Lesser ability this year?

I'm no Paula Radcliffe but last year in my first FLM I ran 4:38 and was placed 21,638,this year I ran 4:18 and was placed 12058.
20 minutes =9,580 places which seems an awful lot to me and judging by the amount of congestion around the whole course I wonder if there were a lot of runners that were 4:30+ competing this year.
What do you think?


  • Slewts
    i think 12058 position is men only,there may be a few thousand women in front as well.
  • Fatty,
    I've used the FLM results page for both years to get the placings so it should be consistent even if there are a few thousand ladies ahead of me.
  • There were certainly fewer sub 3hr runners this year. Might have been the conditions, or just a drop in quality.
  • WardiWardi ✭✭✭
    There does seem to have been a drop in performance overall this year. Those lads & lasses breaking 3:15 are over 400 down on last year. My 3:10 was only a minute faster than last year and I have moved up about 600 places!
  • Slewts-
    I was wondering the same thing. I haven't run FLM before this year, but did NYC in 2001, and came in 4,300 or so. This year, I ran about 7 minutes faster and came in at 476... 7 minutes= 3,800 places??? can that REALLY be right? Granted, they are different courses and different runners, etc, but it's weird!
  • Forgot to say, too, that the few times on the course when I got to see the herd of runners in front of me, it seemed A LOT bigger than 475 people. Maybe it IS just women?
  • Standards are getting lower year after year. Times don't lie. Whether that's a bad thing or not is up for discussion!
  • I think that the unusually hot day had a great effect on the slower times.Even very slight dehydration can have a significant effect on overall performance.
  • It was the second hottest London Marathon since the event began
Sign In or Register to comment.