CMamcms wrote:
Well you are looking at the work and overhead from your standpoint of race director of your local buttf*** 5k.
No, I'm looking at it from both the local buttf*** 5K and large races, including Chicago, Boston, and New York. In fact your "solution" really only has the chance of viability at the bigger events since they have the staff available.
Chicago has what, 5 different starting areas. Elite, top 100 and corrals A,B,C? Tell me, how do they place people in these corrals, previous time right? That's the majority of people in the race, right?
Estimated time is used for all but the front corrals.
I believe the term I used was "minimum fitness required to cover the distance."
Is that what set you off on your defensive rant?
I'm not opposed to people having minimum fitness, I just think it's asinine to assume that forcing a pre-determined race in advance does anything to prove it. It's a solution for a "problem" that's really only in your head.
Other than make a few whiners feel good, what purpose does it serve to have people "prove" they've trained to your satifaction? It does nothing to improve the sport or the marathon, and even if a 2:45 half requirement was imposed there'll still be some dickweed saying "IT SHOULD BE 2:10 OR THERE'S NOT ENOUGH VIAGRA IN THE WORLD TO MAKE MY DICK HARD", so what's the point?