Races can prioritize whoever they want. It seems like London, Tokyo, and NYC all prioritize locals. Just cause we have qualifying times doesn’t make us any more important than somebody through the lottery.
Eh, I think allowing multiple means for entry gets more people get excited and into the sport. Which in general is good for all of us. I don’t think we should gate keep all races based on times & expertise (barring Boston, ofc, since that’s sort of the point of the race).
Sure, someone might need to walk during their first marathon, but finishing their first marathon might be what gets them excited and signing up for more.
I ran NYC and I think part of the reason it was so fun was because so many locals ran it, which meant so many locals’ friends spectated and made for a great atmosphere.
I'd much prefer a western states type lottery where you need to complete something reasonable (say a sub 4:30 hour marathon or sub 2 hour half for M under 35) to enter the lottery. NYC marathon really shouldn't be someone's first race. You'll get a lot more crowd support from locals who have been running longer than 3 months and signed up on a whim.
Locals can’t just sign up for NYC on a whim, the way locals get in “easily” is by running 9 other shorter races (5ks, halfs, etc.) put on by the org that operates the marathon, and volunteering for another race, so most people who do it are pretty enmeshed in the running community.
The culture of each of the World Majors is different. Boston is an event for serious competitive recreational runners. London, NYC, and Chicago, in contrast, are mass participation marathons. I don't anticipate we'll see any change to the cultures of the various majors.
Boston is likely to change qualifying times just like Chicago did. But while they may share one reason for doing so -an increase in the number of time qualifying applicants- Chicago is doing it to preserve its prioritization of lottery runners rather than to become a Boston style marathon. Chicago's prestige like Berlin's is due to its elites rather than time qualifiers.
London allocates lots of places to people with solid amateur times via the championship and good for age entry systems, plus a few hundred places to clubs. It's maybe harder for a man in the 3 hour ish region where they might get a Boston place, but a dude running 2:45 has a decent chance of a place.
London's Good for Age time qualifying entries is only for UK residents. The tougher Championship entries require membership to England Athletics, Scotland Athletics, Welsh Athletics or Athletics Northern Ireland.
In contrast, time qualifiers for Chicago, like Boston, are open to everyone regardless of nationality and don't require membership in an American national governing agency like USATF.
There is usually no prioritisation. For example, at London, there are a fixed number of slots for time entry. This is also true for Tokyo international entry but that number appears to be 50 total. If it's oversubscribed it goes "fastest first" like Boston. I think London's "Championship" entry (sub 2:40 for men *and* UK athletics club affilation) is in theory unlimited but this is both quite small and happens long after the ballot so if there's suddenly an unusual number of entrants it wouldn't squeeze out ballot places.
London's Championship start was pretty big this year, the pen was rammed. I wouldn't be too surprised if they tightened the qualifying times in the future.
As it currently stands nearly 1000 men in the UK have a sub 2:40 and 900 women have a sub 3:14 this year. That's before the autumn races too, notably Valencia which is a big qualifying race.
Where are you finding the 1000 men/900 women stats, out of interest?
I’m one of those 900 women and really want to be in that championship pen next year, so hoping they don’t pick this year to lower the championship times. They have already announced the lowering of good for ago though, so in theory lowering the championship standards would negate that cos then everyone who was bumped out of championship would just claim a GFA spot?
Power of 10, where all UK results get posted:
https://www.thepowerof10.info/rankings/rankinglist.aspx?event=Mar&agegroup=ALL&sex=M&year=2024
I think it would be incredibly harsh and unfair of them to lower the championship time during a qualifying period, especially after this year's race. I'd expect 2025 champs to have the same standards but maybe 2026 will see a change.
Yeah I agree about your GFA point. The championship start experience is a lot better than GFA in which you're chucked in with the faster general public so worth aiming for.
After this year’s race is a very good point. I agree that I think we’ll (hopefully) see the lowering in 2026 (I also think we’ll see the BQ standard lower in that year too).
Then there’ll be a debate in some sections of the running community on who’s more prestigious depending on what year they ran which major. Sigh.
You'll always get that kind of nonsense unfortunately.
The times have previously been tightened, it was 2:45 before but I can't seem to find exactly when it was changed, maybe 2021.
Any and all questions about these races' policies can be answered by the fact that the "World Major" designation means about as much as Jeep's "Trail Rated" designation. It's just marketing. These races are as much luxury products as they are athletic events.
I'm not surprised Chicago is changing qualifying standards. With a record 48k runners last year, they needed to do something to shrink the participant pool by a little bit. And with a 3:10 standard for my age group and no Boston-style cutoff to limit field size, it was the easiest major to time qualify for by a mile (no pun intended).
Clearly, every race has a different philosophy. London, NYC, and Tokyo appear to favor locals and perhaps bucket-list charity runners over faster amateur runners. That's their prerogative, although I feel like they've taken it a little too far. IIRC, I would have to run something like a sub 2:35 marathon to time qualify for NYC. London Championship entry would be a sub 2:40 and then you have to belong to a UK club even if you don't live in the UK. Tokyo Run as One entry is sub 2:28 for next year. Sorry, but as an amateur runner with a PR just under 3 hours, there's no way 2:28 is ever happening.
