London Marathon Good For Age



  • I had 3.09 and i was ordinary GFA but I think I put my estimated time as 3.14 or similar.
  • I estimated my time as 3!
  • These are the qualifying times for Boston - I wouldn't mind London adopting these, especially since it is the age at the date of the race you are competing in!!! I will be 50 so would need 3:30 as opposed to 3:15!image

    I can't imagine being that lucky!


    •For the 2014 Boston Marathon, qualifying times must be run on or after September 22, 2012 •The acceptance of official race entrants will be based on qualifying time, with the fastest qualifiers (in relation to their age and gender) being accepted first until the race is full •All qualifying times are subject to review and verification •All standards below are based on official submitted net time •All standards below are equal to the 2013 Boston Marathon qualifying standards •The qualifying times below are based upon each athlete's age on the date of the Boston Marathon in which they are participating

    Age Men Women 18-34 3:05 3:35 35-39 3:10 3:40 40-44 3:15 3:45 45-49 3:25 3:55 50-54 3:30 4:00 55-59 3:40 4:10 60-64 3:55 4:25 65-69 4:10 4:40 70-74 4:25 4:55 75-79 4:40 5:10 80+ 4:55 5:25
  • MattyWelsh wrote (see)

    I called up today to check whether the GFA criteria is changing, and was told that it will be the same in 2014 as it was in 2013.

    Thank you for posting this! I squeaked under the Ladies' GFA with 3:48 in Amsterdam so I was getting worried after seeing they took the chart down off the site. Annnnd relax....

  • Its a different race though isn't it ? They can't fill it with club runners or it won't be the charity-fest that it is at the present.

    Also I wonder if Boston will have to revise those - just about everyone will want to run it next year ?
  • I have to say that, despite being told on the phone yesterday that the qualifying times will be the same, I am slightly concerned by this! I think I'll stick my name in the ballot just in case, and then hope for the best!

  • I was a bit disappointed at the all important toilet runner ratio at the green start. The question were huge. Plus it seemed that loads of slow runners had pushed their way to the front.
  • 2Old2Old ✭✭✭
    DS2- where did you find the Boston times? Is the 2014 site up now. Looks like I have a 55 year old QT by 31 mins unless Cougies pessimistic view is correct

    MWelsh -that's should be great news unless your pessimistic thoughts are correct too.

    What time is needed for a FGFA ?
  • Surrey - toilet ratio wasn't too bad on FGFA. I loved the announcers comment on Sunday when we were lined up at the start on the FGFA. It was something like "the police aren't watching at the moment, so if you need a last minute pee ....."
  • Hi everyone, thanks for the comments on this thread, really helpful!

    I did VLM 2012 on a golden bond place, and when I got rejected by the ballot again last year (for the fourth time), I have spent the last year working towards Brighton for a GFA place, I got 3.44 and was so happy that I'd done what I needed to do! Agree that to change the goal posts now would be totally unfair unless they made them more favourable (for men).

    If they did change it negatively, presumably it would only be by five minutes and so I would still be safely in...

    In a quandry over whether to enter the ballot just in case...


  • SlowkoalaSlowkoala ✭✭✭
    I've just called VLM and was told that they are still discussing the GFA times for next year. I told her my time (3:29) and asked whether this should be OK, since it is

    21 mins quicker than current GFA (3:50). She advised me to still go for the ballot and said if I get a ballot place but am then eligible via GFA, they would cancel the ballot place and transfer to GFA place. Feel nervous now as thought I would be running again next year image

    As an aside, when my dad ran the VLM in the early 80s, they didn't have GFA, only championship places. He had to run sub 2:35 in the Marlow marathon, his first ever marathon to get in! So I suppose we should all stop moaning image
  • Slowkoala wrote (see)
    I've just called VLM and was told that they are still discussing the GFA times for next year. I told her my time (3:29) and asked whether this should be OK, since it is
    21 mins quicker than current GFA (3:50). She advised me to still go for the ballot and said if I get a ballot place but am then eligible via GFA, they would cancel the ballot place and transfer to GFA place. Feel nervous now as thought I would be running again next year image

    Ugh, I thought I was all safe, too! I wish they'd just decide already, and honor those of us who've already qualified under the 2013 times. image I was hoping to avoid the ballot stress again, and having all the GFA runners apply in the ballot unecessarily just takes away chances from other runners. Strange way to go about it...

    Thanks for posting this update though!

  • I was also told by VLM (or should that be VMLM) that they are definitely reviewing the GFA times and that the Race Director hasn't made a decision and that anyone close should definitely apply via ballot.

  • 2Oldnever - found it when I did a google search!

    Cougie - good point about then 'charity fest'. The thought did cross my mind as well.

    Slowkoala - didn't have GFA when I was running in the 90's either. Only champs at sub 2:45.

  • I wonder how many people get in on GFA ? Is it everyone on Green start and the FGFA people on red ?
  • 2Old2Old ✭✭✭

    DS2-I have snce thanks.The sooner VLM publishes its GFA policy the better.This is causing me unnecessary anxiety-why didnt I defer this year due to injury!!!!

  • If only there was some kind of running magazine that could delve into this kind of thing eh and get the inside info. Aah we can dream.
  • Arghhh, why do they do this to us? You would think that they would have made this kind of decision before this year's race and publish any changes? This would then avoid the mad rush to get in via the ballot and then all the administration to move runners from a ballot place the GFA place!

