not qualifying for Boston

RayCun

http://www.runnersworld.com/boston-marathon/dozens-suspected-of-cheating-to-enter-boston-marathon

on the one hand, if you want to do the race get the qualifying time, or suck it up and raise the money
on the other, has this guy nothing better to do with his life than hunt down people who didn't really qualify?

Murph_D

Maybe he's just addicted to research.

Interesting piece. No harm in having people like this guy police the system, could be a good crowdsourcing activity, as I can't imagine the race organisers can do much more about it before the race (these cheats are identified after running Boston in suspiciously slow times). If people know there's a chance of being 'outed' in this way it might reduce the motivation to cheat.

livedadream

seems fair, cheating is cheating,

personally i will never run Boston, while is doesnt bother me, it does bother me that people are bib muling or swopping or just flat out cheating.
same as doping, cheatings cheating, your taking away the chance of someone who has got the time to qualify.

but i also realise we dont live in utopita where everyone is nice and happy and does the right thing.

Djoucer

I find these stories fascinating.

The deceit, the amount of effort they’ve gone to cheat, the emergence of evidence, the initial denial, the admission, the motivation to cheat when you’re just a mid-packer.

With regard to Boston, I think they have an obligation to seek out cheaters given how prestigious the race is. If anyone could get in, sure what’s the point in qualifying.

Regarding the guy behind it, I don’t think he’s dedicating his life to it. He created a clever algorithm that allowed him “to pinpoint all finishers who ran Boston at least 20 minutes slower than their qualifying time. The search yielded 2,439 names.”

There was a superb piece in New York Times about a woman who cheated in several Ironman races: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/10/sports/julie-miller-ironman-triathlon-cheat.html?_r=0

Myles Splitz

What ever happened to the good old days when people just ran the St George Marathon for their BQ?

On serious note I think its good that cheats are being called out. How many people do this sort of thing and the cite doping and cheating as the reason why the sport is suffering. Cheating is systemic from the bottom up and needs to have a zero tolerance from the Mike Rossi Saga, to the lad who ran the WMM under girlfriends number last year.

There was another high profile case recently of an american running coach who posted this on her blog:

http://www.rungiarun.com/2016/04/why-im-not-running-boston-2016-a-cautionary-tale/

However the above blogger delved deeper into it and found out that despite the cautionary tale she had failed to mention that she had used her friends finishing time as Boston Qualifier and later she had to follow this up with an apology

http://www.rungiarun.com/2016/04/apologies/

Sport should be about becoming the best version of yourself, not bragging rights or superiority complexes etc.

ThisRegard

From what I can remember (and it's not always correct) haven't people who skipped or cut courses short been identified on his forum previously?

Run and Jump

Whatever about cheats, I'm a bit uncomfortable with the market demand for Boston charity places. The race organisers set a minimum of around 5,000 dollars to be raised for a charity entry, but the Boston Globe has reported that some charities set much higher amounts, in one case $10,000.
http://www.bostonglobe.com/lifestyle/style/2013/11/29/want-run-boston-marathon-for-charity-with-applications-running-double-triple-even-four-times-usual-rate-good-luck/7BzQrZfSUUQ5kLgMKrT4SK/story.html

So, the demand dictates that on the one hand you have charities looking to maximise what they get from Boston wannabes, and on the other you have runners shopping around for charity entries. Nothing wrong with this, but it just feels like a charity entry to Boston is a commodity to be exploited. Perhaps it's the same for the London Marathon.

Myles Splitz

Run and Jump wrote: »

Whatever about cheats, I'm a bit uncomfortable with the market demand for Boston charity places. The race organisers set a minimum of around 5,000 dollars to be raised for a charity entry, but the Boston Globe has reported that some charities set much higher amounts, in one case $10,000.
http://www.bostonglobe.com/lifestyle/style/2013/11/29/want-run-boston-marathon-for-charity-with-applications-running-double-triple-even-four-times-usual-rate-good-luck/7BzQrZfSUUQ5kLgMKrT4SK/story.html

So, the demand dictates that on the one hand you have charities looking to maximise what they get from Boston wannabes, and on the other you have runners shopping around for charity entries. Nothing wrong with this, but it just feels like a charity entry to Boston is a commodity to be exploited. Perhaps it's the same for the London Marathon.

Is there really an issue with that? The charity places for such races should not be seen as a handy way to get into the races and avoid chasing the standards. This dissuades people from taking the easier option and reserves charity spots for those who are serious about raising money for a particular cause.

Run and Jump

Myles Splitz wrote: »

Is there really an issue with that? The charity places for such races should not be seen as a handy way to get into the races and avoid chasing the standards. This dissuades people from taking the easier option and reserves charity spots for those who are serious about raising money for a particular cause.

Maybe all the controversies in Ireland recently about charity CEO salaries has made me cynical!

I'd like to think that the runner who raises twice the required minimum really is super-committed to that cause, but I'm sure there are some who are doing it for the Boston place rather than for the cause. But as you say, maybe it isn't an issue.