If you had one race to try and qualify for the Olympic trials, which race/ course would you choose? Looking for sometime October to maybe early December. Any reasons that one stands out more than others?
If you had one race to try and qualify for the Olympic trials, which race/ course would you choose? Looking for sometime October to maybe early December. Any reasons that one stands out more than others?
not CIM right, it's not an official qualifier
Chicago or CIM.
Chicago is pancake flat, has great crowds, good competition, good logistics(particularly since you would presumably get into the American Development field, at a minimum). Only real downside is potential warm weather.
CIM has pretty reliably cool weather, I think. It is also a net downhill course (although I have been told it is not so downhill as to be a gimmick course, and times there are valid as OTQs). And the competition at that 2:19 range might actually be even better than some of the bigger races. I cannot speak to logistics, expense, etc., but Sacramento in December just doesn't sound like much fun. Still, you are there for a purpose, not as a tourist.
kevin hart 4:05:06 wrote:
not CIM right, it's not an official qualifier
YOu mean its not sanctioned?
no I mean CIM is not useable as a qualifier, it is pt-pt, net downhill, and any results/records here set are not useable anywhere else [other than to BQ I think--they dont care, they love net downhills apparently]
I stand corrected:
From the qualifier list for Rio:
Tyler Andrews 2:16:59 B California International Marathon Sacramento CA USA 12/10/2014
The World Championship thon team will not accept a CIM result, however
kevin hart 4:05:06 wrote:
no I mean CIM is not useable as a qualifier, it is pt-pt, net downhill, and any results/records here set are not useable anywhere else [other than to BQ I think--they dont care, they love net downhills apparently]
I don't think that is correct. It's a USATF certified course, and I know a few runners who used that course to qualify for the last OT. Along with St. George which I also believe has a slight net down hill and point to point.
CIM and Chicago seem to be the two that come up the most.
St. George doesn't count- way too much downhill. That being said, the course is at an overall average of 4200 ft altitude so that counteracts most of the dowhill advantage.
Slow region wrote:
St. George doesn't count- way too much downhill. That being said, the course is at an overall average of 4200 ft altitude so that counteracts most of the dowhill advantage.
St. George is sanctioned,
http://www.usatf.org/calendars/searchResults.asp?city=&state=&country=&associationNumber=&startDate=10%2F01%2F2017&endDate=12%2F31%2F2017&eventType=&includeAllAges=ON&distanceSelection=marathon&distance=&distanceUnits=&distanceComparison=%3D&prizePurse=&name=&series=&USATFSanction=ON&submit=SearchI think the mention of its high altitude negating the benefits of the down hill being a good point. Probably not a course I am considering, then.
So someone who has done CIM or Chicago, if you had to choose one as your goal race, which would you choose?
IDK if it makes a big difference, I would be shooting for a 2:45 not 2:19. I know CIM offers a 2:45 pace, which I guess is a nice bonus. I don't think at that pace I would have a problem finding company in either race. I want to avoid crowded water stations, I was over that chaos in Boston quickly last year. I do qualify for Chicago ADA program but I am not aware of program details offered through CIM.
I did the American Development program at Chicago in 2015, as did two of the women that I coach this year. It is a great set up, and I would advocate it. Both were going for 2:45, which was a stretch goal for each. One ran 2:45:24 (a PR by 2:30), the other had a rough day. There was lots of company at 2:45:24.
That being said, I think CIM gives bonus money for OTQ times (they are this year, but that may be because it is the US Championship race this year too, but I am not sure if those things are related), so if I were you, that might swing me back towards CIM.
CIM will be incredibly supported for those looking to qualify as it's the USA Championships. There will be plenty of women going 2:45, just like there will be a ton of men chasing the 2:19 standard. CIM will also be the championship next year, so they will be supporting athletes in that caliber of OTQ potentials. One option for next year would be to train for Chicago and race it if the weather is good. If the weather turns out to be bad, then just race through halfway or 25k and drop, then rest & recover and try and get into CIM. Lastly, there's Houston which is amazing as well. Good Luck!
Definitely Chicago and/or CIM. Chicago and CIM are far enough apart that you could always do both if things don't go as planned in the first one. Chicago is a big city race but I've been surprised running that pace there and at NYC running many miles alone.
