for an ad-free Fetcheveryone experience!

Time for a rant? VLM changes its good for age times

26 watchers

First
Prev
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Next

Spideog Apr 2018 2:14pm, 24 Apr 2018 92 posts	Quote Pin Spideog You are further under the qualification time for two categories younger than you, it won't be a problem. The 3000th woman to finish in 2017, ignoring 2018 due to the weather, was in 3:58. Stick with the faster time, despite the age group issue. I'd expect both times to be perfectly OK for a GFA place though.
larkim Apr 2018 2:27pm, 24 Apr 2018 4,519 posts	Quote Pin larkim Spideog - where did you get those numbers from, they looked a bit light to me so I looked on RunBritain and got different ones for the 2017 numbers e.g I got 1519 men aged 18-39 sub 3 (you had 1093) 658 - 40-44 year olds sub 3:05 (you had 541) 521 - 45-49 sub 3:10 (you had 407)
Spideog Apr 2018 2:36pm, 24 Apr 2018 93 posts	Quote Pin Spideog From here: results-2017.virginmoneylondonmarathon.com and here: results-2018.virginmoneylondonmarathon.com I think that is gender totals that you have, not gender and age group.
larkim Apr 2018 2:42pm, 24 Apr 2018 4,520 posts	Quote Pin larkim Aha, I was grabbing RunBritain data for all races - as its not just GFA in London that counts. In which case, mildly surprising that the overall UK numbers are not that much higher than the actual results from London.
paul the builder Apr 2018 2:44pm, 24 Apr 2018 6,386 posts	Quote Pin paul the builder ""I was grabbing RunBritain data for all races"" - is that UK only races though? So GFAs obtained outside UK are additional to this too?
Spideog Apr 2018 2:48pm, 24 Apr 2018 94 posts	Quote Pin Spideog How many people are going international to get a GFA time, but don't also have a GFA time from a UK marathon as well though? Would expect that to be a fairly tiny number. The 1500 getting sub three in all UK marathons, compared with 1000 in London, minus the 500 getting sub 2:45 in London for championship and it is probably still around about the 3000 mark who will be getting the times overall each year and can apply.
larkim Apr 2018 2:50pm, 24 Apr 2018 4,522 posts	Quote Pin larkim Yes, discounting the relatively small number of overseas GFAs that will be earned. If that amounts to even 5% of the total GFAs achieved I'd be surprised. Though I could be surprised!
larkim Apr 2018 3:10pm, 24 Apr 2018 4,523 posts	Quote Pin larkim i think from RBR the data for 2017 would be:- 18-39 - 1519 40-44 - 658 45-49 - 521 50-54 - 390 55-59 - 161 60-64 - 150 65-59 - 88 70-74 - RBR doesn't show 75-79 - at least 7 80+ - at least 1 So roughly 3500 men in 2017 set times that meet the new criteria. Comparing to the old times / age groups 18-39 - 1855* 41-49 - 1694* 50-59 - 670 60-64 - 150 65-69 - 88 70-74+ as above So around 4500 under the old criteria. The age category the most squeezed therefore is the 41-49 old group - about 1700 eligible places reduced to about 1200 places ranked by time (so likely to be squeezed further). As a 45yo, why do I feel personally aggrieved!! *Categorisation will be slightly off as I've used the V40/V45 etc categories, rather than strictly aged 41-40, so the 18-39 category includes 40 year olds too. As Spideog notes, all these categories include the champs entries too (though not all of them, as a fair few will qualify there as sub 75 min half runners too). But it's easy to see how they've culled the numbers.
Spideog Apr 2018 3:24pm, 24 Apr 2018 95 posts	Quote Pin Spideog I have just managed to spot in the 2017 results that just based on gender (ignoring ages) there were 1862 men running sub 3 and 1850 women running sub 3:45 which is surprisingly similar.
larkim Apr 2018 3:49pm, 24 Apr 2018 4,525 posts	Quote Pin larkim That's interesting, gives some "science" behind their desire for equality of participation.