General Discussion Triathlon Talk » should there be a universal time limit for marathons? Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 12
 
 
2006-10-30 1:13 PM
in reply to: #576753

User image

Runner
Subject: RE: should there be a universal time limit for marathons?
So, out of curiosity, is the consensus then that there should be NO cut-off time, or just no universal cut-off time?


2006-10-30 1:15 PM
in reply to: #583156

User image

Giver
18427
5000500050002000100010010010010025
Subject: RE: should there be a universal time limit for marathons?

Scout7 - 2006-10-30 2:13 PM So, out of curiosity, is the consensus then that there should be NO cut-off time, or just no universal cut-off time?

Don't know if there is a consensus.

I vote for "leave it up to the RD."

2006-10-30 1:17 PM
in reply to: #583156

User image

Resident Curmudgeon
25290
50005000500050005000100100252525
The Road Back
Gold member
Subject: RE: should there be a universal time limit for marathons?

Scout7 - 2006-10-30 1:13 PM So, out of curiosity, is the consensus then that there should be NO cut-off time, or just no universal cut-off time?

No universal cutoff, with cutoff times to be determined by the race directors of individual marathons based on race logistics.

Kind of like it is now.

2006-10-30 1:18 PM
in reply to: #576753

User image

Champion
6999
50001000500100100100100252525
Chicago, Illinois
Subject: RE: should there be a universal time limit for marathons?
I think majority people say Universal cut off time. most who do say 5 hours. I say 8 but 7 seems more resonible. Its always up to the RD and what he is willing to put up with and area is willing to put up with. For those who say no Univeral time limit I have to ask. if you were RD of a race that was not credible tough or have people with 40 lb packs then I ask if you would have a time limit and if so what would you do.



2006-10-30 1:22 PM
in reply to: #583174

User image

Resident Curmudgeon
25290
50005000500050005000100100252525
The Road Back
Gold member
Subject: RE: should there be a universal time limit for marathons?

chirunner134 - 2006-10-30 1:18 PM I think majority people say Universal cut off time. most who do say 5 hours. I say 8 but 7 seems more resonible. Its always up to the RD and what he is willing to put up with and area is willing to put up with. For those who say no Univeral time limit I have to ask. if you were RD of a race that was not credible tough or have people with 40 lb packs then I ask if you would have a time limit and if so what would you do.

If I were RD, I'd keep it open for as long as it was economically feasible to provide support services. Again, that's probably what most RDs do now.

The other side of this sword is to be inclusive of all customers for whom it is economically feasible. As much as you might like to inclued a 9-hour marathoner, the marginal cost to you may be higher than the marginal benefit provided by that customer (i.e., another 1% gain in participants versus a 10% increase in costs to provide traffic control, timing services, etc. for that additional hour)



Edited by the bear 2006-10-30 1:29 PM
2006-10-30 1:22 PM
in reply to: #583172

User image

Runner
Subject: RE: should there be a universal time limit for marathons?
the bear - 2006-10-30 2:17 PM

No universal cutoff, with cutoff times to be determined by the race directors of individual marathons based on race logistics.

Kind of like it is now.



Kinda what I figured, but I wasn't sure.

I'm still not sure why this issue is so hot button. Most races I see have SOME sort of cut-off time, although they vary and are certainly not universal. I certainly don't see that as exclusionary in any way. I see that as the only way the RD was allowed to hold the race.

Of course, if you're talking about a championship-type race, then yes, cut-off or qualifying times are fine. Heck, we had qualifying times for track in HS.


2006-10-30 1:27 PM
in reply to: #576753

User image

Champion
6999
50001000500100100100100252525
Chicago, Illinois
Subject: RE: should there be a universal time limit for marathons?
I guess for me I basicly say keep it where is but more more strict on the time shutoff time. Lets face it people will constantly push the times if they can get away with it.
2006-10-30 1:33 PM
in reply to: #583193

User image

Resident Curmudgeon
25290
50005000500050005000100100252525
The Road Back
Gold member
Subject: RE: should there be a universal time limit for marathons?

