BQ -3:23 gets accepted for 2018

Go back to Runners World, this place isn't for you

not Flagpole wrote:

chaserofthesteeple wrote:

So many hobby joggers will cry themselves to sleep tonight!

BAA should end this nonsense, if you can't go sub 2:30 you have no business running a marathon anyway.

Not 2:30, but yeah, the qualifying criteria is a joke. Way too easy.

BAA only cares about $$$ anyways, and there are lots of joggers with lots of $$$.

You comment doesn't add up. If BAA only cares about money, why wouldn't they let an additional 5,062 people who qualified (but were denied entry) pay for the race? Why would they cap it at 30,000 people, when other marathons (London was 40,000+ in 2017, NYC was 51,000+ in 2016) have far more? What are they gaining by allowing 20% (6,000 people) be invites who are mostly just there to "run" for charity?

Another question for the BAA is why do they open and close registration before 99% of the Fall marathons have been run? They could easily open registration in Nov or Dec. What difference would that make to them?

I think they're mostly arrogant pricks who think "we're Boston, we'll do whatever we want and f*ck everyone else"

Listen, snowflake, if you think the Boston Marathon started in the '70s, you have indeed no business running it.

And no, the times weren't slower in the "old days". 2:40 was average back then, there were almost no times over 3 hours. Now a 5 or 6 hours marathon is nothing extraordinary, and breaking 4 is considered something really special.

chaserofthesteeple wrote:

So many hobby joggers will cry themselves to sleep tonight!

BAA should end this nonsense, if you can't go sub 2:30 you have no business running a marathon anyway.

I agree. And, if you can't at least make it to AA in the minors, you should not play summer baseball or softball. Anyone who can't shoot par on a tough course should give up the game of golf. Anyone who is not a pro should never attempt a full ironman and anyone who is not symphony competent should not play a musical instrument.

By the way, most grown men do not carry the physique of a middle school girl into adulthood and dragging those bigger bodies 26.2 after training through a full time job is much tougher than running 2:30 ish at 5'8, 130 lb while working part-time at Starbucks. And no, I am not a Boston aspirant.

Boston snobbery wrote:[/b

They could easily open registration in Nov or Dec. What difference would that make to them?"

Let's see... what can we do with an extra THREE months to prepare? Why not just wait until April 1st and have everyone line up and fill in their registration by hand? No need to get organized in advance. We can just quickly add up the numbers April 1 and THEN book permits for roads, EMT, first aid...

sheesh!

Bitter ale... mmmmmm wrote:

Boston snobbery wrote:[/b

They could easily open registration in Nov or Dec. What difference would that make to them?"

Let's see... what can we do with an extra THREE months to prepare? Why not just wait until April 1st and have everyone line up and fill in their registration by hand? No need to get organized in advance. We can just quickly add up the numbers April 1 and THEN book permits for roads, EMT, first aid...

sheesh!

You must be a moran. Obviously the race organization starts months ahead of the race. I'm talking about registration. It will sell out no matter when they open it. Running a mid Sept-Dec marathon in 2017 to qualify for Boston gets you into the 2019 Boston. That's f*cked up, just like your head.

chaserofthesteeple wrote:

So many hobby joggers will cry themselves to sleep tonight!

BAA should end this nonsense, if you can't go sub 2:30 you have no business running a marathon anyway.

Why you running the steeple? No real flat speed? There will always be ultras waiting for you.

not Flagpole wrote:

Bitter ale... mmmmmm wrote:

Let's see... what can we do with an extra THREE months to prepare? Why not just wait until April 1st and have everyone line up and fill in their registration by hand? No need to get organized in advance. We can just quickly add up the numbers April 1 and THEN book permits for roads, EMT, first aid...

sheesh!

You must be a moran. Obviously the race organization starts months ahead of the race. I'm talking about registration. It will sell out no matter when they open it. Running a mid Sept-Dec marathon in 2017 to qualify for Boston gets you into the 2019 Boston. That's f*cked up, just like your head.

Sorry to upset you Mr. cool urban dictionary slang man. My mistake to think that registration was part of the organization. If they waited to December after all the fall marathons that would INCREASE the number of applicants and therefore create more work. If you don't like Boston, don't run it. Nobody gives a rats ass if you are there or not. They are turning people away as it is. They don't need you. They don't care about your lame suggestions for improvement. I'm pretty sure the group involved that have to execute the organization of a 30,000 person event have many many reasons for a September deadline.

And your clever wit really hurt my feelings by insulting my head.

Mr. Obvious wrote:

jkim579 wrote:

Two words to explain the continued rise in cutoffs:

DOWNHILL MARATHONS

they have always been allowed. Some people have always sought them out.

Boston itself is a net downhill course so I suppose they feel obliged to accept downhill marathons for BQs.

Back in the day, 2:50 was the cutoff 39 and under.

In 1983, there were hundreds, maybe 500 or 600?, under 2:46, which is to say that even at the very peak of Boston competitiveness, the last finishers were nowhere near even three hours.

Another giver of +1 wrote:

Mr. Obvious wrote:

they have always been allowed. Some people have always sought them out.

Boston itself is a net downhill course so I suppose they feel obliged to accept downhill marathons for BQs.

Probably, but there are now net downhill courses of 1000+ feet. It makes me ashamed that my marathon PRs will always be from NYC, a notoriously tough course, and yet clowns that can't run for sh*t can claim to be faster when they rolled in a barrel down a mountain for 26.2 miles.

You can thank all the fat old women who can easily BQ for this. They overqualify and steal all the entries.

It seems to be the norm now, big marathons that sell out fast open early. How much interest would the race collect with couple million dollars over 6 or 7 months?

Why does anyone want recognition for running a 3 hour marathon? It's equivalent to a 2:30 800. If I were that slow I wouldn't go around telling people, let alone brag about it.

Stoppit Smith wrote:

Plus, Boston has been around since what, 1970? Old days? McGillivray started it and he is still alive. If 1970s is old days to you, then you're just an internet troll or a millennial addict. Neither is much better.

Go back to sleep and grow up. No, I am not joking.

Mike

Are you Mike in San Diego?

Bad Wigins wrote:

Why does anyone want recognition for running a 3 hour marathon? It's equivalent to a 2:30 800. If I were that slow I wouldn't go around telling people, let alone brag about it.

This comment seems like it comes from someone who has never run one. What have you run for the marathon? So many things can go wrong over 26.2 miles. You can go through halfway in 2:3x pace and then finish close to three hours or more if your body shuts down. Maybe you just drop out at that point like top end elites do but others finish it out.

When times were faster in Boston, the fields and standards were smaller and tougher. Boston is a money maker. They set standards to get 30,000 runners, evenly distributed among age groups. The toughest standard is 3:05 which is close to 7:00/mile. When someone does that I tend to think that they had to put in some work to attain that time. People get into running for different reasons. Some people didn't run 16:00 in their first 5k in high school. Others put in a lot of effort to run 3:02 and now they get their victory lap at Boston. I'm into that.

Create another race with a 2:30 standard or whatever but at that point we can have another conversation about the Olympic Trials standard being 2:19, 2:22 or tougher. Sub-2:30 is pretty damn good. Maybe you could get a field of a few hundred. That's not what Boston has become.

It's a farce that you can run the qualifying time and not get in. Why not make it 5 minutes quicker and if you make the time you're in?