the limitations of working with the cities and the narrow streets means that they really can’t add many more runners,
Field size has remained at 30,000 since 2015 (with the exception of 2020 [31,500 "virtual runners"] and 2021 [20,000 covid-reduced]).
However, 2014 had 36,000 and 1996 had 38,708 entries (36,748 starters, 35,868 finishers). The course has handled more than 30,000 runners before so it still can. I honestly do not know why the BAA doesn't bump the field size up to 35K or 40K; it would result in a lot more revenue and that is all the BAA is interested in.
my understanding is they had to get special permission for those field sizes and it was highly congested, and they care about preserving the "quality of the racing experience."
they also enjoy feeling exclusive. they can't compete on city size with boston's aging infrastructure and running through random ass neighborhoods in Natick vs. NYC or Tokyo or whatever, so they compete on prestige
but it's a double edged sword if it gets so bad that your average hobby jogger olympian feels he or she doesn't have a shot, hence they don't want cutoffs to get totally out of control
i maintain that 2025 is going to be a bloodbath in that regard
This presents a problem for pacers. It is getting harder and harder for races to offer a 3:00 pacer. Many seem to start at 3:05 or 3:10. Even big races like Columbus last year did not have a 3:00 pacer; they had a 1:30 HM pacer who only took the marathoners through halfway. If it drops to 2:55, people are going to need to form their own pace groups.
I manage pace groups for a decent sized marathon, and finding good quality pacers who can run a 3:00 or faster is always a challenge (and I have definitely aged out of doing it mydamnself, unfortunately!). You'd need to find someone capable of 2:40 to pace a 2:55 group, which narrows your field quite a bit, and not everyone at that speed is willing to sacrifice a decent effort to pace a race, especially if they plan to do their own race within a few weeks of pacing.
Having paced 40+ marathons, I know there is a lot of value in it for the runners, particularly less experienced runners or people who don't know how to race a marathon properly. The faster groups are usually more self-sufficient - whether they make their time or not is a function of their prep versus how well I pace. For the fast groups, a pacer's job is the first 4-6 miles to not take them out too fast and then the last few miles to give a little kick in the ass. For the slower groups, a pacer ends up doing a lot more coaching throughout the race - at least that's been my experience.
Having a good pacer doesn't guarantee anything, obviously. I had a guy at Marine Corps come to our booth at the expo and say "So...you guarantee that - if I run with you - I'll get a 3:10?" He was CLEARLY a Marine - buzz cut, very fit, and had that look about both him and his buddies. I told him "No - but I guarantee I will get a 3:10...I don't know anything about your training or your abilities!"
I hope the standards aren't changed right away - let's see if the pent-up demand makes the cutoff go down a bit. For me personally, the cost is getting completely out of hand. Luckily I have a friend to stay with because the hotel I usually stay at went from $350-400/night just a few years ago to $1000/night. Ridiculous! That may impact whether I run Boston as frequently as I have in the past - $3-4k for a race weekend with my wife is a little rich for me.
Honestly I'm okay with no pacers in the 3 hr or faster categories. At this point you have trained hard enough to be able to run a respectable marathon, now act like a respectable racer and pace yourself.
That being said as a mid 2:30s guy I'd happily be a bunny if someone wanted to pay me to make it worth my while.
Honestly I'm okay with no pacers in the 3 hr or faster categories. At this point you have trained hard enough to be able to run a respectable marathon, now act like a respectable racer and pace yourself.
That being said as a mid 2:30s guy I'd happily be a bunny if someone wanted to pay me to make it worth my while.
