Boston Marathon Qualifying Statistics

1/10/08

From time to time, questions arise on running forums concerning qualifying for the Boston Marathon. Questions such as:

What percentage of U.S. marathon finishers produce a Boston Marathon qualifying (BQ) time?
Are the qualification standards easier for women than for men?
Are they easier for older age divisions than for younger divisions?
Which races are more likely to produce a Boston qualification (BQ) performance?

Responses to such questions often either reflect individual experiences or opinions, are based on the results of a specific race, or attempt to relate comparatively to other sources of available data, such as the differences between men’s and women’s world records and age graded tables and calculators.

In an attempt to shed some light on answers to some of these questions and bring some reality to the subject, as well as to satisfy my personal curiosity, I researched and compiled BQ data from approximately half of the marathons run in the U.S. in 2006 and 2007, as listed on Marathonguide.com. The criteria that I used for selecting the races included in this project are as follows:

The race had to be run on a USATF certified course, which is a requirement for BQ certification. This eliminated approximately 30% of U.S. races, most of them either trail races or very small events.
The race results had to be tabulated and presented in 5-year age divisions to facilitate research. Two exceptions were made to this requirement. The Boston and New York City Marathons do not compile results into age divisions that are consistent with BQ standards. However, since these two marathons represent more than 15% of all U.S. marathon finishers, their results were manually compiled into appropriate BQ age and gender divisions.
The results had to be searchable, presented by age division and gender, or itemized with gender and age division finishing position listed. One exception was made to this requirement. The Mohawk-Hudson River Marathon consistently experiences a BQ rate that is second only to the Boston Marathon and does report ages of each of the almost 500 finishers. The results were manually tabulated into BQ age and gender divisions.
Races with fewer than 100 finishers were excluded. However, in instances where there were fewer than 100 finishers in one year, but more than 100 finishers in the other year, the race results for both years were included in the analysis.
The Men’s 2008 Olympic Trials Marathon, which was run on 11/3/07 and in which all 104 finishers ran a BQ time, is not included in this analysis.

Based on the above criteria, the 2006 data base includes the results of 171 of 347 marathons run in 2006 and 176 of 340 marathons run in 2007. Three races run in 2006, but not in 2007, and eight races run in 2007, but not in 2006, are included. Thus, a total of 179 races are included in this study.

Data Base

The 59-second “leeway” permitted by the Boston Athletic Association in each of the age-based BQ standards was factored into this study. For instance, the 40-44 male standard of 3:20 was considered to be 3:20:59.

The 2006 data base compiled from 171 marathons includes the results of 93.3% of the total number of U.S. marathon finishers estimated by Marathonguide.com in their 2006 USA Marathons and Marathoners report (370,554 of 397,000). Of the 370,554 finishers, 19,689 were Boston Marathon finishers for a net of 350,865 non-Boston finishers.

The 2007 data base compiled from 176 marathons includes the results of 91.8% of the total number of U.S. marathon finishers estimated by Marathonguide.com in their draft 2007 USA Marathons and Marathoners report (369,795 of 403,000). Of the 369,795 finishers, 20,348 were Boston Marathon finishers for a net of 349,447 non-Boston finishers.

The decrease in the number of finishers from 2006 to 2007 can be directly related to the following factors, as reported in Marathonguide.com’s draft 2007 report, which are estimated to have reduced the number of 2007 marathon finishers and/or recorded finishing times by more than 13,000:

· a substantial decline of 8000 in the number of 2007 Chicago Marathon finishers, compared to 2006 results, due to the exceptional temperatures experienced on that day.

· similar heat-influenced declines of more than 1000 finishers in the Twin Cities Marathon which was run on the same day as Chicago.

· an estimated 4000 missing Honolulu Marathon finishing times due to timing system problems.

In a few cases, the number of finishers included in this project’s data for a particular race is less than the official number of finishers. These instances occurred primarily in races that had Clydesdale and Athena divisions with no ages provided and who were not included in the age divisions’ results. In these cases, it could not be determined how many, if any, met BQ standards. Exclusion of these participants tends to inflate the BQ rates somewhat, but the numbers are so small to be negligible.

The data and resultant BQ rates are based on finishers’ ages on the day of the individual races, not what their ages will be on the day of future Boston Marathons. No consideration is possible for those cases in which a participant did not achieve a BQ time for his age on the day of the race, but will qualify for Boston by virtue of moving into a new age division within an 18-month qualification window. The result of this factor is to understate the resultant BQ rates to a degree that could be significant….perhaps by as much as 20% in 5-year age divisions from age 35 to 79, if the actual BQ performances were evenly distributed across the ages of those comprising each division.

National Averages and Individual Race Summaries

Unless other wise noted, data and results included in this report are 2-year composite averages. In the 11 instances of races that were run one year and not the other, single-year data were used with the assumption that a second year’s race results would have been similar.

It isn’t surprising that the marathon that produced the largest percentage of BQ finishers (36.4%) was Boston, itself. The Boston BQ rate was so much greater than the other 178 marathons that it has a very noticeable effect on the overall BQ rate….11.5% including Boston vs. 10.1% without Boston. On a gender basis, the overall BQ rates with/without Boston were 11.8/10.5% for men and 11.1/9.6% for women. Of course, individual races varied widely from Boston’s 36.4% highest rate to the lowest rate of 2.5% in the Los Angeles Marathon.

The rule of thumb that, on average, about 10% of marathon finishes result in a BQ time appears to be a reasonable one, especially if Boston finishers are excluded.

