Glenn Tanner
http://www.coolrunning.com/engine/3/3_1/2004-boston-marathon-will.shtml
Comments?
Comments?
View Full Version : Elite Women to Start Earlier at Boston
Topcounsel
As I read this article, even if the net time of an unseeded woman is faster than any of the seeds,
she does not qualify to win, place or show. If this type of rule became the norm for all or even
most events, it would effectively be a glass ceiling that would prevent new runners from breaking
into the ranks of actual competitors, wouldn't it? This also negates the possiblility of an
unheralded dark horse "winning" the women's marathon.
she does not qualify to win, place or show. If this type of rule became the norm for all or even
most events, it would effectively be a glass ceiling that would prevent new runners from breaking
into the ranks of actual competitors, wouldn't it? This also negates the possiblility of an
unheralded dark horse "winning" the women's marathon.
Swstudio
I'm all for it (it makes sense), but this quote is weird:
"The women's field will be seeded such that all prize money award winners (top 15 overall and top
five masters) must begin in the separate elite start. Women not in the elite start remain eligible
for age group and age division awards."
Am I reading this right? If an unseeded, non-elite female happens to run the course in a time that
makes her eligible for actual prize money, she is shut out and ineligible? That's completely lame
and goes against fair rules in sport.
cheers,
--
David (in Hamilton, ON) www.allfalldown.org "Glenn Tanner" <gt10@sanctimoniousassgoblin.com> wrote
in message news:40290A4B.8010005@sanctimoniousassgoblin.com...
>
> http://www.coolrunning.com/engine/3/3_1/2004-boston-marathon-will.shtml
>
> Comments?
"The women's field will be seeded such that all prize money award winners (top 15 overall and top
five masters) must begin in the separate elite start. Women not in the elite start remain eligible
for age group and age division awards."
Am I reading this right? If an unseeded, non-elite female happens to run the course in a time that
makes her eligible for actual prize money, she is shut out and ineligible? That's completely lame
and goes against fair rules in sport.
cheers,
--
David (in Hamilton, ON) www.allfalldown.org "Glenn Tanner" <gt10@sanctimoniousassgoblin.com> wrote
in message news:40290A4B.8010005@sanctimoniousassgoblin.com...
>
> http://www.coolrunning.com/engine/3/3_1/2004-boston-marathon-will.shtml
>
> Comments?
Glenn Tanner
SwStudio wrote:
> I'm all for it (it makes sense), but this quote is weird:
>
> "The women's field will be seeded such that all prize money award winners (top 15 overall and top
> five masters) must begin in the separate elite start. Women not in the elite start remain eligible
> for age group and age division awards."
>
> Am I reading this right? If an unseeded, non-elite female happens to run the course in a time that
> makes her eligible for actual prize money, she is shut out and ineligible? That's completely lame
> and goes against fair rules in sport.
If "unseeded, non-elite" means they didn't get one of those F-whatever race numbers, then 2 of the
top 15 women finishers were unseeded, non-elite runners.
> I'm all for it (it makes sense), but this quote is weird:
>
> "The women's field will be seeded such that all prize money award winners (top 15 overall and top
> five masters) must begin in the separate elite start. Women not in the elite start remain eligible
> for age group and age division awards."
>
> Am I reading this right? If an unseeded, non-elite female happens to run the course in a time that
> makes her eligible for actual prize money, she is shut out and ineligible? That's completely lame
> and goes against fair rules in sport.
If "unseeded, non-elite" means they didn't get one of those F-whatever race numbers, then 2 of the
top 15 women finishers were unseeded, non-elite runners.
Swstudio
"Glenn Tanner" <gt10@sanctimoniousassgoblin.com> wrote in message
> SwStudio wrote:
>
> > I'm all for it (it makes sense), but this quote is weird:
> >
> > "The women's field will be seeded such that all prize money award winners (top 15 overall and
> > top five masters) must begin in the separate elite start. Women not in the elite start remain
> > eligible for age group and age division awards."
> >
> > Am I reading this right? If an unseeded, non-elite female happens to run the course in a time
> > that makes her eligible for actual prize money, she is shut out and ineligible? That's
> > completely lame and goes against fair rules in sport.
>
>
> If "unseeded, non-elite" means they didn't get one of those F-whatever race numbers, then 2 of the
> top 15 women finishers were unseeded, non-elite runners.
Lst year you mean? What a joke. Obviously we must be missing something here, because you can bet the
organizers are aware of that.
cheers,
--
David (in Hamilton, ON) www.allfalldown.org
> SwStudio wrote:
>
> > I'm all for it (it makes sense), but this quote is weird:
> >
> > "The women's field will be seeded such that all prize money award winners (top 15 overall and
> > top five masters) must begin in the separate elite start. Women not in the elite start remain
> > eligible for age group and age division awards."
