Dublin Marathon 2021

Burkie1203 wrote: »

5000 at large outdoor venues from august.

That's the marathon out the window

Not the full story, 25pc of large venues, Croker would be over 20k.

I could see(hope) a marathon going ahead but probably not at full capacity and possibly other restrictions.

corcaigh07 wrote: »

Not the full story, 25pc of large venues, Croker would be over 20k.

I could see(hope) a marathon going ahead but probably not at full capacity and possibly other restrictions.

In early August, up to 5,000 people could be able to attend events in big outdoor venues, or 25% of capacity, whichever is the lower figure.

20000 at the all Ireland final doesn’t translate well to DCM when you combine 20000 runners + god knows how many spectators along the route and stewards as well. In a country where ‘an abundance of caution’ is a slogan this ain’t happening.

They could do something like this.

Have 10K entrants.
All entries from last year carry over so they have about 20k people entered.
Offer all 20k the option to defer to next year. If you choose to defer, guaranteed a place in 2022.
If you dont, you go in to another lottery for this year.
Those drawn out get to run this year.
Those who dont get deferred to next year.

Means you have a marathon of 10k this year and then for 2022 you have 10k deferred to it so then do normal lottery entry for the rest.

Might not be financially viable, so maybe its 15k entrants or whatever the govt allow. But I could see something like that and I'd be happy with it. If it was me, I would defer to next year, no interest in a sanitized or smaller DCM. If thats the case I would go run a smaller marathon. I run Dublin for the size of it

event wrote: »

They could do something like this.

Have 10K entrants.
All entries from last year carry over so they have about 20k people entered.
Offer all 20k the option to defer to next year. If you choose to defer, guaranteed a place in 2022.
If you dont, you go in to another lottery for this year.
Those drawn out get to run this year.
Those who dont get deferred to next year.

If they're going to start picking and choosing who gets to run in a scaled back event, I'd suggest prioritizing those who:

(a) Showed their loyalty by running the virtual event last October

and/or:

(b) Had an entry for 2020 and supported the financial viability of the DCM organization by not requesting a refund on that

geodesic wrote: »

If they're going to start picking and choosing who gets to run in a scaled back event, I'd suggest prioritizing those who:

(a) Showed their loyalty by running the virtual event last October

and/or:

(b) Had an entry for 2020 and supported the financial viability of the DCM organization by not requesting a refund on that

The sentiment is nice with those two options but many many people had to prioritise funds for real life stuff and had zero interest in training for a virtual marathon.

They should see how many would like to defer before making a final decision. That will give them an approximate number on how many are interested in being on the start line if it were to go ahead.

geodesic wrote: »

If they're going to start picking and choosing who gets to run in a scaled back event, I'd suggest prioritizing those who:

(a) Showed their loyalty by running the virtual event last October

and/or:

(b) Had an entry for 2020 and supported the financial viability of the DCM organization by not requesting a refund on that

Show loyalty to people who decided to run a virtual event?

And obviously if you requested a refund for 2020 you wouldnt be in for 2021. How would you be, you got a refund?

geodesic wrote: »

Eh, well, yeah. That was my point. Give priority to the people who stood by the event by not requesting a refund and/or by running the virtual event. There was 4,149 in the latter group, of whom I'd guess many are in the former group also.

You choose people who paid a few euro for a non event as that's what virtual events are. You are paying for a medal etc to do a run around your area over people who've ran it for 5, 10, 20, 30 years?

event wrote: »

I signed up to the virtual so Im happy either way if they did go down that route. But there are people who have done one DCM in 2019 and a virtual last year and some people who have done 20 of them. You think the former should have preference?

No special treatment to anyone, that will only cause complaints. Its fairer just to have all names in a hat and draw it that way if they had to

The virtual isn't and never will be a marathon, it was a revenue generator to keep them ticking over so unfair to give preference to people who paid into it.
I paid for it out of loyalty to them but didn't do it as its not the marathon if you aren't on the course.

Loyalty to past participants counts for a lot as was shown by how they rectified the problems with entry to 2020 before pandemic hit.

geodesic wrote: »

That "non event" may have been the difference between ongoing financial viability and bankruptcy for the DCM.

IIRC around 13,000 signed up for the virtual events run on the marathon weekend last year at various distances ... equates to a couple hundred grand in revenue when you include the merchandising sales.

BTW I'd have no problem with them also giving the very few who've run it 20 or 30 times a guaranteed entry. There are likely so few of them that the DCM organizers know them all personally.

So you think people who threw them a few quid last year over people who've given them hundreds over the years? When they didn't even have a sponsor?

Van.Bosch wrote: »

I doubt they have a database of how many each person has done.

Results page on website gives how people did

If the new target of having 70% fully vaccinated by the end of July, there really is no reason to limit the DCM numbers 3 months later.

To alleviate congestion at the start, it could be as simple as everyone walking with their 2 arms outstretched until they cross the start line. Not perfect but would remove any issues with no SD at the start pens.

geodesic wrote: »

Well I've done it 4 times myself up to 2019, so I get it that the "real" event beats out the virtual version every time. But I also feel I got good value each of those times, it's not like the DCM organizers owe me anything - they produced quality, well run events with a reasonable entry fee (by international standards).

The 2021 event, if it goes ahead, is essentially a delayed running of the 2020 marathon - so seems logical to me to prioritzie the folks who stood by the DCM organization during that difficult time.

But there is people who stood with them through darker times also, these are the ones that need to be looked after first.


Then you have the volunteers that looked after the events over the years, those club runners and clubs need to be looked after. No volunteers, no race.


So signing up for the VM is great, but its not the deciding factor, the deciding factor is those that stood with the marathon over the years and will continue to do that over the next 20 years!!

event wrote: »

Thats one thing that will decide if DCM goes ahead as well, volunteers. Some people might not be comfortable with volunteering this year, which is their own choice.

Don't think volunteers will be the issue.

Tony Holohan will be though

rovers_runner wrote: »

PUP being phased back from Sept.
I think we have lift off, in Ireland if you follow the money trail it's usually where you will find the answers.

Reducing the pup as people are refusing to go back to work. Wait till they are asked to pay the tax on the pup payments