People who use net downhill marathons to get into Boston are cheating

I find it a lot easier to run uphill then downhill. I wouldn't call this cheating. A downhill course is so much more difficult to run

the opposite wrote:

I find it a lot easier to run uphill then downhill. I wouldn't call this cheating. A downhill course is so much more difficult to run

Whatever. The only people I know who say that are the ones who try to downplay the ease of their downhill PR.

Puh-lease! I've tried racing downhill courses and haven't gotten any more leg pain than a flat course run hard.

Boston looks like it is over a 400 foot drop.

Oh and until BAA decides to change the rules it is not cheating.

Downhill dog wrote:

CIM is only a net 340 feet downhill:

http://runcim.org/course-map/

366 ft above sea level at start, 26 ft at finish. I doubt that plays a big role over a marathon. I'd say it's probably harder than say, Berlin, because it's probably windier than most courses.

People who have used CIM, Light at the end of the tunnel, St George, Big Cottonwood, and similar marathons are cheating legitimate runners out of Boston. How do you guys look at yourself in the mirror? Cheaters, cheaters, cheaters, cheaters !!!

the opposite wrote:

I find it a lot easier to run uphill then downhill. I wouldn't call this cheating. A downhill course is so much more difficult to run

Define "easier"?

I was thinking about this on my run today, so I thought i would dig up an old thread and rage.

You know how everyone whines about altitude? Yeah most of these downhill races are run at significant altitude. Do you really think that running such an aerobic event at an average of 6,000 feet is easy?? Yeah, probably at least comparable to a perfectly flat course at sea level.

It's not getting into Boston is anything important. Really. It's only some arbitrary cut off time thing for the city of Boston's hospitality businesses to make tons off money of you all.

If Boston doesn't have anything against downhill marathons, then no, it is absolutely NOT cheating.

It may be a cop-out but it isn't cheating if it is not against the rules.

Boston cheaters wrote:

I just saw someone boost on Facebook how they ran this huge marathon PR at Big Cottonwood Marathon. I was like wow - that time is significantly faster than I would have expected. Then I looked at the course - it drops 5,000ft! 5,000ft! Wtf.

People who have used CIM, Light at the end of the tunnel, St George, Big Cottonwood, and similar marathons are cheating legitimate runners out of Boston. How do you guys look at yourself in the mirror? Cheaters, cheaters, cheaters, cheaters !!!

Lucky people who get to run downhill. Sadly the course that I have to do is about 95% of it is uphill and it's not fun.

Boston cheaters

I agree that it makes sense for marathons at altitude. Also, people complaining about their marathon courses being difficult...you know you can choose what marathon you do, right?

Boston cheaters wrote:

I just saw someone boost on Facebook how they ran this huge marathon PR at Big Cottonwood Marathon. I was like wow - that time is significantly faster than I would have expected. Then I looked at the course - it drops 5,000ft! 5,000ft! Wtf.

People who have used CIM, Light at the end of the tunnel, St George, Big Cottonwood, and similar marathons are cheating legitimate runners out of Boston. How do you guys look at yourself in the mirror? Cheaters, cheaters, cheaters, cheaters !!!

CIM is about 6 feet of drop on average per every 5280 feet. I trust you can do the math on that.

Yeah, it's so steep and aggressive the runners are literally falling towards the finish line moments after the gun goes off!!!

You're just a shill for the site to get hits or a jealous person who can't qualify. Which is it?

I agree with your point, but it's 12 feet per mile, which is still nothing spread out over a mile.