Dublin Marathon moves to lottery entries!

akeady

ligerdub wrote: »

You're right, but the

2019 edition sold out 22,500 spots in about 40 days,
2018 edition sold out 20,000 spots by May
2017 edition sold out 20,000 spots by July
2016 edition sold out 17,500 spots by August

2016 was the first time the DCM ever sold out. There were "just" 13,000 for 2015.

Taking these numbers for entries, the numbers finishing haven't changed by nearly so much and the numbers finishing as a percentage of those entering are considerably lower now.

Finishers / Entries

2019: 17725 / 22500 = 78.8%
2018: 16251 / 20000 = 81.3%
2017: 16104 / 20000 = 80.5%
2016: 16762 / 17500 = 95.8%

[It's likely that some more finishers will be added to the 2019 numbers, as this seems to happen in the days and weeks after a race - in fact, the 2016 and 2017 numbers were slightly higher when I looked today than the last time I updated my boring spreadsheet, maybe a year or more ago]

When the race filled up in August (2016), a very high percentage of those who entered actually ran. While 2500 more people entered in 2017 than in 2016, 658 fewer finished! This year, there were 2500 extra places compared to last year, but only 1474 more finishers.

There were 963 more finishers this year than in 2016, with 5000 more entries - is it likely that there's a large increase in demand from people or just that people are entering earlier, to be sure of a spot, and then are unable to take part, for one reason or another?

ATB,
Aidan.

ted1

Vinnie222 wrote: »

Good for age. Men Qualifying standard
Age 18-34 sub 3:00
Age 35-39 sub 3:02:30
Age 40-44 sub 3:05
Age 45-49 sub 3:10
Age 50-54 sub 3:15
Age 55-59 sub 3:20
Age 60-64 sub 3:45
Age 65-69 sub 4:00
Age 70-74 sub 5:00
Age 75-79 sub 5:15
Age 80+ sub 5:30
Women Qualifying standard
Age 18-34 sub 3:45
Age 35-39 sub 3:47:30
Age 40-44 sub 3:50
Age 45-49 sub 3:53
Age 50-54 sub 4:00
Age 55-59 sub 4:05
Age 60-64 sub 4:30
Age 65-69 sub 5:00
Age 70-74 sub 6:00
Age 75-79 sub 6:20
Age 80+ sub 6:40

For Dublin

I guess I will have to identify as a 60-64 year old women

Tommy Max

From what I can see, less than 18k out of 22.5k actually ran this year. my result showed that so i assume it was excluding anybody who failed to finish as many would of still been running after I had finished.

anybody confirm the actual turn out? if it is in fact less than 18k then there is a big issue over so many not taking part and so many others missing out?

Vinnie222

ted1 wrote: »

I guess I will have to identify as a 60-64 year old women

It's a National Championship they should be no qualifying times

RacoonQueen

Tommy Max wrote: »

From what I can see, less than 18k out of 22.5k actually ran this year. my result showed that so i assume it was excluding anybody who failed to finish as many would of still been running after I had finished.

anybody confirm the actual turn out? if it is in fact less than 18k then there is a big issue over so many not taking part and so many others missing out?

As has already been said on thread, all races bank on a certain % not turning up and 20% is about average for no shows.

ligerdub

akeady wrote: »

Taking these numbers for entries, the numbers finishing haven't changed by nearly so much and the numbers finishing as a percentage of those entering are considerably lower now.

Finishers / Entries

2019: 17725 / 22500 = 78.8%
2018: 16251 / 20000 = 81.3%
2017: 16104 / 20000 = 80.5%
2016: 16762 / 17500 = 95.8%

[It's likely that some more finishers will be added to the 2019 numbers, as this seems to happen in the days and weeks after a race - in fact, the 2016 and 2017 numbers were slightly higher when I looked today than the last time I updated my boring spreadsheet, maybe a year or more ago]

When the race filled up in August (2016), a very high percentage of those who entered actually ran. While 2500 more people entered in 2017 than in 2016, 658 fewer finished! This year, there were 2500 extra places compared to last year, but only 1474 more finishers.

There were 963 more finishers this year than in 2016, with 5000 more entries - is it likely that there's a large increase in demand from people or just that people are entering earlier, to be sure of a spot, and then are unable to take part, for one reason or another?

ATB,
Aidan.

Great post, and it's a fair observation. However, it's logical to assume that a race that sells out in 2 months out from a race will have a much higher percentage of finishers than one than sold out almost a year in advance. The organisers probably knew that would happen, but it's a very new problem for DCM organisers. It's not that long since they were seeing numbers going massively down not up.