 

chirunner134 - 2006-10-30 1:18 PM I think majority people say Universal cut off time. most who do say 5 hours. I say 8 but 7 seems more resonible.

chirunner134 - 2006-10-30 1:27 PM I guess for me I basicly say keep it where is but more more strict on the time shutoff time. Lets face it people will constantly push the times if they can get away with it.

But isn't this a similar attitude to the guy that wants to cut it off at 5-hours? Being for a cutoff time, just so it's longer than what I can do, include me but exclude anyone slower?



Edited by the bear 2006-10-30 1:34 PM
2006-10-30 1:49 PM
in reply to: #576753

User image

Champion
6999
50001000500100100100100252525
Chicago, Illinois
Subject: RE: should there be a universal time limit for marathons?
not at all. I am pretty slow as they come and yet I like 6 1/2 which would negate 2 of my marathons. The difference really is standards. Should the marathon be a race or a casual hike? why not do it in some parks and have a nice rest part in it so you can sit down like they do on the bike ramble I did. make it about just hang out and having a good time. Maybe have a nice lunch for you even a dinner maybe. for the 14 hour people you need lunch and dinner. Those are rare and extreme times but honestly its only the extremes I have any issues with.

When does the race stop being a race and becomes a causal hike? When does it lose force of will and becomes soemthing just to do.

To say well its ego the only reason why you want it. I would agree totally. Everything about marathon is about ego. Why run one if you had no pride in doing it? why do it to yourself if it something half the nation has done? We do it to push ourselves which is ego based. We do it to do something few people have done. If not why not stick to 5ks or 10k because those are races too but they are much easier to finish.

2006-10-30 1:52 PM
in reply to: #583241

User image

Giver
18427
5000500050002000100010010010010025
Subject: RE: should there be a universal time limit for marathons?

chirunner134 - 2006-10-30 2:49 PM not at all. I am pretty slow as they come and yet I like 6 1/2 which would negate 2 of my marathons. The difference really is standards. Should the marathon be a race or a casual hike?  

For some people, 5 hours is a casual hike.

Marathon is about distance, not about time. Cover the distance in one sitting, and you can call yourself a marathoner. Go faster and you can call yourself a x:xx marathoner.



Edited by run4yrlif 2006-10-30 1:52 PM
2006-10-30 1:59 PM
in reply to: #583248

User image

Runner
Subject: RE: should there be a universal time limit for marathons?
run4yrlif - 2006-10-30 2:52 PM

chirunner134 - 2006-10-30 2:49 PM not at all. I am pretty slow as they come and yet I like 6 1/2 which would negate 2 of my marathons. The difference really is standards. Should the marathon be a race or a casual hike?

For some people, 5 hours is a casual hike.

Marathon is about distance, not about time. Cover the distance in one sitting, and you can call yourself a marathoner. Go faster and you can call yourself a x:xx marathoner.



So, if I walk the whole thing? Besides, if it's just a distance, can I call myself a marathoner if I go that far in training, outside of a race?


2006-10-30 2:01 PM
in reply to: #576753

User image

Champion
6999
50001000500100100100100252525
Chicago, Illinois
Subject: RE: should there be a universal time limit for marathons?
marathon is about time also because guess what? without it we all completed a marathon. We have all done an IM. I have a 1000 miler easy., sure it took me maybe even 8760:00:00 or 365 days.
2006-10-30 2:16 PM
in reply to: #576753

Veteran
465
1001001001002525
Michigan
Subject: RE: should there be a universal time limit for marathons?

Wow!  I just read this thread - or most of it.  Like someone else said It does sound like SlowTwitch.  Ruling people out of all marathons because they are "too slow".  I understand and fully support having qualifying times for some races like Boston but eliminating a whole group of people from doing any marathons just doesn't sound right to me.  Gosh, I ran my first Half Mary yesterday and according to some of you my accomplishment is nothing to be proud of because I am "too slow".  It is very disappointing to see people on BT with such elitist attitudes.  How does having slower runners in "your race" diminish your achievement or affect you at all?

