It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Just noticed that the beginning of the qualifying period for VLM GFA 2017 is 1st Jan 2014. That is either a typo (i.e., they've not updated it from the VLM 2016 page) or they've extended the qualifying period by a year. I think it's a mistake.
Should I go into the ballot if I've got a good for age time? Or will they release the new GFA times before the ballot opens (assuming they do change).
Like Cougie says. Also, I've heard that if you subsequently get a "higher"category of entry, you just get in touch with them and they convert it. I'm damn certain this has happened for Good for Agers, who later achieve the Championship entry standard, which has a later deadline. I'd expect they would do the same between Ballot and GFA.
BTW, have people actually heard something about the GFA times changing, or is it just supposition?
Steffan - Apparently they had to cut the number of club places they gave out this year with the number of GFA times on the rise. I think with more people achieving the time, it's only a matter of time before they lower it or they'll have too many GFA'ers.
1300 men sub 3 hours in 20141800 men sub 3 hours in 20152000 men sub 3 hours in 2016
The GFA times will surely be clipped otherwise there will simply be too many (doesn't factor in all those who qualify from other races). Wouldn't be surprised to see the 3h00 or under limit reintroduced for men 18-40. Haven't looked to see if there's a similar trend in the women's stats.
Not sure I'll ever run in London if they cut it again
On the other hand, as I understand it one of the reasons for GFA is to try and avoid bottlenecks by spacing runners out and avoiding the chance of a lot of people in the ballot with similar slower target. A larger number of sub-3 hour runners may actually help with this... I wouldn't be surprised if they use some sophisticated simulation software to work out the ideal distribution to use the available roadspace in the most effective manner.
It would be good if some sort of system could be introduced by the organisers to allow everybody who wants to participate to do it at least once but there's no easy solution.
Agree with KennyM - runners finishing in under 3:00 are not a big problem.
Peak time for finishers is around 3:45-5:00, so if they want to even out finishers it is perhaps more likely that M65-75 and W41-69 GFA times will be tightened.
I was thinking they probably won't change GFA for 2017. I'm still sticking as I think the current times seem to work. However on the LM website, it does say subject to change so who knows.
Looks like the GFA page has been updated for 2017 entries.
Manchester runners from 2015 need to add 2 minutes to their time to qualify by the looks of things.
Apart from that the other times do not seem to have changed?
Good job I ran 3:19 this year (2016) then at Manchester
seems like a good approach to the Manchester situation. I got the GFA in Manchester in 2014 by 2 minutes 38 seconds - nice to know that VLM would still have given me a GFA place in 2015 and 2016 if the course length had been found out back in 2014!
Can you use the same qualifying time twice? A friend of mine got a GFA qualifying time back in April 2015 and therefore got to run London this year... can he use that April 2015 time again to enter London 2017 under GFA as well.
I believe so yes. Or I hope so as that's what I'm doing from my Brighton 2015 time!
Dan A wrote (see)
1300 men sub 3 hours in 20141800 men sub 3 hours in 20152000 men sub 3 hours in 2016 The GFA times will surely be clipped otherwise there will simply be too many (doesn't factor in all those who qualify from other races). Wouldn't be surprised to see the 3h00 or under limit reintroduced for men 18-40. Haven't looked to see if there's a similar trend in the women's stats.
I was amazed at the congestion on course, seemed like there were so many going for 3. It didn't start to thin out till 18-19
London Marathon get some bad press for their entry rules but credit where credit is due with their approach to Manchester times. Know lots of people who ran those races in good faith and were worried that their entire race time would be disregarded. Adding a couple of minutes on seems like a really pragmatic way of dealing with it.
Luckily I got a 3.05 this year in Manchester and am well within the 41-49 target times !!