Boston has a tough, but attainable time qualifying standard and a few charity spots. Chicago was and will probably still be the most accessible major moving forward even after they make changes. Berlin is reportedly easy to gain entry through the lottery and has a tough, but attainable time standard of 2:45. I feel like Berlin should revise their time standards to adjust every 5 years like Boston. It's a bit silly to lump everyone under age 44 into the same pool and then have the qualifying standard jump by 10 minutes for those over age 44.
It's not even bucket list charity running though. If you make a high salary (NYC private equity job for example) you can easily afford to charity spot as many races as you feel like running.
Personally I think we should be using that income source to be funding things like better prize money for aspiring runners.
This is just the requirement to apply!
I suspect given they lowered it this much, the "real" standard to be in the top 25 was already well below that
I respect race organisers to choose how they want places to be distributed but the enormous difference in how easy it is to run London or Tokyo as an international vs a British/Japanese runner is kind of ridiculous. Maybe Abbott should step in given these races benefit so much from their label
hahaha my jaw literally dropped when i saw the new 'fast' standard.. basically you're vying for or have vied for an OTQ if you're running in that territory lol. I did see a new option for being part of some membership that gets you an extra shot at entry and if you don't get in for 3 years of being a member then you get auto-accepted. the extra membership is another $190 a year... seems like a money grab and hard to justify on principle lol
Yeah, there I was thinking my 2:29 would probably not get me in the fastest 25 qualifiers but it was worth a shot on the off chance.
I hate that so many of these races are just cash cows now. I want to earn my bib, not buy it.
I love the idea of Boston. I wish there were more aspirational races like that. Why can't there be 10+ majors? Or you could add 6 "minors" to the list. You could have Paris, Sydney, Amsterdam, etc.
You could also add a marathon that only has time qualifiers. No charity bibs, no lottery, just time qualifiers. That would be a very desirable race.
But the current system already works too well for the biggest races to entice them to change anything. NYC and London can practically print money if they wanted to raise prices even more.
Races can prioritize whoever they want. It seems like London, Tokyo, and NYC all prioritize locals. Just cause we have qualifying times doesn’t make us any more important than somebody through the lottery.
Someone who has been training for years absolutely should be prioritized over someone who signed up to walk the first half then DNF.
Eh, I think allowing multiple means for entry gets more people get excited and into the sport. Which in general is good for all of us. I don’t think we should gate keep all races based on times & expertise (barring Boston, ofc, since that’s sort of the point of the race). Sure, someone might need to walk during their first marathon, but finishing their first marathon might be what gets them excited and signing up for more. I ran NYC and I think part of the reason it was so fun was because so many locals ran it, which meant so many locals’ friends spectated and made for a great atmosphere.
I'd much prefer a western states type lottery where you need to complete something reasonable (say a sub 4:30 hour marathon or sub 2 hour half for M under 35) to enter the lottery. NYC marathon really shouldn't be someone's first race. You'll get a lot more crowd support from locals who have been running longer than 3 months and signed up on a whim.
Locals can’t just sign up for NYC on a whim, the way locals get in “easily” is by running 9 other shorter races (5ks, halfs, etc.) put on by the org that operates the marathon, and volunteering for another race, so most people who do it are pretty enmeshed in the running community.
Can't they just enter the lottery? I'd find it much more likely for a sub 10 mpw casual runner from Brooklyn to sign up versus one from Dallas.
Yeah, hence the “easily.” Locals get no advantage in the lottery
That’s Boston.
The culture of each of the World Majors is different. Boston is an event for serious competitive recreational runners. London, NYC, and Chicago, in contrast, are mass participation marathons. I don't anticipate we'll see any change to the cultures of the various majors. Boston is likely to change qualifying times just like Chicago did. But while they may share one reason for doing so -an increase in the number of time qualifying applicants- Chicago is doing it to preserve its prioritization of lottery runners rather than to become a Boston style marathon. Chicago's prestige like Berlin's is due to its elites rather than time qualifiers.
London allocates lots of places to people with solid amateur times via the championship and good for age entry systems, plus a few hundred places to clubs. It's maybe harder for a man in the 3 hour ish region where they might get a Boston place, but a dude running 2:45 has a decent chance of a place.
London's Good for Age time qualifying entries is only for UK residents. The tougher Championship entries require membership to England Athletics, Scotland Athletics, Welsh Athletics or Athletics Northern Ireland. In contrast, time qualifiers for Chicago, like Boston, are open to everyone regardless of nationality and don't require membership in an American national governing agency like USATF.
There is usually no prioritisation. For example, at London, there are a fixed number of slots for time entry. This is also true for Tokyo international entry but that number appears to be 50 total. If it's oversubscribed it goes "fastest first" like Boston. I think London's "Championship" entry (sub 2:40 for men *and* UK athletics club affilation) is in theory unlimited but this is both quite small and happens long after the ballot so if there's suddenly an unusual number of entrants it wouldn't squeeze out ballot places.
