Women’s times are slower and it’s for the purpose of a level playing field.

Why does OP want a race that’s a bunch of men 🤔 ? Why exclude nearly all women for his fake alligator tears prestige. Why does OP not care about more MEN getting in through a non-binary division? Seems that OP just wants more men in the race. That’s his gripe. Hates women. Loves men.

I think the downhill 5,200 foot elevation loss courses are ridiculous. But on the other hand, there are legitimate marathon courses that are net downhill, in the West CIM, Mountains to Beach, Redding, and Rogue Valley come to mind. Those all generally lose several hundred feet, maybe even close to a thousand feet, but also have significant uphill sections. Redding is a lot like Boston in many ways with its big early downhill and difficult uphill sections towards the end. Boston itself is a net downhill course.

Well, they can’t line up next to a 2:44 guy since there are corrals based on qualifying times and the charity runners are in the back. Not even the same start time.

I think Boston could probably make it a little tougher, but they want to maximize revenue.

The change that would make sense is that those who run under certain time get in automatically.

maybe have 3

people know before their marathon the guaranteed qualifying time and can celebrate that day if they reach that time. Maybe 8-10 minutes faster than qualifying time today.

have a second registration period of people 5 minutes to 8 minutes faster than basic qualifying times. if there are too many they get in by a lottery.

If it isn’t full, others who meet a lottery qualification time of 5 minutes or less maybe based off the standard today are eligible to enter into a lottery to gain an entry. they can give better odds if someone is 4 minutes under than less than a minute under.

Boston and the rest of the majors are overhyped.

I mean sure, Boston was/is legit but it’s out of hand. The cost to get there, the stress about signing up, the cost to sleep there, taking a bus hours before the start and the fact that many assume that id if you hit the standard you HAVE TO RUN BOSTON!

Don't get me started with the Majors, it’s marketing all. The only thing special about running all six of them is that you somehow paid for all those trips.

I’ve only run the US majors, but all 3 are pretty great marathons. I wouldn’t set out to run all 6 in the same year just to run them, but I’d imagine they are all worth running. Yes, they are expensive but if you like running, it’s not a bad way to spend vacation money.

I’ve been to London for business a few times, so that marathon is last on my list of the majors. I’d love to go to Berlin or Tokyo, so those marathons would be a good reason to take a trip.

I also understand there are very cool smaller races around the world that are cheaper and more scenic.