B.A.A. to Review Registration Process for 2016

Nick Morris Tue Sep 30, 2014 7:30 pm

Who'd a thunk...

http://www.runnersworld.com/boston-marathon/baa-to-review-boston-marathon-registration?cid=social32606716

Mark B Tue Sep 30, 2014 7:41 pm

You know, the lottery system works pretty well for a lot of other high-profile races...

mul21 Tue Sep 30, 2014 8:32 pm

As terribly sexist as this will sound, I think they need to tighten the women's standards based on the numbers of qualifiers in each sex and age group I've seen.

Tom H Tue Sep 30, 2014 11:34 pm

Crap. Is this just because I decided 2016 would be my year for Boston? I wonder what sort of convoluted formula they will adopt. A lottery for Boston just sounds too pedestrian. I'm guessing it'll be tighter standards again. *sigh*

mountandog Wed Oct 01, 2014 6:17 am

with the qualifying window open I doubt they'll do anything for 2016. Changes will be for 2017 is my guess.

Michele "1L" Keane Wed Oct 01, 2014 8:39 am

Not sure you guys want to see tighter standards, but back in the day, as an open woman I had to run 3:20 and as a 40-49 you had to run 3:40. I think I would still be around 3:50 for 50-59 if they did it.

I also agree that this can't go into affect for 2016 since they already have the current standards on the website for next years race.

Nick Morris Wed Oct 01, 2014 8:43 am

I know that sponsorship and charities are big for this race, as many they are for many races, but couldn't they wait until after runner registration to release the amount of charity spots. If need be, couldn't they start the charity runners are a different time or wave?

mountandog Wed Oct 01, 2014 1:04 pm

Nick Morris wrote:I know that sponsorship and charities are big for this race, as many they are for many races, but couldn't they wait until after runner registration to release the amount of charity spots. If need be, couldn't they start the charity runners are a different time or wave?

that's an interesting thought. I would have to believe that 28,000 or 32,000 runners isn't a big deal logistics wise. Yes there is a bit more to do, but you're really only talking 5 more minutes of runners. Flex the charities rather than the qualifiers, but flex the total amount for the field too. Another 1200 runners this year wouldn't have made any significant difference.

Michele "1L" Keane Fri Oct 03, 2014 3:00 pm

mountandog wrote:
Nick Morris wrote:I know that sponsorship and charities are big for this race, as many they are for many races, but couldn't they wait until after runner registration to release the amount of charity spots. If need be, couldn't they start the charity runners are a different time or wave?
that's an interesting thought. I would have to believe that 28,000 or 32,000 runners isn't a big deal logistics wise. Yes there is a bit more to do, but you're really only talking 5 more minutes of runners. Flex the charities rather than the qualifiers, but flex the total amount for the field too. Another 1200 runners this year wouldn't have made any significant difference.

What is the attrition rate? i.e. how many runners don't actually make it to the start line due to injury, etc? Some how I think they could have accommodated the 1900 that didn't make it.

Nick Morris Fri Oct 03, 2014 3:13 pm

Michele \"1L" Keane wrote:
mountandog wrote:
Nick Morris wrote:I know that sponsorship and charities are big for this race, as many they are for many races, but couldn't they wait until after runner registration to release the amount of charity spots. If need be, couldn't they start the charity runners are a different time or wave?
that's an interesting thought. I would have to believe that 28,000 or 32,000 runners isn't a big deal logistics wise. Yes there is a bit more to do, but you're really only talking 5 more minutes of runners. Flex the charities rather than the qualifiers, but flex the total amount for the field too. Another 1200 runners this year wouldn't have made any significant difference.

What is the attrition rate? i.e. how many runners don't actually make it to the start line due to injury, etc? Some how I think they could have accommodated the 1900 that didn't make it.

Although, I think that they take that into account when determining the field size. They know that the course and staff can accommodate XX. Knowing that X% will not make it to the start line, means that the maximum field size allowed is X.

I agree with you though, that they could have found a way for those 1,900 to make it into the race. C'est la vie.

nkrichards Fri Oct 03, 2014 6:17 pm

It does seem like they could have figured out a way to include those 1900 runners that qualified...either by increasing the field slightly or decreasing the charity numbers or a combination of the two.

I just hope that this race remains an event for those that qualify. I don't like the idea of registering by lottery even if you have to qualify to get into the lottery. Boston is an event that needs to be earned not won. Hope they can figure out a way to do this fairly.

Sponsored content

B.A.A. to Review Registration Process for 2016

B.A.A. to Review Registration Process for 2016

Re: B.A.A. to Review Registration Process for 2016

Re: B.A.A. to Review Registration Process for 2016

Re: B.A.A. to Review Registration Process for 2016

Re: B.A.A. to Review Registration Process for 2016

Re: B.A.A. to Review Registration Process for 2016

Re: B.A.A. to Review Registration Process for 2016

Re: B.A.A. to Review Registration Process for 2016

Re: B.A.A. to Review Registration Process for 2016

Re: B.A.A. to Review Registration Process for 2016

Re: B.A.A. to Review Registration Process for 2016

Re: B.A.A. to Review Registration Process for 2016