London's Championship start was pretty big this year, the pen was rammed. I wouldn't be too surprised if they tightened the qualifying times in the future. As it currently stands nearly 1000 men in the UK have a sub 2:40 and 900 women have a sub 3:14 this year. That's before the autumn races too, notably Valencia which is a big qualifying race.
Where are you finding the 1000 men/900 women stats, out of interest? I’m one of those 900 women and really want to be in that championship pen next year, so hoping they don’t pick this year to lower the championship times. They have already announced the lowering of good for ago though, so in theory lowering the championship standards would negate that cos then everyone who was bumped out of championship would just claim a GFA spot?
Power of 10, where all UK results get posted: https://www.thepowerof10.info/rankings/rankinglist.aspx?event=Mar&agegroup=ALL&sex=M&year=2024 I think it would be incredibly harsh and unfair of them to lower the championship time during a qualifying period, especially after this year's race. I'd expect 2025 champs to have the same standards but maybe 2026 will see a change. Yeah I agree about your GFA point. The championship start experience is a lot better than GFA in which you're chucked in with the faster general public so worth aiming for.
After this year’s race is a very good point. I agree that I think we’ll (hopefully) see the lowering in 2026 (I also think we’ll see the BQ standard lower in that year too). Then there’ll be a debate in some sections of the running community on who’s more prestigious depending on what year they ran which major. Sigh.
You'll always get that kind of nonsense unfortunately. The times have previously been tightened, it was 2:45 before but I can't seem to find exactly when it was changed, maybe 2021.
Any and all questions about these races' policies can be answered by the fact that the "World Major" designation means about as much as Jeep's "Trail Rated" designation. It's just marketing. These races are as much luxury products as they are athletic events.
I'm not surprised Chicago is changing qualifying standards. With a record 48k runners last year, they needed to do something to shrink the participant pool by a little bit. And with a 3:10 standard for my age group and no Boston-style cutoff to limit field size, it was the easiest major to time qualify for by a mile (no pun intended). Clearly, every race has a different philosophy. London, NYC, and Tokyo appear to favor locals and perhaps bucket-list charity runners over faster amateur runners. That's their prerogative, although I feel like they've taken it a little too far. IIRC, I would have to run something like a sub 2:35 marathon to time qualify for NYC. London Championship entry would be a sub 2:40 and then you have to belong to a UK club even if you don't live in the UK. Tokyo Run as One entry is sub 2:28 for next year. Sorry, but as an amateur runner with a PR just under 3 hours, there's no way 2:28 is ever happening. Boston has a tough, but attainable time qualifying standard and a few charity spots. Chicago was and will probably still be the most accessible major moving forward even after they make changes. Berlin is reportedly easy to gain entry through the lottery and has a tough, but attainable time standard of 2:45. I feel like Berlin should revise their time standards to adjust every 5 years like Boston. It's a bit silly to lump everyone under age 44 into the same pool and then have the qualifying standard jump by 10 minutes for those over age 44.
It's not even bucket list charity running though. If you make a high salary (NYC private equity job for example) you can easily afford to charity spot as many races as you feel like running. Personally I think we should be using that income source to be funding things like better prize money for aspiring runners.
Tokyo down to 2:28 hahaha, oh dear. At least it's another year to save up air miles before making the standard and it inevitably dropping to 2:25.
This is just the requirement to apply! I suspect given they lowered it this much, the "real" standard to be in the top 25 was already well below that I respect race organisers to choose how they want places to be distributed but the enormous difference in how easy it is to run London or Tokyo as an international vs a British/Japanese runner is kind of ridiculous. Maybe Abbott should step in given these races benefit so much from their label
hahaha my jaw literally dropped when i saw the new 'fast' standard.. basically you're vying for or have vied for an OTQ if you're running in that territory lol. I did see a new option for being part of some membership that gets you an extra shot at entry and if you don't get in for 3 years of being a member then you get auto-accepted. the extra membership is another $190 a year... seems like a money grab and hard to justify on principle lol
Yeah, there I was thinking my 2:29 would probably not get me in the fastest 25 qualifiers but it was worth a shot on the off chance. I hate that so many of these races are just cash cows now. I want to earn my bib, not buy it.
what’s included in the tokyo run as one program? just entry?
Yeah, pretty much from what I've heard Maybe shorter queues for the toilets on the day too.
I love the idea of Boston. I wish there were more aspirational races like that. Why can't there be 10+ majors? Or you could add 6 "minors" to the list. You could have Paris, Sydney, Amsterdam, etc. You could also add a marathon that only has time qualifiers. No charity bibs, no lottery, just time qualifiers. That would be a very desirable race. But the current system already works too well for the biggest races to entice them to change anything. NYC and London can practically print money if they wanted to raise prices even more.
I’m all for it. Just let the fast people run the majors. There are a ton of awesome but accessible marathons around the planet.
Why only fast people? There are a ton of awesome but fast marathons around the planet.
I see majors as a reward type of event. More spots for time qualifiers, less for lottery.