> >
> > Am I reading this right? If an unseeded, non-elite female happens to run the course in a time
> > that makes her eligible for actual prize money, she is shut out and ineligible? That's
> > completely lame and goes against fair rules in sport.
>
>
> If "unseeded, non-elite" means they didn't get one of those F-whatever race numbers, then 2 of the
> top 15 women finishers were unseeded, non-elite runners.
Lst year you mean? What a joke. Obviously we must be missing something here, because you can bet the
organizers are aware of that.
cheers,
--
David (in Hamilton, ON) www.allfalldown.org
Lanceandrew
...ya know any one of dozens of female marathoners from ethiopia, kenya, tanzania, etc. can enter
this race unseeded and "place" based on time. i am sure there are unseeded runners that will deliver
faster times than the some seeded runners in fact.
---
on cr- A relative newcomer to the road racing circuit, Kaild Abdalah has frequently surprised his
competition and race officials with his unrelenting pace. Just last month Abdalah showed up at the
America's Finest City Half Marathon in San Diego as an unseeded runner. The unknown spry 23-year-old
led the international elite-laden pack for the race's first six miles and finished in the money,
fourth overall in 1:06:16.
this race unseeded and "place" based on time. i am sure there are unseeded runners that will deliver
faster times than the some seeded runners in fact.
---
on cr- A relative newcomer to the road racing circuit, Kaild Abdalah has frequently surprised his
competition and race officials with his unrelenting pace. Just last month Abdalah showed up at the
America's Finest City Half Marathon in San Diego as an unseeded runner. The unknown spry 23-year-old
led the international elite-laden pack for the race's first six miles and finished in the money,
fourth overall in 1:06:16.
Bumper
Clearly intended to
1. prevent the women from having a male "pacer"
2. put the "skirts" out front for the tv viewers.
This is pure bull as it prevents any non-elite female runner from winning and who exactly is to say
that a non-ordained female runner might not just have the race of her life on that day.
If this is just for the sake of preventing the female runners from having male pacers then just let
all the women start together, or even run on a different day or on the left side of the road only.
Hope they get sued.
Glenn Tanner <gt10@sanctimoniousassgoblin.com> wrote:
> http://www.coolrunning.com/engine/3/3_1/2004-boston-marathon-will.shtml
>
> Comments?
1. prevent the women from having a male "pacer"
2. put the "skirts" out front for the tv viewers.
This is pure bull as it prevents any non-elite female runner from winning and who exactly is to say
that a non-ordained female runner might not just have the race of her life on that day.
If this is just for the sake of preventing the female runners from having male pacers then just let
all the women start together, or even run on a different day or on the left side of the road only.
Hope they get sued.
Glenn Tanner <gt10@sanctimoniousassgoblin.com> wrote:
> http://www.coolrunning.com/engine/3/3_1/2004-boston-marathon-will.shtml
>
> Comments?
Jim Gravity
Glenn Tanner <gt10@sanctimoniousassgoblin.com> wrote in message news:<40290A4B.8010005@sanctimoniousassgoblin.com>...
> http://www.coolrunning.com/engine/3/3_1/2004-boston-marathon-will.shtml
>
> Comments?
Supposedly to keep them from pacing off the men, or hiring male pacers.
I wonder how this will change the dynamics of the race for the women. They will have to run in a
tight pack with eachother. They will get a better idea of how each one is doing. Theoretically, if
they were running with men as pacers, they could be running on opposite sides of the road, hiding
their pain.
I don't really think this puts up a glass cieling for non-elites...it's one race...they have plenty
of other marathons to break into the ranks.
> http://www.coolrunning.com/engine/3/3_1/2004-boston-marathon-will.shtml
>
> Comments?
Supposedly to keep them from pacing off the men, or hiring male pacers.
I wonder how this will change the dynamics of the race for the women. They will have to run in a
tight pack with eachother. They will get a better idea of how each one is doing. Theoretically, if
they were running with men as pacers, they could be running on opposite sides of the road, hiding
their pain.
I don't really think this puts up a glass cieling for non-elites...it's one race...they have plenty
of other marathons to break into the ranks.
Eno
"Bumper" <bobemery@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:1g8ycec.spx4ymnwpncoN%bobemery@bellsouth.net...
> Clearly intended to
>
> 1. prevent the women from having a male "pacer"
top 20 placer that doesn't abide by the rule--should be fairly easy to enforce.
> 2. put the "skirts" out front for the tv viewers.
Creative camera work can accomplish that.