The top ten highest combined (men and women) BQ rates among races with more than 1000 finishers are shown in Table 1.

		All			Men			Women
Marathon	Field	# BQ	% BQ	Finishers	# BQ	% BQ	Finishers	# BQ	% BQ
Boston	20,019	7,287	36.4%	12,219	4,259	34.9%	7,800	3,029	38.8%
CIM	4,264	1,104	25.6%	2,577	672	26.1%	1,687	432	25.6%
Tucson	1,083	280	25.8%	664	154	23.1%	419	126	30.1%
St. George	4,801	1,136	23.7%	2,737	626	23.1%	2,064	510	24.7%
Steamtown	1,676	374	22.3%	1,143	245	21.4%	533	129	24.2%
Grand Rapids	1,065	210	19.7%	678	140	20.6%	387	71	18.2%
Hartford	1,445	284	19.6%	917	162	17.6%	528	122	23.2%
Eugene (2007)	1,485	289	19.5%	829	169	20.4%	656	120	18.3%
Philadelphia	6,196	1,204	19.4%	3,971	755	19.0%	2,225	449	20.2%
Green Bay	1,371	262	19.1%	860	188	21.9%	511	74	14.5%

Table 1. Top Ten BQ Percent Races

There were 18 smaller races of less than 1000 finishers interspersed between Boston and Green Bay. Most notable among them were the Mohawk-Hudson River Marathon, which was second to Boston with a 2-year average BQ rate of 34.4% amongst an average field size of 457, and the Last Chance for Boston Marathon, which was third to Boston with an average field size of 118 producing a 2-year average BQ rate of 31.1%. These two races, along with Boston, were the only races that yielded an average BQ rate greater than CIM’s 25.6%

For a summary of all 179 races sorted according to combined BQ rate, see BQ Overview.

Gender and Age Division Demographics

Despite the oft stated opinion that women BQ standards are “easier” than those of the men, women had lower BQ rates in all categories of race field sizes except for the smallest of 100-500 finishers (Figure 1) and in all but three age divisions (Figure 2).

Figure 1. Gender BQ Rates by Race Size Category

For the >10,000 category (New York City, Chicago, Honolulu, MCM, Los Angeles, Boston, R&R San Diego, and Disney, in order of race size), BQ percentages in Figure 1 are shown both with and without Boston to illustrate the impact that the very high Boston BQ rate exerts on the averages. The significantly lower percentages for this category without Boston, compared to the smaller race categories, are probably due to a combination of:

The popularity of the other seven mega-marathons that comprise this category with charity participants.
A large number of first time and “recreational” marathoners who flock to these events.
Participants running them to “experience” them rather than to race them.
Difficulty in pacing a marathon in a crowded race.

Figure 2. Gender BQ Rates by Age Division

Figure 2 seems to reveal a couple of interesting characteristics of women vs. men marathoners. Figure 1 suggested that women consistently BQ at a lower rate than men. However, Figure 2 indicates that their relative performances are a function of age. In the 35-39 and 40-44 age ranges, the percentages of women BQ performances are noticeably higher than those of men….10.6 vs. 8.3 and 12.1 vs. 10.3, respectively. However, that changes as age approaches 50 and, from there onwards, male BQ rates become considerably higher than those of women.

I think the trends that this figure suggests can be explained by a look back at history. It has been 25-30 years since women began to show interest in participating in road racing and, particularly, marathons in any significant numbers. Twenty three years ago Joan Benoit Samuelson won the inaugural women’s Olympic Marathon in Los Angeles in a dramatic fashion that received wide publicity and fired the imagination of Americans, especially American girls and women. Twenty seven years ago the U.S. Government established policies and guidelines for applying and administering Title IX, which is intended to equalize opportunities for the sexes to participate in sports and other activities at the school level.

The prime formative and development years of women who are now in their 50’s and older preceded these historical developments. They have probably carried some old societal inhibitions with them into their later years, as well. As a consequence, they find themselves less able or willing to train and attempt to perform on the same level as their male counterparts in their middle-to-late ages. An alternative theory might be that biological changes that occur during women’s midlife years have a negative affect on their performance ability.

On the other hand, women who are now in their 30-40’s, which are prime years for marathoning, have benefited from the developments of the 1980’s and are better prepared and more willing to perform athletically on a level comparably to that of men….indeed, to excel. It would be interesting to take another look at this picture in another 20-30 years to see if women dominate the BQ rates across the board. It just might become necessary to raise the bar in women’s BQ standards so that men can maintain parity, if not supremacy. J

The plunge in women’s BQ rate in the 75-79 age division and subsequent surge in the 80+ category, as well as the drop in the men’s 80+ category, are probably anomalies resulting from very small numbers. For instance, in two years there were only three BQ performances out of 40 finishes in all 179 races in the women’s 80+ division….and two of those were by the same woman named Helen Klein, who ran 5:18:58 in the 2006 Leading Ladies marathon at age 83 and 5:16:28 at the 2006 CIM at age 84 against a BQ standard of 5:30 for her age division. The third was 5:06:35 run by 80-year old Bettyjean McHugh in the 2007 Honolulu Marathon.

Figure 2 does clearly suggest that the BQ standards for older age divisions are “easier” than those for the open division of 18-34. I wondered if that might be influenced specifically by younger runners in the open division whose physiological and athletic development might not be as advanced as their older counterparts in the division. Were they “dragging the division down”, so to speak? So, to the extent that I could (some races report a 20-29 age division), I compiled 2006 open division data into sub-divisions of 18-24, 25-29 and 30-34 and found little difference among them. Table 2 presents those results.