Harder - BQ or KQ?

Sorry but, BQ doesn't even compare to KQ. Kona is much harder to get into.

Hand's down Kona is MUCH harder then posting a BQ time.  Not that BQ is easy but those two are in different ballparks, especially in the tougher age groups.

^^^^This^^^^

There is no comparison.  To BQ, you know how fast you need to go.  To KQ, it's a moving target depending on who shows up to race.

KQ is SOOO much harder than BQ!  Unless you are a super-biker who is just an average runner.  But really KQ requires being great at 2 sports and utterly fantastic in the other!

Also, KQ is a lot more luck dependent- who shows up.  There are a set number of slots, where BQ is just about the time.  So if the conditions are great and times drop, great,  you're all in!

 

NY Marathon Qualify is much tougher than a BQ.

KQ>NYQ>BQ

I agree.  Not to over simply things but if want to qualify for Boston I can train until I'm confident I can make the time and assuming I have a good race I'll qualify.  With Kona, you could have the race of your life but not qualify because someone else decided to show up.

I'd guesstimate the Kona qualifer to be at least 10x harder (if not more) than the BQ just in terms of numbers from my unofficial guesstimates of the raw numbers of qualifers in my AG for KQ vs BQ. 

While I haven't done it just quite yet, all my run race times from HM-5k exceed a guesttimated BQ time by a fair amount and I've missed the BQ by less than 5 minutes on a tough hilly course, but I don't think I would be able to KQ no matter how hard I trained, as the guys who are getting the spots around here are running 2:45 standalone marathons (which is < top 0.1% AG), and are also accomplished cyclists/swimmers to boot.  (In contrast a 3:10 standalone marathon on a flat course is top 6-7% of my AG.)

I would say that it's MUCH easier to BQ than to KQ.... no question!

I went back and looked at 2009 KQ times, average swim 1hour to 1:10 (ish), 5 to 5:30ish bike, run 3:15to3:30 . For BQ, times should be around 3:00 to 3:30, depending upon age.  So..like the last post, if you have energy/fitness to KQ, you should be hands down be able to BQ.  However, if you BQ, doesn't mean you can KQ.  Also, BQ is really beating yourself and KQ is really beating a faster person.

As a M45-49, I'd need to go <3:31 to BQ.  I'd have to be within a few minutes of 10:00 to KQ and that would probably look like 1:05 Swim + 5:15 Bike + 3:35 Run which gives me 5-10 minutes for transitions. 

I don't see either in my immediate (5 year) future. 

x2

I was also looking at some KQer splits and many had BQing times...or close to it.  Definitely harder to KQ!

Edited by tbcoffee 2010-10-10 9:37 PM

Yeah, not even close.  The one thing I'd disagree with (from some previous posts) is that I think it is relatively easy (to within a few minutes) to know what you have to do to KQ.  Sure, a fluke can occur and a dozen uber-fast athletes can show up to your IM, but looking at the history of the events, it isn't too hard to see what it takes to KQ.  It's just that KQ is way, way, harder than BQ.