2006-10-30 2:19 PM
in reply to: #576753

User image

Champion
6999
50001000500100100100100252525
Chicago, Illinois
Subject: RE: should there be a universal time limit for marathons?
good job at the half. may I ask what was your time?
2006-10-30 2:28 PM
in reply to: #583280

User image

Runner
Subject: RE: should there be a universal time limit for marathons?
kimta - 2006-10-30 3:16 PM

Wow! I just read this thread - or most of it. Like someone else said It does sound like SlowTwitch. Ruling people out of all marathons because they are "too slow". I understand and fully support having qualifying times for some races like Boston but eliminating a whole group of people from doing any marathons just doesn't sound right to me. Gosh, I ran my first Half Mary yesterday and according to some of you my accomplishment is nothing to be proud of because I am "too slow". It is very disappointing to see people on BT with such elitist attitudes. How does having slower runners in "your race" diminish your achievement or affect you at all?



I think that most people have agreed that a UNIVERSAL cut-off time is not needed. However, it should be (and is) up to the RD. Some races have to have cut-off times. Plain and simple. You just cannot keep the streets closed for 24 hours. You just can't do it. The location wouldn't allow it. MCM had a cut-off time, didn't? You had to be at a certain point by a certain time. I've done several trail runs that had a similar set-up. I don't think it's a bad thing in any way, shape, or form, and I certainly don't see it as preventing people from running at all. It just tells you that there's a standard that has to be met. Is that wrong? Is that elitist? No, because the RD tells you flat-out that this is the cut-off. It's no different than putting field limits on races. That excludes me because I may not have been able to sign up for it in time. So, because I'm not as aware of the event, I don't get to do it? That's pretty arbitrary right there, more so than a cut-off, and could be elitist as well (you've never done it, so your chances of signing up for it are greatly diminished).

As for people affecting my race....... Eh, depends on people's etiquette on the course more than anything.
2006-10-30 2:29 PM
in reply to: #576753

User image

Crystal Lake, IL
Subject: RE: should there be a universal time limit for marathons?

This is like that thing about everything in the world being covered with microscopic bugs and being grossed out by it.  It may be true, but who cares?  What practical application does this extreme example have.  The races are the way they are.  In most cases the RD is going to have, as was stated before, the race set up to accommodate people until the $$$ reward no longer justifies the expense.  

Todd, you can provide extreme examples to poke holes in the way things are done now all you want.  Equally so, you could provide an example of how you think it should be done and I could poke holes in it too.  No one system is ever going to make everyone happy.  That's why there isn't one. 

Excluding the pros this is a recreational activity, right?  "THE MARATHON"  as everyone calls it has changed over the years.  Even the distance has changed, although not recently.  Like anything, it needs to adapt if races are going to survive and attract participants.  Anyone who feels that someone who takes longer than _____ to complete that race is not "really" a marathoner might as well get used to that feeling because it would be a death sentence to some races to impose a universal time limit. 

Personally I think it is a major accomplishment that a race like the Chicago Marathon I recently watched is able to successfully meld a very exciting professional race along with a great race experience for age groupers from beginners to elite.  THAT's the part of endurance sports that really appeals to me.  The way they are so inclusive while at the same time allowing each athlete to perform to their peak.  I can't grab my clubs and go play with Tiger and Phil, and I can't get in my Wrangler and go drive at Daytona, and forget about pro team sports.  But I can get on my trusty old Schwinn and/or Reeboks and go rub elbows with the best of the best at an endurance event.

Sweet!

 



2006-10-30 2:33 PM
in reply to: #576753

User image

Champion
6999
50001000500100100100100252525
Chicago, Illinois
Subject: RE: should there be a universal time limit for marathons?
yeah really it comes down to an unwritten rule of 8 hours pretty much. only 3.8 percent last year was over that mark I beleive. 1/2 of those came from 2 races 2/3 of those people from those 2 races came from 1 of the races.

yes BOP who get an early start or on loop courses do affect the faster runners most of the time or those who are clearly BOP and they do not start at the BOP.

