London Marathon Good For Age

1246715

Comments

  • Based on that it looks like the 50 - 64 year olds will get a bit of help and the under 50's who've narrowly missed out will have to work harder ...... BUGGER !!! image

  • I'm hoping to be gutted if they make the GFA 2:59:59 and I miss out by 44 stinking seconds :-/
  • Be interesting to do an analysis on the number getting through over time... only VLM can know for certain, but my guess is that they have been increasing a little as the ballot has got bigger and GFA has become an aspirational target for more people near the boundary (this is a good thing by the way).

  • When they last changed Boston QTs they gave over 18 months notice so everyone knew where they stood. Mind you, having a Boston QT does not guarantee entry as they accept the fastest runners in each age cat until they are full.Some club runners train hard to get a GFA and not to announce the times beofre the ballot opens is ridiculous.

  • Mace, that is good stats there, looking at those I would hope the 3:10 would not change as that is not where the problem lies.



    All I would say is New York and Boston have given ample notice when changing times. For London to change times now without notice would be ridiculous... Many have trained hard to achieve set times, now is not the time to move goalposts...

    I would accept a tougher time next year (if I had to) but to finish the race, knowing I had achieved my time, to now be told I actually haven't, would be heart breaking
  • Paul, I really think this is the issue here. Qualification times evolve with the event BUT change must be notified in adavance to give runners the oppertunity to achieve the new times BEFORE the next GFA entry.
  • I sent my application to Good For Age address and they already sent me a letter back to say they are doing an online system for Good For Age entries. They said to look on the website at end of May and i should be up and running then. I'd imagine they wouldnt change the good for age qualification times, they only changed them a few years ago form sub 3:00 to sub 3:10 for males 18-39...Hope this helps... 

  • There's another thread on here where someone at LM have said that they're toughening the GFA times. So I think that cancels out what we've had here. So they should leave it alone and stop us from fretting any more ! image
  • Rumour that VLM "may" be making an announcement this afternoon,

  • If they are going to make an annoucement this afternoon. They better be quick because most of them will be off to the pub before 5.00.

  • can I just ask are people with GFA on here entering the ballot or just waiting for the GFA ballot/entry or whatever it will be?  I have qualified for the first time ever and would be gutted to miss out. I just keep reading and seeing different pieces of info

  • cheers...

  • Cant you do both ? You can enter the ballot without paying I think ?
  • On the assumption that they won't make the over 40 time tougher than the existing under 40 time I should be ok so i won't be entering the ballot.  Wonder what percentage of 40 to 45s would get under the 3 10 mark?

  • 469/3703 did on sunday...

  • I'm going to have a go at the ballot.....just in case!  image

  • If VLM haven't announce the changes, then in theory the existing GFA times still stands. It would be stupid for immediately change them without notice as it would be unfair to anyone thinking right now they achieved the qualifying time. If in doubt, enter the ballot and wait for the GFA times. I have a couple of contacts with VLM so I will try to find out Monday unless they get bombarded with phone calls!

  • Thanks for that stat literatin, I would therefore be no 470 to miss out by 4 secondsimage

    Be interesting to see what they come up with.

  • Not quite, you were just pipped to 470th place by someone with 3:10:02.

  • Paul Addicott wrote (see)
    Mace, that is good stats there, looking at those I would hope the 3:10 would not change as that is not where the problem lies.

    All I would say is New York and Boston have given ample notice when changing times. For London to change times now without notice would be ridiculous... Many have trained hard to achieve set times, now is not the time to move goalposts...
    I would accept a tougher time next year (if I had to) but to finish the race, knowing I had achieved my time, to now be told I actually haven't, would be heart breaking

    I couldn't agree with you more, as a lawyer I demand a judicial review! I just think it would be too controversial to move the goalposts at this point! So annoying, was hoping that I wouldn't have to stay up til beyond midnight on Sunday to enter the ballot...

  • Going back to the FGFA thing. 

    For women champs is 3.15 which someone also said was FGFA.

    some women will have 3.15 but not qualify for champs if they are not in a club or an affiliated one.

    also, I was reading the instructions and they are very strict about kit, has to be club vest not charity and no logos on kit

    so a lady might have 3.15 and want to run in charity vest or not be in a club or want to wear sponsors kit so opt for FGFA rather than champs

    i was in pen 2 green this year, very crowded and hard to get going.  Did 3.12 so hope they keep champs the same

  • hellen, I'm not sure 3:15 would be fast enough for FGFA. Isn't the idea to let people who are expecting to finish in a really quick time get off to a fast start, irrespective of gender? It wouldn't make sense to mix slower women in with really speedy men just to balance the genders (and people on that start this year have said there were hardly any women). So you probably are better off ditching the charity vest and going for champs.

  • I started in blue 2 this year, filtered in to mix at the back of blue 1 (elite), considering this should be the fastest field it wasn't a particularly fast start, many with a slower start... But with that many you come to expect a slower start I suppose 

  • I'm not going to enter the ballot - I'm  just assuming/hoping  that my GFA of 3:41:37 is a big enough margin for the required sub 4 for Female 50-54!  I just wish there was greater clarification about the process now. My hope is that it will be online rather than snail mail as that creates too much angst...

  • Helen - you'll be on FGFA next year if you don't take the champs. 

  • Really? That's useful to know. Apparently they all wee on the ground over on the FGFA start though...

  • I didn't when I was there!  I prefer the green though - much more fun. 

  • Minni.. I could be wrong but I thought the 'qualifier' for the FGFA start was to have done a sub 3:10.  I was on there for a couple of years, when my qualifying time slipped to 3:13 I was allocated/relgated to the green start.

  • I slipped onto there twice without even a sub 3:30!

  • I wonder where my 3:15:48 will get me since sub 3:15 is champs.  If they use the same rule for ladies and men now then there'll be no ladies on the FGFA (unless of course they don't quality for champs for not being a club member).

Sign In or Register to comment.