Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
Allocation Of Places
Wardi
✭✭✭
I've done a bit of research to try and de-mystify the selection process after the club places, charity places, overseas places etc etc are allocated. I thought I might as well join in the speculation as the LM people clearly intend to keep their lips sealed.
Firstly, the good for age category. In 1997 1,499 runners broke three hours at the LM. This figure has gradually worsened to year 2001 where only 1,026 broke the three hour barrier. This represents a significant drop in standards. The figures for runners finishing between 3hrs and 3hrs 15mins have also worsened in the same period. Good for age (which is a misnomer, age 18 to 59 indeed!) was introduced, I suspect, to bolster this end of the race thereby 'spreading out' the large field in an attempt to reduce congestion. This drop in standards is also evident in club races where, for example, there are far less runners breaking the hour mark in a ten mile race than there were in the late 1980's/early 1990's.
Another statistic. Take a one minute sample of runners from around the 3.10 mark in this year's LM. There were about 110 runners per minute finishing in this sort of time. Take another sample from the 4hr mark and there were about 285 runners per minute finishing, the course and the finish would struggle with many more than this.
Remember the letter code you were asked to put on the entry form? Letters D to G represent the 'mass' finishing time of 3.30 to 4.30, I would guess that these runners have slightly less chance of a ballot place than, say, those putting in a code for 5-6hrs. It is simply less crowded. If you would be tempted to tell fibs and put your estimated time towards the back end of the field, remember that you would be allocated the appropriate pen at the start!
To sum up, the organisers have to spread out the field as best they can. I do however agree with previous forumites that the LM people really ought to come forth with a breakdown of where all the places go.
Me? After several marathons around the 3.30 mark I wittled my time down to 3.18 a couple of years ago in Berlin, got lucky in the LM ballot for this year and trained my butt off to finish in 3.12 thereby guaranteeing a place.
Reading all your contributions sweating over cashed/non-cashed cheques and envelopes due in December brings back lots of memories. Sitting here knowing I am in makes me feel both priveleged and humble.
Sincere good luck to all of you, just don't call me statto!
Firstly, the good for age category. In 1997 1,499 runners broke three hours at the LM. This figure has gradually worsened to year 2001 where only 1,026 broke the three hour barrier. This represents a significant drop in standards. The figures for runners finishing between 3hrs and 3hrs 15mins have also worsened in the same period. Good for age (which is a misnomer, age 18 to 59 indeed!) was introduced, I suspect, to bolster this end of the race thereby 'spreading out' the large field in an attempt to reduce congestion. This drop in standards is also evident in club races where, for example, there are far less runners breaking the hour mark in a ten mile race than there were in the late 1980's/early 1990's.
Another statistic. Take a one minute sample of runners from around the 3.10 mark in this year's LM. There were about 110 runners per minute finishing in this sort of time. Take another sample from the 4hr mark and there were about 285 runners per minute finishing, the course and the finish would struggle with many more than this.
Remember the letter code you were asked to put on the entry form? Letters D to G represent the 'mass' finishing time of 3.30 to 4.30, I would guess that these runners have slightly less chance of a ballot place than, say, those putting in a code for 5-6hrs. It is simply less crowded. If you would be tempted to tell fibs and put your estimated time towards the back end of the field, remember that you would be allocated the appropriate pen at the start!
To sum up, the organisers have to spread out the field as best they can. I do however agree with previous forumites that the LM people really ought to come forth with a breakdown of where all the places go.
Me? After several marathons around the 3.30 mark I wittled my time down to 3.18 a couple of years ago in Berlin, got lucky in the LM ballot for this year and trained my butt off to finish in 3.12 thereby guaranteeing a place.
Reading all your contributions sweating over cashed/non-cashed cheques and envelopes due in December brings back lots of memories. Sitting here knowing I am in makes me feel both priveleged and humble.
Sincere good luck to all of you, just don't call me statto!
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
They say, that they have places for every estimated time. When a timegroup is full, they will have other criterias, they do not know now, because it depends on the sourrounding groups.
I guess, London will have something similar, just with bigger numbers for each group.
I'd assume that with so many entries they have a set of criteria built into a computer and I doubt estimated times has anything to do with it. I should really get off my backside, run sub 3:15 elsewhere and get a guaranteed entry next year.
Good luck anyway Wardi. You've certainly earned your place and it's nice to see you appreciate it. I've only run the FLM once and it was one of the most amazing days I've ever had.