Any idea why the major championship races do not have qualifying times to get in like the Boston Marathon? Seems like it would make the race provide a higher standard rather than
who happens to show up to a race, and roll downs.
Dave
Which races do you have in mind?
jaretj
Your gue$$ i$ a$ good a$ mine.
.
Any of the USAT championships, Hawaii, things like this. Folks seems to always say they want these events to truely meet a standard. I know that I am very proud of my Boston qualification, not because I got a roll down spot or something, but that basically every person there has met a minimum standard and they truely are the best.
Dave
Boston has no trouble filling up their race, and making lots of money. So, it can not all be about money?
Dave
We all know about having to qualify for Hawaii, are you suggesting that anyone could go to Hawaii if they go under say…11 hours?
Straight from USAT website:
“With the exception of the USA Age Group National Championship, any athlete can compete in the national championships. The Age Group National Championship, which is owned by USA Triathlon, is the premier event of the year. All athletes who wish to compete must qualify at a designated USAT sanctioned event.”
So I suppose that the USAT national championships are different than the age group championships. Maybe it’s a buzz word they use to promote the (or series of) races.
I see your point but do you feel that we have enough people to participate in any race they want to call a national championships? There are probably more marathoners than triathletes in the US.
jaretj
I’d say because race times in triathlon vary so much based on terrain and race courses are very innaccurate.
i wouldnt say boston is that tough to qualify for. dont 18,000 people qualify for it??
JR
Times in marathons can vary quite a bit due to the course as well. One thing to note is that the Boston qualifying times have gotten relatively easy over the past 15-20 years. I remember back in the 80s, that men had to run well under 3 hours in order to qualify so the qualifying standards are easier so they can let more athletes in. To get to Hawaii you have to do pretty well in your age group at a major race. Other than getting in by lottery, I think that the Hawaii slots are pretty much earned by anyone who gets one. At IMLP last summer I think that most of the men under 40 had to go at least 10:10 or faster which is pretty solid on a wet day on that course.
The current format is cool, because it promotes actually racing and beating people. Only having a qualifying time promotes mediocrity.
The reason is because you don’t see time qualifying standards in any cycling format. Bike courses seldom have anything close to flat or consistent total elevation gains. Competing against your competition is good enough for me.
This years’ Boston limit is set at 22,500. I don’t think Kona could handle quite that many.
As for Kona, you could easily fill up that race with a 10 hour qualifying time limit. Of course it would then be 95% male and 90% 30-45 year olds.
Just like with Boston, the qual time would be per AG, and per sex. The times, just like Boston, would be adjusted such that the race fills up, but no more. So, the times would go up and down over
the years based on interest. Now, I am assuming races like Oly and Half IM’s would have to be “speced” to be accurate. Just like Marathons, some are easier than others.
Now with Hawaii quals, and races slots, I have known of folks getting in with roll down times that are 15 plus hours, so depending on where you go, it looks like it may be easier to get in.
And the 70.3 “championships” could not give away all the slots at some races.
Maybe it is just me, but meeting this time goal for Boston I am very proud of since it is me against the course. No games with who shows up, penalty calls (or lack of) ,etc.
Dave
I didn’t read all the replies, but one issue for qualifying times in tri would be an unknown for the number of people who would actually qualify. With slots they know how many people with show up.
It appears that people are missing the point: if you run 26.2 fast enough on a certified course, why shouldn’t you be able to run Boston?
Boston has adjusted the QT’s over the years to match the size of race they can hold, how many qualify, and how many show up.
So, if this were to happen with a Tri distance, it would take time to get this right.
So, lets take the AG nationals this next year in portland. It was sure be more attractive, I think to a lot of folks, if there was a time standard that could get met at “certified races”, to make the race at least some minimum standard. Its like Worlds 2 years ago. If you picked up your packet in KC, even if you had never done a tri race, you got to go to Worlds.
Dave
The reason is because you don’t see time qualifying standards in any cycling format. Bike courses seldom have anything close to flat or consistent total elevation gains. Competing against your competition is good enough for me.
I think you nailed it. Though runners do have to deal with the conditions as well, it’s not nearly as severe as with cycling. At IMMoo I felt my run suffered very little under the cold, wet, windy conditions. The bike, however, was a different story.
IM qualifying times would kill the high level participation at LP and WI.
IMFL would sell out in less than an hour every year and the draft lines on the bike would be ridiculous. 
Now, thats a totally different issue. :o)
Dave
Having qualifying times also promotes racing on only the fastest courses. That would drive the sport to purely flat bike courses in particular. One impact is that it would really limit the number of “quality” race venues, as the only races that would prosper would be in very flat areas.
We all know how hard it is to have a fair race on a flat bike course, as drafting typically gets out of control. So if you want the sport to heads towords flat, draft legal racing, the idea might have merit. If you like the individual nature of the sport, with each sport being challenging on an individual effort basis, I think it is a bad idea.
It is true that in the early days some IM slots rolled down a long way; that certainly happened this year with 70.3 slots. But I have not seen any Hawaii slots roll down significantly, it terms of time differential between the “qualified” versus “roll down” athletes, in a long time. In a few years, 70.3 will be the same way.
As mentioned, I think the best reason for the current system is that the organizer for the qualified race (WC, IM, etc.) knows a long time in advance EXACTLY how large each age group will be. That allows the director to know how many athletes will be on the course at any given time, how to design wave starts, how many volunteers at each aid station, etc.
Paul