Can the clubs use the qualification bypass applications as a way to make the club some money and auction them off. I bet that would really pee in someones wheaties.

NH,

I thought that was a very interesting post. I wondered if it would help to approach the BAA's action in the light most positive to the BAA and see if it makes any sense.

I've got no brief for the BAA, I've never run Boston, and all I know is what I read in the papers, magazines, and in online forums. Really, I'm not well informed. I speculate.

For the sake of discussion, let's say:

1.BAA loves each and everyone of the volunteers that they have and wants only the best for them. I know that can't be true because I've worked in a number of volunteer organizations but let's think about it that way anyway.

2. BAA loves and respects each and every of the volunteer organizations that have helped them out, some I'm sure over the course of many, many years.

3. BAA loves and respects all the athletes that want to run the race.

4. BAA wants to run the Boston Marathon possible. They like being the inheretors of a grand tradition, a tradition that is the seed from the first modern Olympics planted here in America.

5. BAA loves the positive side effects of the race. These postive effects include raising the level of fitness in America (at least at the margins) and also, the race raises money for various charities.

From this, I think you would agree that the BAA is trying to serve many constituencies: itself, volunteers, volunteer organizations, athletes, charities. For the most part, these groups have interests which largely coincide. I would argue that their interests are not perfectly coterminous. So, there will be a time when these interests will conflict.

When that time comes (as I think perhaps it has), there will be heartache. Not even considering the constituent groups, we've said, again for argument's sake, that the BAA loves each and every one. In a conflict, you are going to have to hurt someone's feelings. You are going to have to decide which goals are the most important.

The crisis, and I may well be wrong about this, is that Boston is simply too big and too popular. Whether this is the fortuitous circumstance of a couple of "running booms," poor planning, other factors, or factors in combination really doesn't matter. The BAA would have to feel that they need to do something. What is to be done?

Part of being too big could be the course needs to be changed, especially at the start. I can only imagine the extremely negative response if that were proposed. This would upset the BAA (as upholders of tradition) and the athletes, who like the tradition, and probably the volunteers as well. Even if this step were to be taken, is there a suitable place given the geography of the area? Would residents of the area want to put up with the hassle? I'm sure there would be some neighborhood groups that would fight it tooth and nail.

You could make it harder to qualify and so cut down the number of entrants. This would make athletes unhappy and would seem to unfairly privilege charity and bypass entrants. They might also be able to run the numbers and see that making a small change each age group standard would not be enough to make a difference in the size of the race. So, unless they cut the times down quite a bit, they would make no impact and dramatically ratcheting up the difficulty of entering would make athletes even more unhappy and make leaving charities and volunteers alone that much worse.

You could increase entry fees. I think that has the same argument, more or less, as in changing qualifying times as above.

You could ask the volunteers to take a hike. This action would obviously anger the volunteers and volunteer organizations, both of which are needed to run the race.

You could have the charities take a hike. This cuts down on the beneficial side effects of the race, makes the BAA look bad, and hurts a valued constituency too.

So, what's left? The BAA has, given our stipulations, a number of groups that it loves. It has got to hurt one or more of these groups. My guess is that, at the end of the day, the BAA will decide putting on the best race possible is of paramount value. Seeing no comprehensive solution, the best that they can do is make marginal changes.

Volunteers and volunteer orgs are asking to help in larger numbers than the BAA needs according to your post. By raising fees for bypass (volunteer) applications and by imposing administrative hardships (like no bib transfers), the BAA will be able to decrease the number of runners at the margins. While the BAA loves these people and groups, it will be able to offend some of them and still survive because there are so many groups willing to help.

If I am correct in saying that there is a crisis - or at least that a crisis is perceived by the BAA, I think this action will not be enough to help. It may be the best that they can do in practical terms and within whatever politics happens in and around the BAA board. I would also suggest that BAA is attempting other measures to remedy the problem, some that are known (the earlier start and the wave start) and some that are not known (if I were in their shoes, I'd be talking to the charities).

So, I feel like more change is coming. I think it will be painful. I don't believe it is improperly motivated or that at least I have shown that it is not necessarily from bad motivation.

NHSenior, I just looked at my clubs two "waiver" applications and later learned of the increase from another club I am a member of.

As you are aware I am also a Team Cap. of volunteers as well. I too, as well as the vast majority of my two clubs members, are just as shocked at the increase. To the point of which we are considering sending them back!

I concur with your thoughts on the subject completley.

I have a couple of questions;

1) How many non-qualifiers now participate in the Marathon?
Remember the field is now limited to 22,500.

2) Do all no-qualfiers now have to pay the $200, i.e. charity runners?

3) I believe one of the reasons the fee was increased was to help PAY for the marathon trials next year. This has to be quite an expense.

Year by year the marathon tries to cater to more and more demands that are put on it whether asked, i.e charities or demanded, i.e. 10 AM start.

As a result of trying to please everyone it has become less and less of the marathon we use to know. Whether this is good thing or not is an idivdivuals decision to make.

Personally I am waiting for the BAA Boston Marathon to soon be called the Boston 'Rock & Roll' Marathon!

Yours in running, Icky





------------------

quote:<HR>Originally posted by ICKY:
How many non-qualifiers now participate in the Marathon?
Remember the field is now limited to 22,500.<HR>

I've been told (though this may not be correct) that neither charity runners nor others who don't have to qualify count against the 22,500 runner limit. They're in addition to that group. I'd assumed they did count against that, but just a couple of days ago someone said they didn't. He also claimed that the BAA counts on having aid stations stocked to service 40,000. Anyone know if either of these claims is correct?