I’m racing a marathon in the next few weeks with the intent of grabbing a bq. If I run 5min under / sub 2:55 will I be safe?
I’m racing a marathon in the next few weeks with the intent of grabbing a bq. If I run 5min under / sub 2:55 will I be safe?
Bobby_tea wrote:
I’m racing a marathon in the next few weeks with the intent of grabbing a bq. If I run 5min under / sub 2:55 will I be safe?
99.6% sure
BQ Cutoff Watch wrote:
Looking through the FindMyMarathon numbers offered up by Alex1610, and using their figures of US Marathons, the cutoff would be about 3:20. There are a few factors that could swing that each direction.
Make it tougher:
1. The demand for the WMM 6-star medal will continue to make the race draw more entries, especially international runners that otherwise wouldn't be here.
Make it easier:
1. Last year there were 2 Berlin Marathons that fell into the Boston window. This year there is just one which lowers the total BQ numbers from a fast course.
3. Mentioned here by 5KPace, the US Olympic Trials could gift back some time.
I guessed 3:18 on the FindMyMarathon contest. 3:20 might get you second place though. ;-)
https://findmymarathon.com/boston-marathon-cut-off-prediction-contest.phpBobby_tea wrote:
I’m racing a marathon in the next few weeks with the intent of grabbing a bq. If I run 5min under / sub 2:55 will I be safe?
Magic 8-ball says:
Yes
Yes siree wrote:
Bobby_tea wrote:
I’m racing a marathon in the next few weeks with the intent of grabbing a bq. If I run 5min under / sub 2:55 will I be safe?
Magic 8-ball says:
Yes
that's good enough for me. Thank you letsrun.
As others have noted many people have adjusted to the faster qualifying times by seeking out downhill courses.
There is an entire new niche market for fast downhill marathons to qualify for Boston now.
Qualifying times will probably be faster this year and next year for the 125th, but I suspect the qualifying times will peak soon as the novelty of seeking out downhill courses runs out.
Reminder for 10+ streakers: registration opens today.
dorky dufus wrote:
As others have noted many people have adjusted to the faster qualifying times by seeking out downhill courses.
There is an entire new niche market for fast downhill marathons to qualify for Boston now.
Qualifying times will probably be faster this year and next year for the 125th, but I suspect the qualifying times will peak soon as the novelty of seeking out downhill courses runs out.
I still think people are overreacting about what the cutoff is going to be this year. It has moved 45-90 seconds every year over the better part of a decade. Now people are saying in 1 year it's going to shift 120-180 seconds. I'm just not buying it. Sure, BQ rates have only dropped by .6%, but people were already essentially trying to go BQ-5 before. So the shift in BQ was really only on the surface, not in application.
I do agree we're hitting our peak in qualifying times over the next few years. At most, i see it going to BQ-5 to current standards and then leveling off or slowing down. To your point, 2021 will be a big year for Boston. I also see Boston doing something about these huge Net Downhill races. Obviously can't get rid of them (hypocritical if they did). But maybe the qualifying standard needs to be put it place for no more than -450ft (Boston Marathon Net Loss). Revel Big Cottonwood in Utah is happening in a few weeks. It has an over 5,000ft elevation loss. Complete joke (regardless if you think downhill has it's challenges of its own).
The field size may be increased to 35,000 this year.
The thing is this year (2020 Boston) people have been trying to go BQ-5 too. It will shift down that 2-3 minutes this year.
Just not seeing it, but I wouldn't be blown away if I happened. I'm using historical statistics and not anecdotal theory. And history tells us 45-90 seconds is the general trend. Of course, to your point, this isn't a normal year as the standards have changed which could impact performance for the better.
Doesn't matter for me since I'm BQ-1:07 so fat chance I get in unless they expand the field like the one poster just indicated (doubtful... more likely to expand it for 2021/125th). Still pissed I was in 2:52 shape for Cleveland and got an 85/sunny/humid day. Oh well.
A pointy headed horse told me.... wrote:
The field size may be increased to 35,000 this year.
