BQ times - Men VS Women standards
_Josee_
Posts: 625 Member
(( I don't know if that subject has been talked about previously (I didn't find anything...) so sorry if it has been. ))
Since I started to talk with some runner friends about trying to get a BQ time, I realised that a lot of guys think that the Boston Qualifying times for women are ''too easy'' vs the times for men.
18-34 --- 3hrs 05min 00sec / 3hrs 35min 00sec
35-39 --- 3hrs 10min 00sec / 3hrs 40min 00sec
40-44 --- 3hrs 15min 00sec / 3hrs 45min 00sec
45-49 --- 3hrs 25min 00sec / 3hrs 55min 00sec
50-54 --- 3hrs 30min 00sec / 4hrs 00min 00sec
55-59 --- 3hrs 40min 00sec / 4hrs 10min 00sec
Do you guys think that the 30 minutes difference isn't enough ?!? Do we women really have an advantage vs men? Why ?!?
Personally, I feel like 3:35:00 is totally doable for me.But, there is no way in hell I could run a 3:05:00. But again, I'm not a man. I do feel like guys my age telling me that 3:35:00 isn't fair and is easy and they could totally BQ with that time aren't being objective and are kind of whinny (Sorry guys!). I don't feel like 3:35:00 is an ''easy'' marathon time for a woman. But is it as hard as a 3:05:00 for a man ? I don't know.
I'm curious about what others think
Since I started to talk with some runner friends about trying to get a BQ time, I realised that a lot of guys think that the Boston Qualifying times for women are ''too easy'' vs the times for men.
18-34 --- 3hrs 05min 00sec / 3hrs 35min 00sec
35-39 --- 3hrs 10min 00sec / 3hrs 40min 00sec
40-44 --- 3hrs 15min 00sec / 3hrs 45min 00sec
45-49 --- 3hrs 25min 00sec / 3hrs 55min 00sec
50-54 --- 3hrs 30min 00sec / 4hrs 00min 00sec
55-59 --- 3hrs 40min 00sec / 4hrs 10min 00sec
Do you guys think that the 30 minutes difference isn't enough ?!? Do we women really have an advantage vs men? Why ?!?
Personally, I feel like 3:35:00 is totally doable for me.But, there is no way in hell I could run a 3:05:00. But again, I'm not a man. I do feel like guys my age telling me that 3:35:00 isn't fair and is easy and they could totally BQ with that time aren't being objective and are kind of whinny (Sorry guys!). I don't feel like 3:35:00 is an ''easy'' marathon time for a woman. But is it as hard as a 3:05:00 for a man ? I don't know.
I'm curious about what others think
0
Replies
-
I think a 3:05 is more like a 3:30 from most genet calculators I see.
From my memory my 3:27 translated into a 3:03
I have plugged in a 19:50 5k is like a 17:30 for a guy which is 45 seconds per mile.. Which if you use that second difference a 3:35 for a female is a 3:15 for a man.
My fiancé likes to "equate" a his 2:46 PR to a 3:05 for a wOman which is closer to the 45 second differential..
I'm not sure we will ever know the answer the this one
lolz. 0 -
It is a great topic. Apparently, men on average, have certain physical capabilities that give them an edge. Anecdotally, I get beat by everybody. In so many marathons I have had overweight and elderly men and women pass me with no problem. It is tempting for me to complain about the time difference to qualify. In the end, it is easier and better if I simply find a way to run faster and qualify based on the standards they set. If it is a faster time for men than women so be it. I am, after all, only running and competing against myself.0
-
That debate falls along the lines of the similar men vs. women standards in the military. Personally, when it comes to combat missions, etc... I agree with the same standards.
But...that is the military. Not the Boston Marathon. And if you look over the world records for a marathon, women are still 14 minutes behind the men...men are just naturally stronger in that aspect. There was an article I read, can't remember if is was Runner's World or Competitor or what but it talked about this. It was an interesting read about men vs. women in distance running. The mag was predicting women to over take men in the 50 miles + catagories because our bodies are just natrually accustomed for endurance (due to motherhood, female stuff, etc...), but men will probably maintain the 5k, 10k, hm and marathon times simply because in nature they are generally the stronger sex.0 -
It is an interesting topic and I look forward to reading people's opinions on it.
This years Male vs. Female winners were only about 10 minutes apart (Meb finished in 2:08:37 and Rita Jeptoo finished in 2:18:57), so it does beg the question of where a whole 30 minutes comes from?
