London Marathon Good For Age

is it or not???

281 to 300 of 416 messages
03/05/2013 at 20:16

I do feel for those who missed out and I would have been devasteted, too. Sometimes if feels this is the only marathon.

However, I had a GFA place ever since 2008 and even though the GFA target was raised in 2010 I always aim to run at least within the old targets. It was always in the cards that they change it again and this time to cut times.

I think runners should understand that these times are not set in stone. It is better to be on the safe side and aim to run it well under the target time, if one is capable of doing so.

 

03/05/2013 at 22:45

Personally, I started with the goal at the beginning of the year to come under the GFA time of 3:10 but training went so well I thought I would have a crack at sub 3.  Heat got to me by mile 16 and slowed up, cramping in the last 1/2 mile to finish in 3:11.  Was a little gutted not to come under 3:10 but always knew there are plenty other marathons so have no regrets at all at my 'shit or bust' strategy.  There is always the option to choose a charity place for 2014 if anyone feels VLM is the only marathon for them.  Otherwise, if you don't get in by ballot, choose another marathon that is flat & fast in 2014 and go for the sub 3:05 time that will get you back in for 2015 (unless VLM reduce the time again!!!!!!!!!!!)

04/05/2013 at 16:38

Ran my first marathon this year and was very pleased with my finishing time of 3.05.35 but a little bit disappointed with the new GFA time. The most annoying thing is that I didn't enter the ballot as I thought my time was good enough until I listened to the Marathon Talk podkast today! Could anyone recommend a nice a flat marathon near london for 2014?

04/05/2013 at 17:02

If it's all just about fairness then stop every one running the VLM next year who has already run it in the past, and make it available only to first timers. That would be fair, wouldn't it?

Or do people only mean fair as in getting what they want?

20/05/2013 at 17:53

Tenjiso is quite right: people say fair when they mean unfair to them. For years the GFA time for 40 to 59 years old has been 3:15 across board which is a 78% WAVA grading for a 59 year old male. Now it is 3:20 which is a mere 76% WAVA grading. If you are a regular runner, say 25 year old male, then 3:05 is 68%. Even for a 40 year old, 3:05 is only 69%.

A 25 year old woman gets in with a GFA of 3:45 which is 56% WAVA.

Yes it is unfair, but it depends how you define unfair. It is not an even field, it is easy for young women, it is hard for old men. Did they promise something and change it? No.

24/05/2013 at 12:26

i ran london in 3.05 and NINE seconds. Do you think they may still let me have a good for age spot - I heard they round up 30 secs?

 

24/05/2013 at 13:06
Where did you hear that?
I heard they were usually pretty strict on it.

Your best bet is to phone them and see.
24/05/2013 at 13:53

Simon, they are strict. Even if you one second outside, you're not in.

24/05/2013 at 16:01
The website says "Sub 3.05" so i`d assume it will be a no.
cougie    pirate
24/05/2013 at 22:48
Nope. I wasn't allowed in for the sake of 15 seconds one year.
30/05/2013 at 10:12

Well nearly the end of May but no update yet to Good For Age webpage!

30/05/2013 at 11:12

*Biggles*, I've been checking that page 3 or 4 times daily since they announced the new GFA times. So far I've resisted calling the number mentioned but I'll be able to resist no longer if we get to the weekend and there's still no news. It does advise to check at end of May so we'll at least have to give them until then.

I WANT TO KNOW NOW *stamps feet*

Edited: 30/05/2013 at 11:13
30/05/2013 at 11:17

rob kelly 3

I admire your restraint! I called them about two weeks ago and they said the application procedure would be online by the end of the month. They also confirmed it would be a online procedure this year and not via snail mail as previous.

Edited: 30/05/2013 at 11:17
30/05/2013 at 14:36

It's starting to wear thin and will be non existent come June 1st.

I've never been fast enough to even consider GFA places until now so this will be my first experience of entering without going through the normal ballot. Fingers corssed it'll be straight forward and we all get places.

Good luck to everyone who's looking for a GFA place, that includes those who've been shafted by the changing of the GFA times. Hopefully the delay is down to them reconsidering the GFA times for this year. Even though I'm unaffected by it, it's definitely wrong that they moved the goal posts at such short notice. I feel for anyone who might miss out, not that it's any consolation.

30/05/2013 at 14:44

Thanks rob...

cougie    pirate
30/05/2013 at 15:07
I'd really not think they'll budge on the GFA times that theyve published.
The only delay is the new method for entering the race online.
It is a good 10 months before the race so I'm not chomping at the bit.
Online entry will be much better than snail mail.
KMJ
30/05/2013 at 15:55

I've also been checking the website a few times each day. Tomorrow is the last day of May, online entry has to be up by tomorrow surely?

30/05/2013 at 16:13

What is the delay? The end of May is tomorrow....so only on Saturday could you say if there is a delay. And like Cougie says I really can't see them changing the times now.

Relax people - the entry will remain open for a while, and it's not a ballot, so there's no rush to do it.

KMJ
30/05/2013 at 16:18

But entering it is exciting

30/05/2013 at 16:22

OK, maybe a little .  But getting the acceptance mag in October is more exciting

Previously bookmarked threads are now visible in "Followed Threads". You can also manage notifications on these threads from the "Forum Settings" section of your profile settings page to prevent being sent an email when a reply is made.
Forum Jump  

RW Forums