4 hours tends to be the upper limit for half marathons but like in the marathon that is pretty arbitary also. Alot of half marathons go from 2:30 - 3:00s. Yes I have yet to attempt a 2:30 half marathon since I do not think I could make that time. When I feel I can make it I will go for it.
2006-10-30 2:49 PM
in reply to: #576753

User image

Champion
6999
50001000500100100100100252525
Chicago, Illinois
Subject: RE: should there be a universal time limit for marathons?
Hangloose you are right I use extreme examples only because well I am talking about is the extremes. Do not think a marathon is a jsut some sort of moving party. no one dances the whole thing. most of the people's cute things go away by mile 20. For most everyone who does it is a struggle in some way. It is why people do it and are addicted to it. If you make it something too casual you take away that spirit. As the 5:00 people claim is true if people can get all the time in the world they do not push themselves and take away from the reason people do it. Sure maybe tehy are missing the boat. Kinda like those people who did 3.29 miles in the 8 hour race I did this summer. Sure they completed the Ultra marathon but did not do it in the way the race is designed and are not being allowed to race next year if they do not put in the honest effort to go over 26.3 miles.

I agree distance sports are cool because in theory I could win it. Its better that way in running races than tris that ways since well wave starts and all not sure if events like chicago that have an elite start if a non elite racer could actually win overall. In Chicago marathon its gun time not chip that determines the winner.

hehe next time I run one and I am in pain and going why the heck am I doing this again I will rememeber you and how its suppose to be a fun party and curse you rather than curse myself for being so stupid. Its why I do marathons. You are not having fun until you just want the race to be over with and it will be another hour until it is.

there are unwritten rules but if they go away then the race itself may go away. What would the IM people say if they changed 17 hour limit to 18 hours, 19 hours, or later ? what would it do to the sport? Same thing with marathons. Liquests you can not take allt he time you want but in honolulu you will finish with people after 14 hours and that is just too long. I am trying to be a realist and not an elitest. even at 8 hours people who are walking a casual pace can finish.


2006-10-30 3:07 PM
in reply to: #582447

User image

Regular
408
100100100100
Rhode Island
Subject: RE: should there be a universal time limit for marathons?
MarkK - 2006-10-29 8:26 PM
In one of your prior posts you stated "Par for a marathon is 3 hours, so 5 allows for an awful lot of duffers. After that... cut 'em off" and when asked why 3 hours is par your reply was a "It just is. Trust me on this. Now put your shoes on and go out for a run" Where did you come up with this statistic? According to Marathonguide.com, the avg finishing time for a marathon in 2005 was 4hrs 45mins.
Here's the link: http://www.marathonguide.com/features/Articles/2005RecapOverview.cf...





Without taking one side or the other, par equaling 3 hours sounds about right when the average golf score is 100. So 100 is about equal to 4:45

"The average 18-hole score for the average golfer remains at about 100, as it has for decades, according to the National Golf Foundation"

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/05/24/news/golf25.php


And looking at the percentage of finishing times, cutting off the marathon at 5 hours will only eliminate 19% of the finishers. 81% still make that cutoff.
2006-10-30 3:26 PM
in reply to: #576753

User image

Champion
6999
50001000500100100100100252525
Chicago, Illinois
Subject: RE: should there be a universal time limit for marathons?
1/5 the field is quite a large percent though. Maybe 1/5 of those could make 5 hours but a number can not either.

Honest 5 hour finish time will bring it to like marathons in moscow. Russia alot less do marathons but the ones that do are alot faster. In america we need more than ever something to get us off our lazy butts.

and yes a 12 hour finish time threats this because if its not longer look at it as something great that people can look back with pride then most people will no longer do it.
2006-10-30 3:26 PM
in reply to: #583324

User image

Crystal Lake, IL
Subject: RE: should there be a universal time limit for marathons?

chirunner134 - 2006-10-30 2:49 PM  Do not think a marathon is a jsut some sort of moving party.

