B.A.A will consider re-configuring the qualification times for Boston

I like this one wrote:

Here's an even better idea. Start half the field in hopkington and half the field in boston. When they hit one another it will be funny as hell.

I like this idea too! I'll sit on the sidewalk with a bag of popcorn and watch the carnage transpire. Who's with me?

On a more serious note: I am all for the 1980's qualifying standards to be reinstated.

To the whiny hobby-joggers: deal with it and jog a different marathon. It isn't my fault you neither take the time, energy, and effort to get to those standards nor that you lack the ability, regardless of condition, to qualify for Boston. I put in the countless hours of training, stretching, and weight training to prepare myself to be able to run well under 3hr's (2:48:15 pr) and I deserve the chance to compete at Boston. Not those individuals that bought there way in or had the luxury to register right when it opened.

If the world were Burger King and I could have it my way I leave Boston to the sub 3:00hr men and sub 3:20hr women. There are so many other marathons out there to race (that do not have qualifying standards). Can't we faster people have just this one?

What happen to the time when the marathon wasn't just an accomplishment to check off your things to do before you die list and people actually got out there and RAN? Whether you were racing the 2:50 guy next to you or trying to qualify for the OT, you went out and competed, stuck your nose in there, and grinded it out.

This may seem insensitive but the Boston marathon is one of the most historic races in the world which, I believe, should be left to those who run/race it. Sorry to the 4+hr finishers this may offend but you are jogging not running.

Boston is the holy grail of marathon-ing. I propose we keep it that way by having harder qualifying standards not unlike those of the 1980's. Bring the austere back to Boston and leave it for runners not the hobby-jogger.

Picayune wrote:

Post surgical old ambler wrote:

I have been passed many times in the last 10K by runners on their way to sub three who are over six feet and weigh in excess of 180 to 200 pounds.

Congrats, you suck at running!

Congrats: you proved my point and so lucky for you that you are hiding behind a keyboard, panty pimple boy.

Where do we stand on this? Have new standards been announced?

No. Last I heard/read was that it should be released by the first week in Feb.

Below was taken from:

http://www.runnersworld.com/community/forums/races-places/boston-marathon/update-timeframe-2012-baa

Thank you for your email. You will see information regarding registration for 2012 on our website the first week of February.

Sincerely,

Boston Athletic Association

Registration Office

One Ash Street

Hopkinton, MA 01748

508-435-6905

What point? There's no luck involved, I'd say the same to your girly fleshy-jowled face.

This is pretty exciting. I'm surprised there hasn't been more talk about this on the front page or the message board.

There is really enough demand for them to have two races--one on Sunday and a faster one on Monday. I doubt the hotels and airports could handle all those people though.

I also heard that Chicago sold over 20,000 entries today. I can't verify that number though. I don't know why they don't just publish those figures on the front page of their website.

get ugly wrote:

There is really enough demand for them to have two races--one on Sunday and a faster one on Monday. I doubt the hotels and airports could handle all those people though.

Nor the residents of those towns that the course passes through.

get ugly wrote:

This is pretty exciting. I'm surprised there hasn't been more talk about this on the front page or the message board.

There is really enough demand for them to have two races--one on Sunday and a faster one on Monday. I doubt the hotels and airports could handle all those people though.

I also heard that Chicago sold over 20,000 entries today. I can't verify that number though. I don't know why they don't just publish those figures on the front page of their website.

Per the website

Search Results ( 1 to 25 of 17504 )

So, close to 20k but 17,504 to be exact.

ecin wrote:

So, close to 20k but 17,504 to be exact.

Probably going to take 2 weeks or so.

Back to Boston: I heard they changed timeline. No news will be announced until end of February. Not sure what's taking them so long.

ANY UPDATES ON WHAT THE 2012 BAA BOSTON MARATHON QUALIFYING STANDARDS WILL BE??????

I wonder if it's taking so long because they are still getting the permission needed from the effected towns for a increase in field size or 2 races.