--
ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º
eNo
"If you can't go fast, go long."
ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º
news:1g8ycec.spx4ymnwpncoN%bobemery@bellsouth.net...
> Clearly intended to
>
> 1. prevent the women from having a male "pacer"
top 20 placer that doesn't abide by the rule--should be fairly easy to enforce.
> 2. put the "skirts" out front for the tv viewers.
Creative camera work can accomplish that.
--
ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º
eNo
"If you can't go fast, go long."
ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º
Mike Tennent
"eNo" <eswrite@y-a-h-o-o.com> wrote:
>"Bumper" <bobemery@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
>news:1g8ycec.spx4ymnwpncoN%bobemery@bellsouth.net...
>> Clearly intended to
>>
>> 1. prevent the women from having a male "pacer"
>
>top 20 placer that doesn't abide by the rule--should be fairly easy to enforce.
>
some time. Presumably, the difficulty in enforcing it is the reason for the new separate start.
How do you tell if a woman is pacing off a male runner when she is virtually surrounded by male
runners? Or is she simply running the same pace coincidentally? It's impossible to judge.
Mike Tennent "IronPenguin"
>"Bumper" <bobemery@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
>news:1g8ycec.spx4ymnwpncoN%bobemery@bellsouth.net...
>> Clearly intended to
>>
>> 1. prevent the women from having a male "pacer"
>
>top 20 placer that doesn't abide by the rule--should be fairly easy to enforce.
>
some time. Presumably, the difficulty in enforcing it is the reason for the new separate start.
How do you tell if a woman is pacing off a male runner when she is virtually surrounded by male
runners? Or is she simply running the same pace coincidentally? It's impossible to judge.
Mike Tennent "IronPenguin"
Bumper
For all the efforts to make men and women equal in sports like running, I see this as a major step
backwards. I am left wondering not if but when someone is going to challenge this in the courts. If
a bad boy running back can force the NFL to its knees what would a Boston court would rule-where men
are men and so are women.
All of this is so moot considering how many major marathons go out and hire a rabbit to lead the way
for the men and then say that women can't use the person next to them because we didn't hire them.
Jock Semple rises from the ashes.
Mike Tennent <ironpeng@darientel.net> wrote:
> "eNo" <eswrite@y-a-h-o-o.com> wrote:
>
> >"Bumper" <bobemery@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> >news:1g8ycec.spx4ymnwpncoN%bobemery@bellsouth.net...
> >> Clearly intended to
> >>
> >> 1. prevent the women from having a male "pacer"
> >
> >top 20 placer that doesn't abide by the rule--should be fairly easy to enforce.
> >
>
> some time. Presumably, the difficulty in enforcing it is the reason for the new separate start.
>
> How do you tell if a woman is pacing off a male runner when she is virtually surrounded by male
> runners? Or is she simply running the same pace coincidentally? It's impossible to judge.
>
> Mike Tennent "IronPenguin"
backwards. I am left wondering not if but when someone is going to challenge this in the courts. If
a bad boy running back can force the NFL to its knees what would a Boston court would rule-where men
are men and so are women.
All of this is so moot considering how many major marathons go out and hire a rabbit to lead the way
for the men and then say that women can't use the person next to them because we didn't hire them.
Jock Semple rises from the ashes.
Mike Tennent <ironpeng@darientel.net> wrote:
> "eNo" <eswrite@y-a-h-o-o.com> wrote:
>
> >"Bumper" <bobemery@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> >news:1g8ycec.spx4ymnwpncoN%bobemery@bellsouth.net...
> >> Clearly intended to
> >>
> >> 1. prevent the women from having a male "pacer"
> >
> >top 20 placer that doesn't abide by the rule--should be fairly easy to enforce.
> >
>
> some time. Presumably, the difficulty in enforcing it is the reason for the new separate start.
>
> How do you tell if a woman is pacing off a male runner when she is virtually surrounded by male
> runners? Or is she simply running the same pace coincidentally? It's impossible to judge.
>
> Mike Tennent "IronPenguin"
Scott
I am a newbie in these things. Can someone explain to me what the problem is? If a woman (or man,
for that matter) can use someone else's pace to set their own and still complete the event, why
should anyone care? It's not like that person carried them! They still had to run using their own
bodies. What am I missing?
Bumper wrote in message <1g91ei6.1pa407k1fbz90kN%bobemery@bellsouth.net>...
>For all the efforts to make men and women equal in sports like running, I see this as a major step
>backwards. I am left wondering not if but when someone is going to challenge this in the courts. If
>a bad boy running back can force the NFL to its knees what would a Boston court would rule-where
>men are men and so are women.
