Hi ,
It looks like you're using an ad blocker.



The revenue generated from the adverts on the site is a critical part of our funding - and it's because of these ads that I can offer the site for free. But using the site for free AND blocking the ads doesn't feel like a great thing to do, which is why this box is so large and inconvenient. Some sites will completely block your access, but I'm not doing that - I'm appealing to your good nature instead. Did you know that you can allow ads for specific sites, whilst still blocking them on others?

Thanks,
Ian Williams aka Fetch
or for an ad-free Fetcheveryone experience!

London Marathon 2020

1 lurker | 60 watchers
Aug 2020
10:57am, 17 Aug 2020
429 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
Spideog
Yes a track is a measured distance, but who is doing the counting, and how does that prove anything is a more legitimate run than having run in VMLM 2019?

They just need to accept already run marathons that have been done on certified courses. They can't use a run measured and timed with their as yet unreleased phone app where you could ride a bike or have a relay team of mates run for you as a qualifier for GFA places ahead of actual marathon results.
Aug 2020
11:02am, 17 Aug 2020
11,702 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
larkim
"They can't use a run measured and timed..." etc

Well, they can if they want to. It is their race after all; their rules, irrespective of how illogical or flawed they objectively are.

No disagreement from me that it isn't logically sound or consistent with previous years though!
Aug 2020
2:18pm, 17 Aug 2020
5 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
Chrismean
if they take a GPS track as evidence from a non-track work route, i cannot see them checking the lap numbers for a track-route. that would be a lot of effort, and someone could easily move between lanes to allow for other runners to get by at different times
SPR
Aug 2020
2:44pm, 17 Aug 2020
30,899 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
SPR
Track is notorious for being dodgy with GPS which is why they'd check if they were doing it properly.
JR
Aug 2020
2:49pm, 17 Aug 2020
711 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
JR
Assuming they are going to open up the Virtual Run to joe public (which I think they have indicated they will) I think it’s very alive to think there won’t be huge numbers of those seeking to cheat. There are plenty caught every year in the actual race - this is just giving them even more opportunity to do that for GFA. I’m looking forward to the how they are going to respond to allegations of cheating or accusing people of cheating who haven’t! Then again if people pay the entry fee each year perhaps they’re not bothered!
JR
Aug 2020
2:49pm, 17 Aug 2020
712 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
JR
Naive not alive!
Aug 2020
2:56pm, 17 Aug 2020
11,711 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
larkim
Am I misunderstanding? I thought the concept of a GFA in the virtual event was *only* for those runners who already had a GFA entry for 2020 but who needed to "renew" their GFA status as their GFA achievement was pre-Jan 2019.

If they are opening the virtual race to all, and have a route in to GFA for 2021 too, then I'll be spending tonight editing a GPX file...
Aug 2020
2:59pm, 17 Aug 2020
66,995 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
swittle
Here is an analysis of the 2018 London Marathon w.r.t. 'course cutters': the meat of it is:-

"Timing Data
There were very few missed timing mats at The London Marathon among the finishers. There were 9 intermediate checkpoints. Only 313 runners out of 40154 non-elite finishers missed 1 or more mat. (0.78% of runners). Out of 361,386 possible checkpoints, runners registered at 360,661 of those. (99.8% hit rate)."

marathoninvestigation.com

Disclaimer: I have not looked in detail at the reliability of this organisation.
Aug 2020
3:02pm, 17 Aug 2020
4,172 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
Fizz :-)
I think you’re right, larkim. That’s certainly the way I understood it.
Aug 2020
3:31pm, 17 Aug 2020
430 posts
  • Quote
  • Pin
Spideog
The asking people with a 2018 time to "renew" their GFA status in someway is reasonable. What isn't reasonable is to disregard 2019 times that have already been run in actual real marathons from that process and that cancelling of 2019 times goes against the process outlined on their GFA page which states:
virginmoneylondonmarathon.com
"You will be able to defer a 2020 Good For Age place if you have achieved the qualifying time within the dates of 1 January 2019 and 7 August 2019."

Not quite sure why they have the end date of 7th August 2019 on that as someone deferring a place for April 2020 (assuming no coronavirus happened) may well have run a time in an autumn 2019 marathon that would meet the standard and should be considered as well.

It would be more reasonable to ask existing GFA place holders who don't have a time from in 2019 to run the virtual event at their qualifying band pace + X% just to show that they are still a runner but not req. To ask people to run what is essentially a PB effort in a solo time trial is not

About This Thread

Maintained by larkim
Endless discussion about will it happen, won't it happen for VMLM 2020
  • Show full description...

Related Threads

  • events
  • london
  • marathon
  • vlm








Back To Top

Tag A User

To tag a user, start typing their name here:
X

Free training & racing tools for runners, cyclists, swimmers & walkers.

Fetcheveryone lets you analyse your training, find races, plot routes, chat in our forum, get advice, play games - and more! Nothing is behind a paywall, and it'll stay that way thanks to our awesome community!
Get Started
Click here to join 113,996 Fetchies!
Already a Fetchie? Sign in here