Looking like it will be BQ-3:54. Slight drop down from 48 hours ago . Conference call with Mexico City Marathon honchos . Times will be accepted if proof of other comparable performance shown . BQ-7:30 have been accepted .
Looking like it will be BQ-3:54. Slight drop down from 48 hours ago . Conference call with Mexico City Marathon honchos . Times will be accepted if proof of other comparable performance shown . BQ-7:30 have been accepted .
Minus 5:00 have been accepted or it wouldn't have opened today.
Deep mole source wrote:
Looking like it will be BQ-3:54. Slight drop down from 48 hours ago . Conference call with Mexico City Marathon honchos . Times will be accepted if proof of other comparable performance shown . BQ-7:30 have been accepted .
No one believes you, bro.
Topu wrote:
No one believes you, bro.
Not even his mother believes the mole (and with good reason). There is zero chance the cut is over 3:00 and very little chance that it will top 2:00.
biogen wrote:
20% of the field are charity bibs dude.
!
nope, more like 10%
the other 10% is made up of sponsor, municipality, and club bibs given out by the BAA and it's only recently that the number of charity entries equaled or exceeded the number of other non-qualifiers
I applied last week with a BQ-13:xx and haven't been accepted yet.
-13:xx wrote:
I applied last week with a BQ-13:xx and haven't been accepted yet.
At which race did you qualify? I think it takes them longer to validate qualifying times from obscure races.
Lulz wrote:
-13:xx wrote:I applied last week with a BQ-13:xx and haven't been accepted yet.
At which race did you qualify? I think it takes them longer to validate qualifying times from obscure races.
Lehigh Valley Via Marathon on 9/10.
-13:xx wrote:
Lulz wrote:At which race did you qualify? I think it takes them longer to validate qualifying times from obscure races.
Lehigh Valley Via Marathon on 9/10.
Lehigh probably hadn't even finalized their results by the time you registered. Hang in there, you're in.
I'd say -2:00 given Mexico City and the heat at Boston this year.
The BAA's policy of having qualifying standards that does not guarantee entry gives athletes little guidance on what time to shoot for. Thus, everyone that runs a BQ is a bit disappointed as they wonder if it was fast enough. Should they celebrate or not? Making the times 5 minutes faster, may not allow BAA to fill the field, and deny a lot of good runners the chance to run the race.
So, here's one solution: Have an "A" standard that is "BQ-2 minutes" that guarantees entry into Boston, and a "B" standard for running below a BQ time that gets you in if there's room. This will solve several problems:
* Those who ran the "A" standard could celebrate at the finish knowing they made it and tell everyone that they got in without the risk of looking like a fool. They could also make early hotel and plane reservations.
* Those who ran the "B" standard would still have to wait and see if there's room, but should be more accepting of the fact that if they ran faster they would have had guaranteed entry. Also, there will be so few spots for the "B" standard, it will be more of a triumph if they get in, rather than a disappointment if they don't.
* BAA will always be able to fill the field with runners from the "B" standard, if the major feeder races have adverse weather.
* Although it's possible that more than 30k runners will make the "A" standard, the BAA could just have a bigger race those year's like they did for the 100th anniversary and the 2014 race when there was 36k.
gregmacd wrote:
I'd say -2:00 given Mexico City and the heat at Boston this year.
The BAA's policy of having qualifying standards that does not guarantee entry gives athletes little guidance on what time to shoot for. Thus, everyone that runs a BQ is a bit disappointed as they wonder if it was fast enough. Should they celebrate or not? Making the times 5 minutes faster, may not allow BAA to fill the field, and deny a lot of good runners the chance to run the race.
So, here's one solution: Have an "A" standard that is "BQ-2 minutes" that guarantees entry into Boston, and a "B" standard for running below a BQ time that gets you in if there's room. This will solve several problems:
* Those who ran the "A" standard could celebrate at the finish knowing they made it and tell everyone that they got in without the risk of looking like a fool. They could also make early hotel and plane reservations.
* Those who ran the "B" standard would still have to wait and see if there's room, but should be more accepting of the fact that if they ran faster they would have had guaranteed entry. Also, there will be so few spots for the "B" standard, it will be more of a triumph if they get in, rather than a disappointment if they don't.
* BAA will always be able to fill the field with runners from the "B" standard, if the major feeder races have adverse weather.
* Although it's possible that more than 30k runners will make the "A" standard, the BAA could just have a bigger race those year's like they did for the 100th anniversary and the 2014 race when there was 36k.
The BQ time is psychological. If you make the A standard guaranteed, that is what everyone will shoot for. Look what happened when the BQ was lowered by 5mins across the board.
Times will always cluster around the guaranteed BQ and you have just made the A standard the defacto BQ. Nothing will change.
gregmacd wrote:
I'd say -2:00 given Mexico City and the heat at Boston this year.
The BAA's policy of having qualifying standards that does not guarantee entry gives athletes little guidance on what time to shoot for. Thus, everyone that runs a BQ is a bit disappointed as they wonder if it was fast enough. Should they celebrate or not? Making the times 5 minutes faster, may not allow BAA to fill the field, and deny a lot of good runners the chance to run the race.
So, here's one solution: Have an "A" standard that is "BQ-2 minutes" that guarantees entry into Boston, and a "B" standard for running below a BQ time that gets you in if there's room. This will solve several problems:
* Those who ran the "A" standard could celebrate at the finish knowing they made it and tell everyone that they got in without the risk of looking like a fool. They could also make early hotel and plane reservations.
