Somebody please correct me if I’m wrong since the below quote seems contrary to logic. The quote comes from the FAQ of the BAA’s web page.
“The qualifying times below are based upon each athlete’s age on the date of the Boston Marathon in which they are participating.”
I’ll be 40 on race day for the 2013 Boston Marathon. As a 39 year old this year, I beat the old 40 year old standard by 6 minutes and the new 40 year old standard by 1 minute. Race was from this past weekend. From the above quote, it seems like I can get into the Boston Marathon using the 40 year old scale even though I ran it as a 39 year old. Am I correct?
BTW, to qualify for automatic entry into the New York City Marathon, it is your age on the date of the qualifying race.
The NYC marathon is a much harder race to qualify for than Boston. That’s the primary reason I’ve said that Boston is just another race – it’s popular no doubt but it is just a race that’s gotten too big.
BTW, to qualify for automatic entry into the New York City Marathon, it is your age on the date of the qualifying race.
The NYC marathon is a much harder race to qualify for than Boston. That’s the primary reason I’ve said that Boston is just another race – it’s popular no doubt but it is just a race that’s gotten too big.
and it’s getting even harder as of the 2013 qualifying standards… for qualifying via a half marathon, a lot of the times are going down a full TEN MINUTES.
I can run the old times for Boston fairly regularly and on a good day and properly trained I can make the new times for my age group. There’s no way on earth absent taking a subway ride to the finish line that I can get a time that qualifies for an automatic entry to NYC. It’s still harder.
I beat the new 40 year old standard by 1 minute. Race was from this past weekend. From the above quote, it seems like I can get into the Boston Marathon using the 40 year old scale even though I ran it as a 39 year old. Am I correct?
You bested the qualifying time, however, you won’t know if you are accepted until next September 2012 after you signup. The new 5min faster Q times are still subject to the “fastest people get accepted first” policy. So if they deem the 40-44yr age group “full” with the slowest guy running 1-1/2 min faster than the Q time, then you’re out.
I understand that. However, if you base it on this year’s signup and the -1 min 30 seconds rolldown based on the old standard, I think that I have a good shot. I’m -6 on the old standard and -1 on the new standard. I’m hoping the average of the field don’t all of the sudden become 6 minutes faster from one year to another.
BTW, to qualify for automatic entry into the New York City Marathon, it is your age on the date of the qualifying race.
The NYC marathon is a much harder race to qualify for than Boston. That’s the primary reason I’ve said that Boston is just another race – it’s popular no doubt but it is just a race that’s gotten too big.
Yes, the times for automatic entry into NYC are more difficult, but the pool of runners is composed primarily of people that meet no qualifying standard other than financial ability and good fortune. It’s still essentially a lottery entry race, not a qualifying entry race. Everyone that races Boston must meet a qualifying performance standard (even if it is relatively soft). At the end of the day, it’s more representative of a “race” than NYC. The obvious exceptions, in both cases, are the charity/celebrity/freakishly wealthy entrants that represent a minority of the overall field.
I understand that. However, if you base it on this year’s signup and the -1 min 30 seconds rolldown based on the old standard, I think that I have a good shot. I’m -6 on the old standard and -1 on the new standard. I’m hoping the average of the field don’t all of the sudden become 6 minutes faster from one year to another.
Six minutes may be a stretch, I think that a lot of people will be surprised by the effect of new standards on average performance. Look at the distribution of marathon finishers, and then overlay the qualifying standards. You’ll see higher concentrations of runners in the vicinity of milestone times. Is that simply indicative of the average ability within an age group, or is it indicative of people training to meet the standard? My guess is the latter. The same is true for specific time markers as well (i.e. 3:00, 3:30, 4:00). I don’t know many people that shoot for a time like 3:12:46 … unless, of course, their PR is 3:12:47.
BTW, to qualify for automatic entry into the New York City Marathon, it is your age on the date of the qualifying race.
The NYC marathon is a much harder race to qualify for than Boston. That’s the primary reason I’ve said that Boston is just another race – it’s popular no doubt but it is just a race that’s gotten too big.
So is New York. There’s a lottery and that rule about everyone who runs a series of NYRR races getting in and more charity runners, etc.
Aside from Fukuoka, they’re mostly all just another race
Is there a different corral for qualifiers at NYC (I’m too lazy to look it up)?
The short answer is no as you will just be *seeded *in your corral based on that qualifying time.
If you’re at the pointy end of the qualifying standards (<2:35 for men & <3:05 for women IIRC), you then have the opportunity to apply for the ‘sub elite’ corral which basically puts you between the pros & the front of the 1st corral.
I understand that. However, if you base it on this year’s signup and the -1 min 30 seconds rolldown based on the old standard, I think that I have a good shot. I’m -6 on the old standard and -1 on the new standard. I’m hoping the average of the field don’t all of the sudden become 6 minutes faster from one year to another.
Zoom,
With a -6 qualifying time, you’re in. Baring injury, you can book your hotel room now.
It will be interesting to see where the axe falls in 2013. I think it will be around 45 seconds but that’s just a guess.
I wouldn’t consider it just another race. There are 100 years of tradition that you can feel there. And there’s perhaps no finishing chute like boylston st. I dont think they match that energy at the des moines marathon. No number of charity runners can change what really makes Boston great, in my opinion.
Plus no race gets ‘too big’ if you start at the front end of the field. They all seem pretty small to me.