CIM has a 2:45 pacer and a money bonus for hitting the standard like other posters said. It might be nice to zone out and run a bunch of miles with 20-30 other women trying to do the same thing.
http://citiusmag.com/where-do-people-qualify-for-olympic-trials-marathon/
HOpeFULl wrote:
Slow region wrote:
St. George doesn't count- way too much downhill. That being said, the course is at an overall average of 4200 ft altitude so that counteracts most of the dowhill advantage.
St. George is sanctioned,
It's USATF certified but not eligible for the OTQ standard due to net elevation drop. Before you go and qualify on an invalid course do yourself a favor and read this very carefully:
http://www.usatf.org/Events---Calendar/2020/U-S--Olympic-Team-Trials---Marathon/QualifyingStandards.aspxNERunner053 wrote:
Definitely Chicago and/or CIM. Chicago and CIM are far enough apart that you could always do both if things don't go as planned in the first one. Chicago is a big city race but I've been surprised running that pace there and at NYC running many miles alone.
CIM has a 2:45 pacer and a money bonus for hitting the standard like other posters said. It might be nice to zone out and run a bunch of miles with 20-30 other women trying to do the same thing.
http://citiusmag.com/where-do-people-qualify-for-olympic-trials-marathon/
That article was interesting. All the big races mentioned so far were my first thoughts, but depending on where OP is and what kind of travel she wants to do, Twin Cities could be a really nice option.
I ran CIM last year and Chicago this year - ran a bit over 2:45 at CIM and a few minutes under at Chicago. I ran with a pack of women for the first 24 miles of CIM, at Chicago I was pretty much solo for most of it. Part of that is because I went out conservatively at Chicago and negative split by a lot, but still I think if you're looking to race with a group CIM is the better option. American Development logistics at Chicago were nice and sure it's a nicer city, but the weather in Sacramento is more of a sure thing. Also you can go to Napa afterward.
itdepends wrote:
NERunner053 wrote:
Definitely Chicago and/or CIM. Chicago and CIM are far enough apart that you could always do both if things don't go as planned in the first one. Chicago is a big city race but I've been surprised running that pace there and at NYC running many miles alone.
CIM has a 2:45 pacer and a money bonus for hitting the standard like other posters said. It might be nice to zone out and run a bunch of miles with 20-30 other women trying to do the same thing.
http://citiusmag.com/where-do-people-qualify-for-olympic-trials-marathon/That article was interesting. All the big races mentioned so far were my first thoughts, but depending on where OP is and what kind of travel she wants to do, Twin Cities could be a really nice option.
I think Twin Cities might be a little elevated because it hosted the US Champs in 2013. I think that brought a lot of qualifiers to it. I ran it a year ago and found it a tougher than Chicago & CIM- not as bad as some people claim it to be. It's an honest course and you're bound to get good weather for it. I think it's a good option, just that there are some faster races to choose from.
NERunner053 wrote:
I think Twin Cities might be a little elevated because it hosted the US Champs in 2013. I think that brought a lot of qualifiers to it. I ran it a year ago and found it a tougher than Chicago & CIM- not as bad as some people claim it to be. It's an honest course and you're bound to get good weather for it. I think it's a good option, just that there are some faster races to choose from.
Eons ago I ran my OTQ (2:42:50) at Twin Cities. Assuming the course is still approximately the same, indeed there were a few small hills on it. However, you do have a good chance of really good weather. The year I ran it was sunny, dry, and upper 30s to low 40s, which for me was perfect.
Cim and Chicago are equally fast.
I don’t think one is faster than the other by anything significant.
I’ve run faster at Chicago than cim.... in better weather at cim ....so I actually think chicago might be faster for me.
I prefer totally flat. The few seconds you might gain at cim are a wash. There isn’t any serious downhill advantage.
Anyone have any ideas for a fast Fall marathon for an OTQ? I'm going for the 2:45 standard if that helps. Unfortunately I have a conflict with Columbus Day weekend.
I'm based in the Northeast (gambled with the standard at Boston and was close but missed it). I'm willing to travel but not sure if I want to wait until December to give CIM a go.. my original plan was Chicago and then CIM as a backup plan, but unfortunately that's not in the cards.