>
>All of this is so moot considering how many major marathons go out and hire a rabbit to lead
>the way for the men and then say that women can't use the person next to them because we didn't
>hire them.
>
>Jock Semple rises from the ashes.
>
>Mike Tennent <ironpeng@darientel.net> wrote:
>
>> "eNo" <eswrite@y-a-h-o-o.com> wrote:
>>
>> >"Bumper" <bobemery@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
>> >news:1g8ycec.spx4ymnwpncoN%bobemery@bellsouth.net...
>> >> Clearly intended to
>> >>
>> >> 1. prevent the women from having a male "pacer"
>> >
any
>> >top 20 placer that doesn't abide by the rule--should be fairly easy to enforce.
>> >
>>
>> some time. Presumably, the difficulty in enforcing it is the reason for the new separate start.
>>
>> How do you tell if a woman is pacing off a male runner when she is virtually surrounded by male
>> runners? Or is she simply running the same pace coincidentally? It's impossible to judge.
>>
>> Mike Tennent "IronPenguin"
for that matter) can use someone else's pace to set their own and still complete the event, why
should anyone care? It's not like that person carried them! They still had to run using their own
bodies. What am I missing?
Bumper wrote in message <1g91ei6.1pa407k1fbz90kN%bobemery@bellsouth.net>...
>For all the efforts to make men and women equal in sports like running, I see this as a major step
>backwards. I am left wondering not if but when someone is going to challenge this in the courts. If
>a bad boy running back can force the NFL to its knees what would a Boston court would rule-where
>men are men and so are women.
>
>All of this is so moot considering how many major marathons go out and hire a rabbit to lead
>the way for the men and then say that women can't use the person next to them because we didn't
>hire them.
>
>Jock Semple rises from the ashes.
>
>Mike Tennent <ironpeng@darientel.net> wrote:
>
>> "eNo" <eswrite@y-a-h-o-o.com> wrote:
>>
>> >"Bumper" <bobemery@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
>> >news:1g8ycec.spx4ymnwpncoN%bobemery@bellsouth.net...
>> >> Clearly intended to
>> >>
>> >> 1. prevent the women from having a male "pacer"
>> >
any
>> >top 20 placer that doesn't abide by the rule--should be fairly easy to enforce.
>> >
>>
>> some time. Presumably, the difficulty in enforcing it is the reason for the new separate start.
>>
>> How do you tell if a woman is pacing off a male runner when she is virtually surrounded by male
>> runners? Or is she simply running the same pace coincidentally? It's impossible to judge.
>>
>> Mike Tennent "IronPenguin"
Brian Baresch
>I am a newbie in these things. Can someone explain to me what the problem is? If a woman (or man,
>for that matter) can use someone else's pace to set their own and still complete the event, why
>should anyone care? It's not like that person carried them! They still had to run using their own
>bodies. What am I missing?
Some folks don't like the idea of pacers, or "rabbits". Others think that women who use pacers in
efforts to set women's records should use women pacers, otherwise it's not really a women's record
because there were men doing some of the work. (Pacers do help a lot.) Others take your view that
the question of who paces who is irrelevant.
Part of the deal is that with or without official pacers, a woman running in a mixed field will have
people to pace off of even if she's leading the women's field; the leader in a women-only race will
not. That essentially makes them two different kinds of race.
Me, I'm ambivalent on the issue, FWIW. I can see both sides. I do tend to think that records in
mixed fields and women-only fields ought to be treated separately. But I don't feel particularly
strongly about it.
--
Brian P. Baresch Fort Worth, Texas, USA Professional editing and proofreading
If you're going through hell, keep going. --Winston Churchill
>for that matter) can use someone else's pace to set their own and still complete the event, why
>should anyone care? It's not like that person carried them! They still had to run using their own
>bodies. What am I missing?
Some folks don't like the idea of pacers, or "rabbits". Others think that women who use pacers in
efforts to set women's records should use women pacers, otherwise it's not really a women's record
because there were men doing some of the work. (Pacers do help a lot.) Others take your view that
the question of who paces who is irrelevant.
Part of the deal is that with or without official pacers, a woman running in a mixed field will have
people to pace off of even if she's leading the women's field; the leader in a women-only race will
not. That essentially makes them two different kinds of race.
Me, I'm ambivalent on the issue, FWIW. I can see both sides. I do tend to think that records in
mixed fields and women-only fields ought to be treated separately. But I don't feel particularly
strongly about it.
--
Brian P. Baresch Fort Worth, Texas, USA Professional editing and proofreading
If you're going through hell, keep going. --Winston Churchill
Miss Anne Throp
Elite women? I always thought that was just a legend.
vBulletin, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0