I agree distance sports are cool because in theory I could win it.   That's not what I said.

 I will rememeber you and how its suppose to be a fun party and curse you rather than curse myself for being so stupid.

I never said any of these things.  Any one who knows how I did the OLY at Pleasant Prairie -you were there- knows I worked my butt off to have fun leading up to the race, and then worked my butt off during the race to drag myself slobbering and injured across the finish line.  I don't know how you read my post and got this out of it. 

What would the IM people say if they changed 17 hour limit to 18 hours, 19 hours, or later ? 

Nobody is talking about lengthening marathon hours, just not imposing time limits that seem arbitrary or elitist (or both).



2006-10-30 3:28 PM
in reply to: #583377

User image

Regular
408
100100100100
Rhode Island
Subject: RE: should there be a universal time limit for marathons?
chirunner134 - 2006-10-30 4:26 PM
and yes a 12 hour finish time threats this because if its not longer look at it as something great that people can look back with pride then most people will no longer do it.


But that's the exact same argument that the Dugger guy was getting hammered for, the only difference is you chose different times. You say cut 'em off at 12, he said 5. Isn't 12 hours being a little elitist against people who can't finish it in that time?
2006-10-30 3:36 PM
in reply to: #583384

User image

Runner
Subject: RE: should there be a universal time limit for marathons?
paTRIck - 2006-10-30 4:28 PM

chirunner134 - 2006-10-30 4:26 PM
and yes a 12 hour finish time threats this because if its not longer look at it as something great that people can look back with pride then most people will no longer do it.


But that's the exact same argument that the Dugger guy was getting hammered for, the only difference is you chose different times. You say cut 'em off at 12, he said 5. Isn't 12 hours being a little elitist against people who can't finish it in that time?


Is it elitist to cut people off at all? If so, then by that measure, Ironman races are all elitist. Does anyone on here who has completed an Ironman race feel that their accomplishment will be diminished in some way if next year, they eliminate the cut-off completely (excepting championships). So, I can call myself an Ironman by going out and doing the whole distance in, say, 24 hours?

I'm not picking on anyone at all. I'm also personally of the opinion that cut-off times are necessary from a LOGISTICS standpoint, and not from an elitist "I did this" standpoint. But for those who argue that any cut-off time is elitist, I think that there's nothing wrong with that at all.
2006-10-30 3:41 PM
in reply to: #576753

User image

Champion
6999
50001000500100100100100252525
Chicago, Illinois
Subject: RE: should there be a universal time limit for marathons?
I know you worked hard for PP and you did well. you should be proud of that fact. I know I worked hard and I race as hard as I could there myself. I had to ice my knee because it was killing me from my injury 3 day earlier.

sorry if I miss understood your post. It can happen on a message boards very easliy.


as for patrick I guess if that is what you determine that as an elistest then I am an elitest.

Then anyone who agrees with 17 hours time limit for the IM should also be an elitest. So should that race also be left up to the race director also or am I missing something?
2006-10-30 3:44 PM
in reply to: #576753

User image

Master
1845
100050010010010025
Athens, Ga.
Subject: RE: should there be a universal time limit for marathons?

Every race I've done has had cut-offs, even sprints. But it's not done from an elitist pointofview, it's logistics, like scout said. But, please, don't make the cut-off for a marathon 5 hours. I expected to break 4:45 at my first, but cramping at mile 15 sent me duck-waddling the last 11 miles. To finish in 5:40 was an accomplishment. RD know their events. They make the decisions to cut off some and maybe lose money, but they know their towns.

BTW, is it really about egos when most of the time people look at you like you've gone completely insane for running a marathon or even doing a sprint tri?

New Thread
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » should there be a universal time limit for marathons? Rss Feed  
 
 
of 12