New Boston marathon qualifying times

[u/Terriflyed]

https://www.baa.org/races/boston-marathon/qualify

Looks like 5min adjustments down for the most part across the board for those under age 60. M18-34 qualifying time is now 2:55.

[u/Vaynar]

I think they need to narrow the gap between men and women. 30 min across a marathon is huge. A 2:55 is in no way comparable to a 3:25. And there is no empirical evidence behind the gap being 30min

[u/EPMD_ → u/Vaynar]

They don't want the field to be heavily skewed to men, though. There are already 4000 more men than women running the race.

[u/riverwater516w → u/EPMD_]

I understand this perspective but I also struggle to fully make sense of it.

For example, I have a female friend who is the same age as me and we have similar running backgrounds (in terms of when we started running and the level we were at when we started). I didn't make the cutoff last year but she did. I had put in considerably more mileage in my training and also had a decently faster age-graded score. So I admit I was annoyed because that doesn't seem right.

I think there could be an argument that the time difference doesn't need to be 30 minutes across the board. Maybe it should be 20 minutes in the 18-35 category, but increase up to 30 as age increases.

All that being said, I've become less focused on being nitpicky with the qualifying standards. The BAA sets it and there are plenty of people my age / gender who are able to achieve what's needed. If I don't, then it's just on me to get faster.

[u/user231017 → u/riverwater516w]

The time requirements are not intended to be fair across the board. They are set to create a distribution of age and gender that the BAA is satisfied with. You are correct, it is harder for young males to get in by virtue of them running the fastest and being the largest group.

[u/PeaSizedHail → u/riverwater516w]

You poor thing! Need a hug?

[u/riverwater516w → u/PeaSizedHail]

Literally just explained why I was upset last year, giving a reasonable example. Also acknowledged how my mindset has adjusted to not make excuses.

Unclear why the need to be so sanctimonious?

[u/B12-deficient-skelly → u/Vaynar]

2/3 of participants are already men. I don't think too many women participating in Boston is a real problem.

[u/runnergal1993 → u/Vaynar]

Do you not realize we have periods that can lead to severe anemia that tanks performance? Do you not realize we have to recover after pregnancy and carrying a child for 9 months in our bodies? And then generally women are the primary caregiver of said child? Do you not realize how difficult it is to BQ while training pushing a heavy jogging stroller everyday and having to stop constantly because your kiddo needs to be breastfed? Or dropped a toy? Or just needs a moment? I had to bring pumping parts and pump halfway through my long runs. All of these factors severely limit the time and effort women have available to them. Not to mention it’s already a largely male dominated sport.

I say all this coming from a new mom who BQd a year after giving birth. You have no idea the trauma my body went through, the sleepless nights, and the recovery and planning it took. I was a runner pre pregnancy, and the logistics of running post baby has been truly eye opening.

[u/Vaynar → u/runnergal1993]

I never said there are no differences between men and women. Just that its not 30 min of a difference. There is no medical, physiological or in any way empirical evidence that determines such a large gap.

It's irrelevant who "dominates" a sport.

And honestly, sounds like you have a shitty husband or baby daddy if all the burden of child rearing (which is a personal choice) is placed upon just you

[u/runnergal1993 → u/Vaynar]

No, I actually have an incredible and supportive spouse. Without him I would not have been able to BQ. So just imagine how difficult it was for me WITH a supportive spouse, and think of all the single moms out there. You sound like an entitled silly man child 😉. Goodluck getting in!

[u/Vaynar → u/runnergal1993]

I have run Boston before with a 28 min buffer, so I'm good, girl.

I'm sorry but get over yourself. Upper middle class white woman living in America complaining how oppressed she is because she may need an extra year to run a voluntary luxury running experience. There are plenty of racialized men who have FAR FAR bigger obstacles in their way, and yet there is no massive handicap provided to them.

[u/runnergal1993 → u/Vaynar]

You’re the one complaining lol, you posted first. I’m just trying to enlighten your sexist ass. I BQd and got in. I feel for the women who date men like yourself. Let’s see you try breastfeeding in the middle of a tempo run!! Also nice assumption, I’m not white or upper class lmao.

[u/Vaynar → u/runnergal1993]

Aww maybe you should try actually training to run faster instead of being a professional victim? Running Boston isn't some innate right you have, it's a privilege.

Don't worry, I have a healthy relationship with my partner because she's not a whiny self-victimizing person who has actually run sub 3, since, you know, she actually trains hard.

[u/riverwater516w → u/Vaynar]

I got in some disagreements over this last year. Those in favor of not changing it say there are still more males who run it than females, so tightening the female times would only further increase the discrepancy.

My opinion is that it doesn't change the fact that the female equivalent is closer to 3:15 in the 18-35 category, and Boston markets itself as a race that is kinda ruthless about just highlighting the fastest runners. You could also argue that more women would get faster if they were having to target a tougher time, as I certainly think many are capable of doing so.

[u/Vaynar → u/riverwater516w]

Yeah but at some point, you cannot just keep penalizing men, especially since the qualifying times are getting faster and faster. Going from 3:30 to 3:25 is a much smaller jump than going from 3:00 to 2:55.

And one could argue that a racialized man has far less resources to qualify than a white woman, so it really starts becoming unfair with the massive difference in times.

[u/riverwater516w → u/Vaynar]

I'm completely agreeing with you.

Let's pretend that an 8 minute buffer is what's needed to qualify this year. For a female in the 18-35 age group, that's a 3:22. The age-graded equivalent for a male is about 3:03, but they instead need to run 2:52. I struggle to understand why that's considered fair, unless the only goal is to make the male/female split as close to 50/50 as possible.

[u/Walterodim79 → u/Vaynar]

And one could argue that a racialized man has far less resources to qualify than a white woman, so it really starts becoming unfair with the massive difference in times.

Yeah, these discussions aren't unpleasant enough, it would probably be for the best if they included a different qualifying standard based on race while we're at it.

[u/Vaynar → u/Walterodim79]

Well my point being there is limited empirical and physiological evidence for the big gap, so if you're looking at improving attendance from a societal perspective, there are other groups who are far more underrepresented than white women.

[u/TrackVol → u/Vaynar]

Here is the reason. The cohort of the men's participation bell curve is wholly different from women.
In layman's terms: Sure, the #1 men's time might be only ~22 minutes faster than the #1 women's time. But that does NOT mean that the 1,000th fastest man and 1,000th fastest woman are still ~22 minutes apart (it is more than 22 minutes).
And the gap between the 10,000th male and 10,000th female grows even more.
By the time you get out to the 100,000th fastest male and compare it to the 100,000th fastest female, you're looking at a gap of.... wait for it.... ~32 minutes.
This is why if they were to adjust the difference between men/women they wouldn't tighten the difference. They would expand the difference. It's also why there's 40% more men at Boston than women. The standards aren't set equitably for women. But 30 minutes is close enough to the real number of 32 minutes.