Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
Options
London Marathon 2015
The materials in this website are in no way intended to replace the professional medical care, advice, diagnosis or treatment of a doctor, qualified personal trainer, therapist, dietitian or nutritionist Runners's World, Part of the Hearst UK well-being network © Copyright 2017
Comments
Matt (Overthinking)
I think I'm one of your 25%! My last 10 applications have been turned down. Rejected 2004-8 so got a five strikes place in 2009. Rejected 2010-4, but with the five strike scheme gone there's no knowing when I'll get a ballot place again.
Then there are the number of people who post on here who dont know what all the fuss is about as they got in first time!
Womble78, sorry mate but the charities should be paying £1000 per bond place then they wouldn't be hogging all the places and expecting outragous fees, and that would allow more places for the lottery, then more individuals would be able to take part, which is what the idea of the "London Marathon" was all about
But how would more people be taking part? The same amount would be taking part, but they would have entered via a ballot instead of via a charity. ?
I agree that there should be more of a balance. But if the charities didn't have to pay £500 for a place then they wouldn't have to ask £1200 min to cover their costs, which would make it more realistic for a lot more people to commit to running for them. Also the charity aspect is a huge part of the spirit of the event and enhances the atmosphere massively, take it away and it wouldn't be the same. £38 for a general entry is ridiculously low for an event of this scale, that's the going rate for a lot of 10k's. New York and Chicago charge around £180, somewhere in between would be a fairer amount...
Bitter? Much? (still cross about having to pay for the train home?)
Surely the very nature of the VLM is the charity/ballot mix? The runners who run on gold bond places are happy to meet the "outrageous" fundraising targets you despise, and if you don't fancy that then you have the ballot, running club places and GFA or (indeed) other marathons.
To penalise charities for being one of the options is nonsense - without the mix as it is, the £35 entry fee would be untenable.
I still haven´t received any confirmation mail for my place in the overseas ballot. Got a code at the end of the registration though.
Should I be worried?
Edit: No mail in the spam filter either...
I didn't get any emails last year, phoned them and they confirmed my place in the ballot. But no emails even though they confirmed it and said would send another email. Just sulked and took it as read I wasn't going to get a place!
My biggest gripe is those that get in either via the ballot or charities that quite literally walk from about 5 miles, I'd find it very hard to raise 2,000 unlike some of my friends who work for big corporate companies where 2,000 is easily raised, I'm not bitter it's just how it is.
Personally I'd be in favour of a queue system so that once you've run you go to the back of the queue, I know that if I get in this year I won't enter again next year
Frankly why anyone who can't run at least 13 miles without walking wants to take six hours 'running' a marathon is beyond me. Surely at that level a half would be a decent challenge.
Additionally once you get beyond 6 hours you lose the crowd support quite substantially in latter stages.
I suspect it's so they can say "I've done the London marathon" maybe if you were required to take a medical as some cities insist on then the numbers of people walking would be greatly reduced.
A friend ran this year and said that it was so easy to spot those looking to walk it, personally I'd prefer to see a time limit set around the 6 hour mark.
Does anyone know if you need to take a medical for the Amsterdam marathon?
No medical needed for any of the Dutch marathon's, France seems to alone in requiring a medical certificate (to my knowledge?) Would a medical certificate stop people walking?
I suspect not but it would be nice if organisers made people aware prior to the medical that it was a running race, it might make walkers think before entering, my issue is that there are more than enough genuine runners to take up the full allocation of spaces and that walking the course really isn't much of a test.
If I don't get a place in London I might well look at Amsterdam
Well you say that, but officially you have 8 hours to complete London. I could walk that far in that time. If the organisers give that long, I don't think they do consider it to be exclusively a running event.
That's a fair point but personally I think that there are just too many people entering with no intention of running it, it's just a case of saying "I've done the London marathon" for the sake of it, it's a great event with fantastic support and for normal recreational runners it's the challenge of a lifetime, just seems a pity that it could become an event that is split with runners/walkers but I take your point
the facts are it has an 8hour limit, it's irrelevant that you don't like it
LM appears to sell all the places available each year, so as far as they are concerned there cannot be much wrong,
they are getting stricter as they used to allow finishers taking days etc,,, now none of these get an official finishers medal, if you don't like the rules then don't enter the 'not race'
I definitely think that if you need to walk more than a mile or so of the course your place should be given to someone who is going to run it! I've been trying to get in for years on a ballot place and keep getting rejected. Yet every year I up my training at the start of September just in case I get in. If you're not committed, don't apply!
By the same token why should anyone who will not finish in the top 10 of a marathon ever bother to join. 11th or 35,999 no difference.
When I took part in 1997, I had trained well and was hoping for a time close to 3:30. All was going well, I went through 16 miles in 2:07, but at about 16/5 miles cramp hit the back up my upper leg, causing me to slow right down. I actually had to walk/hobble for a mile or so towait for it to ease. Based on the definition above, should I have no longer bothered to try and get into the London Marathon?
its not me- if you are so committed why have you not just gone for the gfa route and guaranteed entry?
Its the slower runner (runner not walker) that in my opinion make the VLM the event it is. I do agree why would you want to attempt 26.2 miles if you can not run 5 without walking- there must be easier/better ways to raise money for charity
Gladrags, not got a problem about having to pay to get home, just wish I had known before hand so would have got secretary to have arranged oyster /travel card as I dont carry money when running, not a problem next year as have already arranged for company driver to be available to take us home.As to payment, I would be happy if the entrance fee was like New York etc. £100-150 first come first served and know you are in immeadiatly then all sorted if you then wanted to raise for charity that would be your decision
As I mentioned that I hadn´t recieved any confirmation email for the overseas ballot earlier in this thread I can inform you that I got it yesterday (!), one and a half week after I registered. It must be a really slow internet connection between UK and Sweden...
Y
E
S
Why do things yourself when you have someone to do it for you lol. As to New York then I stand corrected, but assumed, wrongly, that all other majors were first come first served. But as I say,I think that if the fee for London was raised to the level of others then those who want to take part will be able to enter and know they are in,those who now just enter on a whim would have time to rethink and not take places they do not really have an intention of filling