Before you edited this, you said someone told you it was going to expand. Why would they expand it this year and not just expand it next year? Or did they just want to bring in more 3:29 speedy women into the race to boost sales at the expo?
5kPace wrote:
Brutux wrote:
The thing is this year (2020 Boston) people have been trying to go BQ-5 too. It will shift down that 2-3 minutes this year.
Just not seeing it, but I wouldn't be blown away if I happened. I'm using historical statistics and not anecdotal theory. And history tells us 45-90 seconds is the general trend. Of course, to your point, this isn't a normal year as the standards have changed which could impact performance for the better.
Doesn't matter for me since I'm BQ-1:07 so fat chance I get in unless they expand the field like the one poster just indicated (doubtful... more likely to expand it for 2021/125th). Still pissed I was in 2:52 shape for Cleveland and got an 85/sunny/humid day. Oh well.
You can probably still register for a Revel race and improve your qualifying time. ;)
Still two downhill marathons in Washington.
Both are super fast on dirt and scenic.
The Washington races would be faster for me than the Revel marathons. Let pounding and not too steep.
5kPace wrote:
I also see Boston doing something about these huge Net Downhill races. Obviously can't get rid of them (hypocritical if they did). But maybe the qualifying standard needs to be put it place for no more than -450ft (Boston Marathon Net Loss). Revel Big Cottonwood in Utah is happening in a few weeks. It has an over 5,000ft elevation loss. Complete joke (regardless if you think downhill has it's challenges of its own).
If there was a vote on the next move to lessen the number of BQs that get left out due to the cutoff, I'd vote for eliminating the double dipping.
They have been in negotiations to expand to 35000 for this year and it comes down to how much money each city or town gets. Note that the field size has not yet been announced. That was not unintentional.
Even if the field size is 30,000, I would expect that if you qualified, you will get in. To the extent that some people are rejected, it will be by seconds.
downhill jones wrote:
5kPace wrote:
Just not seeing it, but I wouldn't be blown away if I happened. I'm using historical statistics and not anecdotal theory. And history tells us 45-90 seconds is the general trend. Of course, to your point, this isn't a normal year as the standards have changed which could impact performance for the better.
Doesn't matter for me since I'm BQ-1:07 so fat chance I get in unless they expand the field like the one poster just indicated (doubtful... more likely to expand it for 2021/125th). Still pissed I was in 2:52 shape for Cleveland and got an 85/sunny/humid day. Oh well.
You can probably still register for a Revel race and improve your qualifying time. ;)
Hahaha. Unfortunately I haven't trained for years to get my time down from 3:50 to 2:58 to only bail myself out on a cheaters course. I would get no satisfaction out of that. I'm surprised some people are cool with it. Whatever, more power to them.
A pointy headed horse told me.... wrote:
They have been in negotiations to expand to 35000 for this year and it comes down to how much money each city or town gets. Note that the field size has not yet been announced. That was not unintentional.
Even if the field size is 30,000, I would expect that if you qualified, you will get in. To the extent that some people are rejected, it will be by seconds.
Interesting. 35,000 basically ensures everyone who has qualified gets in based on current BQ rates. Hope you're right.
I think it will be within a min. But I don't get everyone's obsession with Boston is. It's a very hobbyjogger thing. There are people in my gym who wear Boston gear and they look slow.
I qualified within a year of training to running marathons. I went it's not that exciting. Random people sort of tolerate you for a day but that's about it. Too many people. More people want to be mediocre and get mediocre people to like them but if you explain any type of hard training they look at you like an alien.
Then when runners face ANY type of challenge - heat, wind, rain it's all "wooah is me."
It's like so many people's lives and self image revolve around this race, which makes me like it less.
And don't take me for someone who "can't get in" as my BQ is now -15 even with the new standards. I'd be more impressed if they had actual tough standards to qualify like sub 2:45 (all men) and sub 3:00 (all women)
The only reason I have any Boston gear is their logo is a unicorn and my 3 year old daughter likes unicorns so I have some gear for her sake.