However, I will gladly take the extra 30 minutes because I am not naturally fast and I know I'm going to have to work my *kitten* off just to get to 3:35.0 -
As a woman you will not find me complaining, but they do seem a little disproportionate to me. It is over 1 minute per mile difference. I am at work and most sports sites are blocked so I can't look it up myself, but has anyone done a comparison on the number of women that qualify vs. the number of men? I think that would be the best indicator of how fair the times are. The times should be set so that the field is split pretty close to 50/50.0
-
I don't think the time differences between men and women are fair but I don't think that is the goal. The goal is to have close to an equal number of men and women racing.0
-
I don't think the time differences between men and women are fair but I don't think that is the goal. The goal is to have close to an equal number of men and women racing.
This exactly. The qualifying times are designed to get an equal number of male and female competitors. There isn't really any attempt at equivalency.0 -
I don't think the time differences between men and women are fair but I don't think that is the goal. The goal is to have close to an equal number of men and women racing.
This exactly. The qualifying times are designed to get an equal number of male and female competitors. There isn't really any attempt at equivalency.
I never thought about it that way. Makes a lot of sense now!
Thank you!0 -
Yup, all about trying to get equal numbers. Registration for next year starts sept 8 I just saw! And they are bumping the qualifier percentage back up to 80% (was 70 last year with all the added charities etc)0
-
My first assumption was that it was to have a closer to equal number of participants of each gender.
A little off topic, and not meant to take any importance off of a BQ, but could someone enlighten me as to why Boston is such a bucket list run for so many. Everyone seem to be after that BQ at some point in their running lifespan, and I'm curious what the draw is to that?
Again - I am not trying to belittle anyone's goals by asking why a BQ is so important - it is just something that I guess I haven't yet understood.0 -
So, basically, I should stop encouraging everybody around me to run, to ensure that I'll be capable of a BQ eventually at an appropriate age group?0
-
My first assumption was that it was to have a closer to equal number of participants of each gender.
A little off topic, and not meant to take any importance off of a BQ, but could someone enlighten me as to why Boston is such a bucket list run for so many. Everyone seem to be after that BQ at some point in their running lifespan, and I'm curious what the draw is to that?
Again - I am not trying to belittle anyone's goals by asking why a BQ is so important - it is just something that I guess I haven't yet understood.
I'll speak for myself here:
You tell me that one of the oldest marathon in North America can only be run if you can run another marathon fast enough... You fuel my competitive side. On top of that, you tell me that those qualifying times are fast enough that some runners would never be able to run them, or train for a couple of years before even getting close to those times... You make me want it even more.
So the answer is: I'm competitive. It's within reach. I want it.
Easy 0 -
FWIW, on a morning run the other day, I heard a jogger steadily overtaking me from behind who eventually stormed past me. Turned out to be a young lady but I should note she did look to be about half my age (53).0
-
My first assumption was that it was to have a closer to equal number of participants of each gender.
A little off topic, and not meant to take any importance off of a BQ, but could someone enlighten me as to why Boston is such a bucket list run for so many. Everyone seem to be after that BQ at some point in their running lifespan, and I'm curious what the draw is to that?
Again - I am not trying to belittle anyone's goals by asking why a BQ is so important - it is just something that I guess I haven't yet understood.
I guess it is the idea that you kind of have to earn the spot at Boston. If you look back over the Boston Marathon history, the races itself didn't actually become as popular as it is until they made it a race you have to qualify for. Up until that point it had maybe a couple hundred runners.
It is also the title, I guess. I mean you go from training for a marathon, to finishing one. Then to a veteran finisher, and then to a BQ and then finally to a BF. So I guess it is kind of like an elevation in a hierarchy if you think about it. It is the same concept for the ultra runners who have finished a Badwater race. Honestly, how many people have the pleasure of saying they finished the 135? People are drawn to titles and to distinquishing achievements that set them apart from the others. It is common to see the 26.2 or the 50K stickers on the back of the cars. But I have only seen one 135 sticker here in Memphis and only a handful of BQ stickers.
Many don't know this, but being military you can run up a special request to get a spot at Boston. They give out so many entries to the each branch without having to qualify for them. I had a Chief ask me about this a few months ago and I told him that I would never ever consider accepting a slot at Boston with out having qualified for it yet. So for me it is all about earning that spot.0 -
My first assumption was that it was to have a closer to equal number of participants of each gender.