    Rant over.
  • Cougie - the green start also includes the celebs and anyone going for a Guinness record, I'm not sure if there is anyone else. 

    As for slow people at the front of green - well the celebs start at the front and then the rest of us.  I didn't have a pen number on my race number so when I asked I was directed to pen 3.  I was 2 pens ahead of both the 3:45 and 3:56 pacers and I told them I was aiming for sub 4.

  • MinniMinni ✭✭✭
    I was at the very front of the green start this year, yes on the ribbon! The celebs were then brought in front but they were only about 5 deep. The FGFA go at the front of the red.
  • FreemersFreemers ✭✭✭

    I was pen 2 on Green but it was saying 1-2 on the there early and ended up right at the front with just a few celebs to get past.  The first half a mile was a bit dodgy with some elbow bumping but it spread out quickly enough I thought.

  • Ok, rang VLM - they are reviewing the GFA times, info will be on the website next week, but they advise applying through the ballot. If you qualify under the new GFA criteria, they will change your ballot place to a GFA place.

    Hey ho - what time on the 29th does the ballot open?
  • FreemersFreemers ✭✭✭ elbow bumping you know who I'm talking about Minni imageimage

  • My assumption is VLM have already decided on the GFA changes ages ago. Find it very hard if the race director hasn't decided when the ballot opens next week. A report was sent to former race director Dave Bedford regarding the male veteran GFA which poses to be unfair. He wanted more info and its more than accepted GFA will change with extra age catergories for male veterans which will reflect a fairer GFA system. If you under 40, expect the same qualifying time. 40, 50, 60+ may be different. I think there will be little change to women's GFA. However, pretty stupid for VLM to ask everyone to apply through ballot before giving away GFA times.

  • MinniMinni ✭✭✭
    Lol Freemers! But you still got away!
  • I like the way runnerman talks. I'm finding it very soothing ! Say it again dude !
  • runnerman - good point, well made! Whatever the outcome, some of us will be happy and some won't. Just like the ballot results really!
  • macemace ✭✭✭

    I'll be more than happy for them to push it out to 3:17 for a 46 year old image

  • WardiWardi ✭✭✭

    Here are a few quotes from an old thread on the les Croupiers forum, this is the background to rumours of GFA changes.  There may be a few tweaks but it is the men's 41-59 group which is the obvious black spot..

    2012.. An interesting piece of news on the "good for age" entries.
    Our own Jeff Aston is currently submitting his "stats" to David Bedford, to hopefully change the London Marathon "good for age" entries.
    At the moment you will see that the 41 to 59 year olds have the same qualifying times. Jeff thought that this was unfair to the late 50s and decided to do some stats to divide the groups into smaller age groups.
    His idea went through Welsh Masters, then British masters. I then as secretary obtained the backing of Martin Duff and Steve Smythe from Athletics Weekly and approached Dave Bedford alongside Jeff. Dave has now asked Jeff to compile the stats and it looks hopeful that they will be adopted for 2013. (2012 entries are already out)
    Jeff was also inspirational in changing the number of scorers in the women's age groups at the British Masters relays, a few years ago, also.

    2013.. When the GFA proposal from Jeff was submitted to the London Marathon, being the BMAF Road Race Secretary at that time, I also had a massive interest in Jeffs proposal. As your query states, nothing since has happened. To be exact, David Bedford had only agreed to look at them.
    As there had not been any noticable movement on the proposal, I personally spoke to Dave Bedford on this in London last week and he seemed to think that Jeff's info was mislaid. Jeff has now submitted his updated proposal with this year's stats included, to Dave and the new Director Hugh Brasher and they have both been received by them.

    All I can say is watch this space!

     Jeff's stats took into consideration the number of masters  each age band over the last few years and when his suggested GFA entry totals were applied it still did not exceed the current range of competing masters in the VLM. Therefore the VLM would not have a problem with final totals. Should the totals increase, it would be relatively easy to tweek the age band times to reduce the final total masters entries. In recent years though, the overall average race finishing times seem to have become slower than the average times produced 20 year ago, which makes Jeff's GFA proposition in age bands a much fairer entry system to the o/50 applicants.

    I speak as a 55 year oldimage


  • macemace ✭✭✭

    Here's a few stats from VLM 2013 for MEN only

    So, of 12051 male runners in the 18-39 category, 1127 managed the GFA time for the category = 9.4%

    Overall, 2463 of 21975 men qualified as GFA = 11.2%

    The WOMENS TOTAL was 1822 of 12214 = 14.9% 

    I can post the splits by category if anyone is interested but basically the GFA times seem reasonably fair for Women and the % GFA success is fairly steady with age , increasing  ( as the mens does ) over age 65 ...... but then if they can get through a Mara aged 65+ the bloody deserve it !!!!

    cat       %qual     qual no.     gfa 

    18-39    9.4%      1127      12051     3:10

    40-44    15.4%      570       3699      3:15

    45-49    14.6%      412        2821     3:15 

    50-54      9.1%      157       1733     3:15

    55-59      4.8%        39         818     3:15

    60-64      8.2%        39         476     3:30

    65-69     24.9%        60         241    4:00

    70+       43.4%        59         136     5:00 

    TOT       11.2%       2463     21975

Sign In or Register to comment.