Looking at my age group I think I qualify by over 35 minutes. They could definitely make those cut-offs faster. I can beat the 18year old time by more than 20+ so they're definitely easy.
boston is trending warm but with a tailwind. right now BQs are trending around 30% above last year, which is around where boston typically lands. even if they have a monster fast year (>40% BQ like last year, i think) it won't move the overall needle all that much with tens of thousands of BQs. it's almost certainly going to be a net percentage increase of 30-35% BQs year over year, then factor in increased international interest. 40% increase in applications would suggest a cutoff of >8:43 and more like 10 minutes based on the model in the linked article, though it gets harder to predict bc it's nonlinear as applications increase (more and more time is needed to find applicants to "cut")
Off topic and purely out of curiosity - can you line up two pacers who each run half the marathon rather than having to find folks who can run that fast for the whole thing? I agree generally that people who are running under 2:50/2:55 don't need the same pace support as others, but it obviously still benefits some of them because even elites use pacers. The BQ times look to be shifting closer and closer to sub-elite times in the near future, so just curious about this aspect.
Off topic and purely out of curiosity - can you line up two pacers who each run half the marathon rather than having to find folks who can run that fast for the whole thing? I agree generally that people who are running under 2:50/2:55 don't need the same pace support as others, but it obviously still benefits some of them because even elites use pacers. The BQ times look to be shifting closer and closer to sub-elite times in the near future, so just curious about this aspect.
Yes, some marathons do that. We have relief pacers (who join as support after 10-13 miles and run to the end) for some of our faster groups and I've been able to fill some holes that way. It's definitely not my preference because runners fall into a groove with the pacer who goes the distance. Each pacer has their own style and fresh legs coming in halfway in, it may take a new pacer a few miles to settle into the rhythm. Relief pacers are good though because they are there as support in case the pacer who started has an issue - if that happens, I have the pacer who started hand off their watch to the reliever so the group is consistent on overall chip time based on how long it took them to reach the starting mat. If a group takes 3 minutes to reach the start line and the 2nd pacer isn't aware of that, he/she may try to make up that time unnecessarily.
Honestly I'm okay with no pacers in the 3 hr or faster categories. At this point you have trained hard enough to be able to run a respectable marathon, now act like a respectable racer and pace yourself.
That being said as a mid 2:30s guy I'd happily be a bunny if someone wanted to pay me to make it worth my while.
Not calling you out personally, but this is what I hear from really fast runners. For most races - pacing is a volunteer gig. You get free entry and a uniform, perhaps a gift card and some swag, but nothing major. And I get it - if I were really fast and someone asked me to put in a hard effort and not many people can do that reliably and consistently, I'd want some compensation for my efforts.
And I also agree - sub 3 pacers at a major marathon is a nice luxury, but you really should be able to run your own race. And in a smaller race, sub 3 could be in the middle of the women's leaders, or top age group runners.
these splits are starting to look like chicago 2021. it's 70 degrees or so near brookline reportedly. a hot boston likely saved the 2025 cutoff (as of now >30% increase in BQs, more international interest, and idiot shoetuber boston - six world majors mania ) from being a complete disaster
Both CIM and Boston under 500 with rolling hills (Boston obviously moreso, I would say CIM comes right up to the edge of a legit course without cheating, but is legit)
2024 U.S. Olympic Team Trials - Marathon Qualifications USA Track & Field › events › 2024-u-s-olympic-team-trials- The course must be USATF/WORLD ATHLETICS/AIMS certified with an active course certification and have an elevation loss no greater than 3.30 meters/km.
for the downhill course specialists with their delicate egos threatened, i ask, why would OTQ specifically exclude courses beyond a certain degree of downhill unless they inarguably provided a gravity-assisted advantage? don't point to the handful of folks whose quads blew up, look at the distribution of finishing times at cheater courses. the entire curve is shifted to the left when people run down a mountain. these people have no self respect and cheapen the sport. deep down, they know it.
I'm talking about Revel events, St. George, Mesa, The Tunnel Marathons, etc. Courses with huge drops (some in excess of 1000 feet) specifically created and marketed for borderline BQ hopefuls. The sorts of races where a 3:45 guy suddenly becomes a 3:25 runner thanks to gravity.
This conversation makes no sense. People are asking how far under 3:00 hours do I have to be to Q. If your capable of running 2:50, then set the pace to run 2:50. If you can do that, why would you aim for 3 hours? Just run a race to the best of your ability and let the chips fall where they may when it comes to a Boston qualifying time. Are people really running full marathons to just barely slip in under the age group time and not running them to see how fast they can go?