A little off topic, and not meant to take any importance off of a BQ, but could someone enlighten me as to why Boston is such a bucket list run for so many. Everyone seem to be after that BQ at some point in their running lifespan, and I'm curious what the draw is to that?
Again - I am not trying to belittle anyone's goals by asking why a BQ is so important - it is just something that I guess I haven't yet understood.
I'll speak for myself here:
You tell me that one of the oldest marathon in North America can only be run if you can run another marathon fast enough... You fuel my competitive side. On top of that, you tell me that those qualifying times are fast enough that some runners would never be able to run them, or train for a couple of years before even getting close to those times... You make me want it even more.
So the answer is: I'm competitive. It's within reach. I want it.
Easy
Great answer. For many, qualifying for Boston is the accomplishment, running Boston is the reward.0 -
It's the oldest Marathon in America too, and has all kinds of tradition. Legitimacy at Boston was a major turning point for female runners, etc.0
-
I love everyone's different views on it.
Visiting Boston one day for it's history is on my life-travel bucket list - maybe by the time I'm 40 I'll be fast enough to BQ, and do it all!0 -
I love everyone's different views on it.
Visiting Boston one day for it's history is on my life-travel bucket list - maybe by the time I'm 40 I'll be fast enough to BQ, and do it all!
My plan is continue running into my 70's.0 -
A little off topic, and not meant to take any importance off of a BQ, but could someone enlighten me as to why Boston is such a bucket list run for so many. Everyone seem to be after that BQ at some point in their running lifespan, and I'm curious what the draw is to that?
Being able to say I can run a BQ is much more meaningful to me than actually running the race would be.0 -
Being that i haven't even run a marathon yet (November!) I'm so far from knowing if a BQ would ever be a possibility for me. My gut says it's probably not, speed is not my thing. If it turns out my gut is wrong and my body does seem to have the potential to train for it, I will. But I'll never run it! I've got no desire to run it. I've been hanging out eating burgers and drinking beer at mile 23 for 15 years (aside from the two years I watched it from my floor to ceiling windows on Beacon St. @ mile 24). It's my spectator race! I view it as my job to the running community to go out there and shout until my voice is hoarse and be friendly and encouraging until they start to take the barriers down and open up to traffic at around 5:30pm.0
-
Being that i haven't even run a marathon yet (November!) I'm so far from knowing if a BQ would ever be a possibility for me. My gut says it's probably not, speed is not my thing. If it turns out my gut is wrong and my body does seem to have the potential to train for it, I will. But I'll never run it! I've got no desire to run it. I've been hanging out eating burgers and drinking beer at mile 23 for 15 years (aside from the two years I watched it from my floor to ceiling windows on Beacon St. @ mile 24). It's my spectator race! I view it as my job to the running community to go out there and shout until my voice is hoarse and be friendly and encouraging until they start to take the barriers down and open up to traffic at around 5:30pm.
That sounds like the best possible thing to be doing at mile 23 0 -
A little off topic, and not meant to take any importance off of a BQ, but could someone enlighten me as to why Boston is such a bucket list run for so many. Everyone seem to be after that BQ at some point in their running lifespan, and I'm curious what the draw is to that?
This is a really great question and I've been thinking about it every since you posted it this afternoon. I can't really come up with anything that really stands out to me.
For me, I think a big part of it is that it demonstrates a pretty high level of running achievement. Anyone that's ever run a marathon knows what kind of preparation goes into it. To attain that holy grail means you have put in the work.
Another part of it is, it's Boston. Have you ever had a non-runner say "Have you run Chicago?". I haven't, but I've had dozens ask me if I've run Boston. It holds a certain level of prestige in and out of running circles.
I guess that, deep down inside, I've felt like I have to qualify for Boston to consider myself a successful runner. Part of this is my obsessive compulsive behavior. I gave up the booze, but I have to go to extremes in something. I chose running.0 -
I didn't understand the importance of the BQ until recently. Granted, I'm still a beginner runner, but when my brother told me he qualified and I was just all, "Um... okaaaaaaay. If you're not going to run it, then who cares?"
A year later, I get it now.
And yes, I want that BQ. I'm giving myself a few years to get it (mostly so I can age out into the other category, and get that extra five minutes LOL, and give myself enough time to become a pretty solid marathon runner).
And yeah, I want it because it's prestigious, and a challenge, but not an impossible one. And as a runner, the idea of "earning" my spot just really, really appeals to me. 0