* Those who ran the "B" standard would still have to wait and see if there's room, but should be more accepting of the fact that if they ran faster they would have had guaranteed entry. Also, there will be so few spots for the "B" standard, it will be more of a triumph if they get in, rather than a disappointment if they don't.
* BAA will always be able to fill the field with runners from the "B" standard, if the major feeder races have adverse weather.
* Although it's possible that more than 30k runners will make the "A" standard, the BAA could just have a bigger race those year's like they did for the 100th anniversary and the 2014 race when there was 36k.
This is one of the better suggestions I've heard, but like the previous poster alluded to, BQ-2min will then become the new standard that everyone shoots for.
OR just assume BQ isn't good enough.
Assume you need BQ-5:00. Smart runners aim for BQ-5:00 now. If you change it, everyone will get faster. It will be "A" standard minus 2:.00 because they'll be too many runners again. Harder for everyone.
Keep it the same, be smart, target BQ-5:00.
If they would tighten the standards it would solve all the problems. Everyone with the standard gets in and can celebrate right away. No one stresses out for months if their time is good enough. Travel plans can be made, training plans initiated, etc.
And what about the BAA who wants to fill the race? No worries, there are still 7 months to go to fill it and lots of big events during that time. People will step up their game when the bar is lifted. When the race starts to fill up within a few weeks of the start of registration, they know that it's time to tighten the standards again. Or conversely, if it doesnt fill up until late, they loosen them.
gregmacd wrote:
I'd say -2:00 given Mexico City and the heat at Boston this year.
The BAA's policy of having qualifying standards that does not guarantee entry gives athletes little guidance on what time to shoot for. Thus, everyone that runs a BQ is a bit disappointed as they wonder if it was fast enough. Should they celebrate or not? Making the times 5 minutes faster, may not allow BAA to fill the field, and deny a lot of good runners the chance to run the race.
So, here's one solution: Have an "A" standard that is "BQ-2 minutes" that guarantees entry into Boston, and a "B" standard for running below a BQ time that gets you in if there's room. This will solve several problems:
* Those who ran the "A" standard could celebrate at the finish knowing they made it and tell everyone that they got in without the risk of looking like a fool. They could also make early hotel and plane reservations.
* Those who ran the "B" standard would still have to wait and see if there's room, but should be more accepting of the fact that if they ran faster they would have had guaranteed entry. Also, there will be so few spots for the "B" standard, it will be more of a triumph if they get in, rather than a disappointment if they don't.
* BAA will always be able to fill the field with runners from the "B" standard, if the major feeder races have adverse weather.
* Although it's possible that more than 30k runners will make the "A" standard, the BAA could just have a bigger race those year's like they did for the 100th anniversary and the 2014 race when there was 36k.
This is basically how it works now. Run a BQ-5:00 and you're in. Others have to sweat it out. The highest it has been is 2:29.
No difference.
Lulz wrote:
gregmacd wrote:I'd say -2:00 given Mexico City and the heat at Boston this year.
The BAA's policy of having qualifying standards that does not guarantee entry gives athletes little guidance on what time to shoot for. Thus, everyone that runs a BQ is a bit disappointed as they wonder if it was fast enough. Should they celebrate or not? Making the times 5 minutes faster, may not allow BAA to fill the field, and deny a lot of good runners the chance to run the race.
So, here's one solution: Have an "A" standard that is "BQ-2 minutes" that guarantees entry into Boston, and a "B" standard for running below a BQ time that gets you in if there's room. This will solve several problems:
* Those who ran the "A" standard could celebrate at the finish knowing they made it and tell everyone that they got in without the risk of looking like a fool. They could also make early hotel and plane reservations.
* Those who ran the "B" standard would still have to wait and see if there's room, but should be more accepting of the fact that if they ran faster they would have had guaranteed entry. Also, there will be so few spots for the "B" standard, it will be more of a triumph if they get in, rather than a disappointment if they don't.
* BAA will always be able to fill the field with runners from the "B" standard, if the major feeder races have adverse weather.
* Although it's possible that more than 30k runners will make the "A" standard, the BAA could just have a bigger race those year's like they did for the 100th anniversary and the 2014 race when there was 36k.
This is one of the better suggestions I've heard, but like the previous poster alluded to, BQ-2min will then become the new standard that everyone shoots for.
There's a real limit on how fast people can run. Otherwise everybody would have qualified for New York and the Olympic trials. Making it faster for everyone could make the number of entrants too small.
The two-tier system guarantees the fastest runners will get in, and the second fastest still have a chance.
Doesn't matter brah, i am in the elite corral with my 2:22:02.
No need to worry about those damn ridiculous slow runners trying to break 3 hours.
Just run damn faster, and dont worry about time. You people act like boston gives you all 1 million dollars if u qualfy get over it.
Gregmacd wrote:
Lulz wrote:This is one of the better suggestions I've heard, but like the previous poster alluded to, BQ-2min will then become the new standard that everyone shoots for.
There's a real limit on how fast people can run. Otherwise everybody would have qualified for New York and the Olympic trials. Making it faster for everyone could make the number of entrants too small.
The two-tier system guarantees the fastest runners will get in, and the second fastest still have a chance.
Which is exactly what there is now.
BQ Math wrote:
Topu wrote:No one believes you, bro.
Not even his mother believes the mole (and with good reason). There is zero chance the cut is over 3:00 and very little chance that it will top 2:00.
I've seen the math on RW forum. They forget many haven't been confirmed. Based on numbers on FB complaining, there could be 4000 people already in with BQ-5:00. They just haven't been verified.
Who got in so far ?