General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

a boston marathon question

Started by dwjones45 · · Last activity · 5 posts · 353 views

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
18 April 2006
Last activity
24 April 2006
Original author
dwjones45
Posts
5
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
353
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–5 of 5
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. realizing that one has to qualify to run boston then why is it that there
    were runners who took up to 7-1/2 hours to complete the race which is by the
    way is 2 hours longer than the highest qualifying time? i just do not get
    it.

  2. "dwjones45" <[email hidden]> wrote in
    news:[email hidden]:

    Quoted message said:

    realizing that one has to qualify to run boston then why is it that
    there were runners who took up to 7-1/2 hours to complete the race
    which is by the way is 2 hours longer than the highest qualifying
    time? i just do not get it.

    Well, there were 94 runners over the age of 70, 18 visually impaired
    runners, and 9 mobility-impaired. They could account for some of those odd
    times.

    But, after watching the start on OLN yesterday, I saw more than a few folks
    'running' who made me realize that the vaunted qualifying times must not
    matter if you know the right person or pay the right price.

  3. dwjones45 said:

    realizing that one has to qualify to run boston then why is it that there
    were runners who took up to 7-1/2 hours to complete the race which is by the
    way is 2 hours longer than the highest qualifying time? i just do not get
    it.

    Some of these people could have been allowed to participate for
    charity.

    --
    Phil M.

  4. dwjones45 said:

    realizing that one has to qualify to run boston then why is it that there
    were runners who took up to 7-1/2 hours to complete the race which is by the
    way is 2 hours longer than the highest qualifying time? i just do not get
    it.


    As Phil previously said, there are many people who run the Boston
    marathon because they have raised money for charity. The charity
    runners do not have to meet a qualifying time standard. I have known a
    few "slow" runners who have done the charity thing just so they could
    run Boston. In addition, anyone can have a bad day or get injured on
    the course. Even the Kenyans DNF sometimes.

  5. "Phil M." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    dwjones45 said:

    realizing that one has to qualify to run boston then why is it that
    there
    were runners who took up to 7-1/2 hours to complete the race which is
    by the
    way is 2 hours longer than the highest qualifying time? i just do
    not get
    it.

    Some of these people could have been allowed to participate for
    charity.

    True, or possibly bandits. Did they have numbers? And then there is the
    case where people have a bad day, what I call [censored] the bed, and decide
    to walk rather then bail. Also so remember even those that did qualify
    did in the last year or so. It's impossible to have come to the dance
    under/un/not trained compared to their qualifier.

    -DF

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.