Boston Marathon qualifying buffer is unfair

Get over it, it's a hobby jogger event. The organizers have more than enough <= 35 males and want a more diverse field

"Get the hell out of my race and give me those numbers!"

Disko Eric wrote:

The BQ minus X standard is applied to all age groups though. Older runners and women skew the buffer substantially. This is unfair to the under 35 age group. It’s crazy that a 2:55 isn’t good enough because a bunch of grannies and gran pappies can take a week off to visit St George and parachute down.

It means more cougars staying at the 800/night hotels next to Boston common at Boston are impressed with my male 240s marathon and this may increase my chances

It’s also great I can know they are vaccinated as Tinder is full of M@ga types these days declaring on profile that they won’t date the vaccinated

It's actually already pretty much set up that way.

At this year's Boston, 366 men under 39 finished 10 minutes faster than 2:55. 324 women aged 45-49 finished 10 minutes faster than their qualifying time. 256 men aged 50-54 finished 10 minutes faster.

there's already a disporportionate number of younger people in the race; runners under 40 made up 32% of the people in the race this year. 40-50 is 31%, and it drops significantly from there.

This supposed influx of easy qualifiers who are taking spots away from super-fast 30-somethings doesn't actually exist.

The BQ process isn't about what's fair. It's about what BAA wants. It's their race. Some of the rules aren't "fair." That's just the way it is. It's that way, because the BAA wants it that way. It sucks, but that's all there is to it.

If you don't like it, either run faster, pay the charity fee, wait until you age into an age group you think will make it "easy" (as your body breaks down, weakens and degenerates) or find another race.

Stop complaining and run a real marathon without a net downhill.

Disko Eric wrote:

While hard working single dads like 4:30miler can run 2:55 and they may not even squeak in.

Nobody cares. Run faster.

The Jericho Mile. wrote:

Get over it, it's a hobby jogger event. The organizers have more than enough <= 35 males and want a more diverse field

That's merciful of them. Like that demographic is the most boring to have around town before and after the race. Zombified overtrained number crunchers. Send me another 2:59er please, I had such a fun time hanging out with and chatting with the last one!!!!

If a 34 year old man runs 1hr faster than their BQ, they’ll be the most famous runner for at least a week. If a woman does it, she’ll be an also-ran getting bashed here about shoes and doping and someone will mention burritos. That’s the difference. So there’s a much higher percentage of women running 30-45min faster than their BQ.

just run faster. Honestly a 3:05 isn't super human stuff

Disko Eric wrote:

If a 34 year old man runs 1hr faster than their BQ, they’ll be the most famous runner for at least a week. If a woman does it, she’ll be an also-ran getting bashed here about shoes and doping and someone will mention burritos. That’s the difference. So there’s a much higher percentage of women running 30-45min faster than their BQ.

Couple things here

1. Comparing the qualifying standards based on time differences is sloppy. An hour off the women's qualifying standard is a smaller % of race time than an hour off the men's. An hour off a hobbyjogger's HM time would probably beat the world record...THEY are the real athletes here. See how numbers can do whatever we want them to when you use them irresponsibly?

2. What in gods name does it matter what the quality of a time would be if it were an hour faster than the qualifying standard? What does this have to do with explaining why every Johnny-on-the-cusp should get a spot even if that means they make up 75% of the race? The qualifying standards are about more than just who is the best for their age.

3. (bonus) Get over it and either run a better, less expensive, or closer-to-you race...or bow to the arbitrary gatekeepers at BAA. But on some level I suspect a lot of people want to run Boston so they can say they got past the arbitrary gatekeepers, though. So genuflect before your gods.

umm, ok wrote:

there's already a disporportionate number of younger people in the race; runners under 40 made up 32% of the people in the race this year. 40-50 is 31%, and it drops significantly from there.

I can't tell if you're joking, or actually innumerate. Over 50% of the general population is under 40. So having 32% representation in the race means they are under-represented.

Disko Eric wrote:

The BQ minus X standard is applied to all age groups though. Older runners and women skew the buffer substantially. This is unfair to the under 35 age group. It’s crazy that a 2:55 isn’t good enough because a bunch of grannies and gran pappies can take a week off to visit St George and parachute down.

Let's wait to complain about this after we see what the cutoff is this year.

They should start accepting the appropriate % of a diverse population. 38% of the world population is Asian, I expect the field to represent that.

mr38 wrote:

I can't tell if you're joking, or actually innumerate. Over 50% of the general population is under 40. So having 32% representation in the race means they are under-represented.

In his defense the minimum age is 18, so the age group is 18-39. Anyhow yes 3 hours is probably closer to 3:25 for women's, but the BAA has chosen their marks and we should just be happy they're back to 30,000 runners.

Disko Eric wrote:

If a 34 year old man runs 1hr faster than their BQ, they’ll be the most famous runner for at least a week. If a woman does it, she’ll be an also-ran getting bashed here about shoes and doping and someone will mention burritos. That’s the difference. So there’s a much higher percentage of women running 30-45min faster than their BQ.

so what you're really mad about is there are more young women in the race than young men.

umm, ok wrote:

Disko Eric wrote:

If a 34 year old man runs 1hr faster than their BQ, they’ll be the most famous runner for at least a week. If a woman does it, she’ll be an also-ran getting bashed here about shoes and doping and someone will mention burritos. That’s the difference. So there’s a much higher percentage of women running 30-45min faster than their BQ.

so what you're really mad about is there are more young women in the race than young men.

I never mentioned the age of the women. But also, who doesn’t want more young men?

Disko Eric wrote:

umm, ok wrote:

so what you're really mad about is there are more young women in the race than young men.

I never mentioned the age of the women. But also, who doesn’t want more young men?

The only people who might realistically be using spots you believe should be going to younger men, are younger women.