When Guy Morse hands over the reins to Tom Grilk as executive director of the Boston Athletic Association on Jan. 1, one of the first things Grilk is planning to do is to wrap up a review of the BAA’s entry procedure for the Boston Marathon.
That’s not really a surprise, of course, considering how registration for the 2011 race turned out.
As you may know, the marathon sold out in eight hours, vexing many runners who worked hard to qualify for 2011. Many would-be registrants reported technical issues with the BAA’s site when they tried to register. The runners who didn’t have the luxury of logging in from work were simply out of luck. By 5:15 p.m. on Oct. 18, the BAA had announced it was no longer accepting any entries to next year’s marathon, outside of the runners who qualify by raising money for charity.
It wasn’t long ago when the race didn’t sell out at all. The 2010 race filled up in 10 weeks, marking the first time that the April marathon had ever been sold out in a prior year. Because that early closing messed up the plans of plenty of runners and race directors, the BAA tried opening registration a month later (in October instead of September) for the 2011 race. The thought was that it would give more of the fall marathons an opportunity to participate in the “Boston Qualifier” craze – an opportunity that used to be just about guaranteed until a year ago.
As one of the few marathons that require a qualifying time, the Boston Marathon has obtained mythic status among 26.2-mile road races (its history as the oldest continually-run marathon also helps). That, in turn, helps support all the other marathons that serve as Boston qualifiers. In February 2008, for example, I drove to a marathon in Albany that served as the last shot in the Northeast to get into Boston that year (I had been out of the running for two years due to a nasty case of plantar fasciitis). I’m sure I wasn’t the only one who trekked to the race – which consisted of several loops around the University of Albany – just to use it as a Boston qualifier.
Since the early sellout a year ago, the BAA has been trying to come up with a way to address the issue. The only change so far was a minor one – opening registration in October instead of September. But I’m guessing that bigger changes are on their way.
In a press release issued on Friday about the pending leadership change at the BAA, the club made a point of stating that one of Grilk’s first duties as executive director will be to tackle the Boston registration issue. Grilk (a lawyer who has been a member of the BAA since the 1980s, and is currently its board president) will work closely with Morse (who will stay on the BAA staff) and race director Dave McGillivray to conclude the BAA’s review of its marathon qualifying standards and entry procedures.
Here are a few of the options that have been discussed by runners. You can bet that they’ve been considered by the BAA at some point as well.
Raising the price: The recent entry price of $130 is at the high end of what marathons are charging these days, although it’s reasonable considering all the extra logistics behind running a smooth and safe race from Hopkinton to the Back Bay. Raising the price significantly as a way to limit the rush to register seems like the easy way out, and would likely jeopardize some of the goodwill that the race has built up over the decades.
Tightening the qualifying times: The fastest qualifying times right now are 3:10:59 for open men and 3:40:59 for open women. An Oct. 13 story in The Wall Street Journal makes a case that the qualifying times for women may be outdated and no longer reflective of the strides that have been made by women in the sport (some runners blamed the timing of the Journal story for the quick sell-out). It might be politically tough for the BAA to reduce qualifying time for women, without adjusting the men’s times as well. And it may very well be too late to change qualifying times for the 2012 race.
Expanding the size of the race field: The number of runners is currently capped at about 25,000. Morse said in October that the BAA has talked with community leaders about expanding that number, but he also signaled a reluctance to make the race too big and unwieldy. The switch in 2006 to splitting the field into two waves probably helped make the fast-growing size of the race more manageable. But there’s really only so many people a small town like Hopkinton can accommodate in one day.
Shifting to a lottery system: This idea is a nonstarter, because I can’t imagine the BAA would want to completely do away with qualifying times (some runners have suggested using qualifying times and a lottery for those who don’t qualify). Besides, do we really want to copy something that’s done in New York?
Eliminating or reducing the numbers that are given for charity fund-raising: This would be a tough sell as well, with all the well-meaning programs that are in place that help local charities with funds and do a good job of connecting volunteer runners with those charities (nearly one-fifth of the race’s available numbers are used in the charities program).
Staggering the registration: One interesting idea I’ve heard would involve opening up a certain number of race slots at intervals throughout the year. This is an unusual approach to race registration, in general. But the Boston Marathon isn’t a normal race. Divvying up the registration among multiple dates would put the vast majority of the marathons who once touted themselves as “Boston Qualifiers” back in the BQ business again and would accommodate runners who, for whatever reason, missed their first shot at online registration.
ShareThis