They've also cracked down a lot more on those transferring numbers, or those who sold numbers for other races in the series, so the numbers taking someone else's number (I'm not advocating it) also had downward pressure on those actually running the race.

People entering 2 to 3 months out can plan accordingly and can predict with decent accuracy that they'll be in the shape needed to do it. It's different for people 12 months out, they could have all sorts of change of personal circumstances, motivation, ability to run, they might not even be in the country.

Some of those numbers though can't really be explained by selling out quicker, such as the drop from 2016 to 2017, so who knows.

Cona

What’s Dublin’s transgender policy?

PaulieC

Cona wrote: »

What’s Dublin’s transgender policy?

Jeez, this must be a record. Longest thread ever before something completely off topic is posted 😄

Plumbthedepths

PaulieC wrote: »

Jeez, this must be a record. Longest thread ever before something completely off topic is posted 😄

It's fair to assume it's a tongue in check reference to the qualification time for men versus women.
I guess it's needs to spelt out clearly.

PaulieC

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

It's fair to assume it's a tongue in check reference to the qualification time for men versus women.
I guess it's needs to spelt out clearly.

Maybe. Bit obvious though.

Murph_D

I assume these GFA times are determined by Athletics Ireland and not the Dublin Marathon people as their point is to restrict entry to the separate entry for AI members?

Any announcement as to why they used London Q times rather than something that better reflects historic standards, or is this a fallback to protect clubs who have their fastest runners excluded by the lottery?

If so, again the GFA flak should be directed at AI, not DM.

BeepBeep67

RacoonQueen wrote: »

They are the same as is posted earlier, this is last years team results
https://www.athleticsireland.ie/downloads/eshop/Team_Results_Published_01112018.pdf

and overall championship where 19 women under 35 make the cut. Bull****.
https://www.athleticsireland.ie/downloads/eshop/Age_Category_Results_Published_01112018.pdf

5 of 9 F50 2018 team medalists did not have the 2020 AG standard.

Burkie1203

ligerdub wrote: »

Great post, and it's a fair observation. However, it's logical to assume that a race that sells out in 2 months out from a race will have a much higher percentage of finishers than one than sold out almost a year in advance. The organisers probably knew that would happen, but it's a very new problem for DCM organisers. It's not that long since they were seeing numbers going massively down not up.

They've also cracked down a lot more on those transferring numbers, or those who sold numbers for other races in the series, so the numbers taking someone else's number (I'm not advocating it) also had downward pressure on those actually running the race.

People entering 2 to 3 months out can plan accordingly and can predict with decent accuracy that they'll be in the shape needed to do it. It's different for people 12 months out, they could have all sorts of change of personal circumstances, motivation, ability to run, they might not even be in the country.

Some of those numbers though can't really be explained by selling out quicker, such as the drop from 2016 to 2017, so who knows.

The lottery is being used to remove the time wasters who sign up and by xmas have forgotten all about it and don't run a single KM training.

I expect the number of people who actually run next year to get close to 21000 as a result.

If numbers drop off or demand isn't as expected they will just go back to how it was previous

Cona

Burkie1203 wrote: »

The lottery is being used to remove the time wasters who sign up and by xmas have forgotten all about it and don't run a single KM training.

I expect the number of people who actually run next year to get close to 21000 as a result.

If numbers drop off or demand isn't as expected they will just go back to how it was previous

Why would a lotto remove time wasters? If anything it is going to add to it significantly.

Van.Bosch

Cona wrote: »

Why would a lotto remove time wasters? If anything it is going to add to it significantly.

Yeah, before you had to pay in full initially. Now you just have to pay 15 which is refundable. So people will enter for the craic.

bucketybuck

Burkie1203 wrote: »

The lottery is being used to remove the time wasters who sign up and by xmas have forgotten all about it and don't run a single KM training.

But a well organised transfer system would be infinitely better at addressing that problem, certainly better than a lottery system where people still have to confirm their place 9 months in advance.

So why go with a lottery when there is a much better way of addressing that problem?

RacoonQueen

Burkie1203 wrote: »

The lottery is being used to remove the time wasters who sign up and by xmas have forgotten all about it and don't run a single KM training.

I expect the number of people who actually run next year to get close to 21000 as a result.

If numbers drop off or demand isn't as expected they will just go back to how it was previous

People had to sign up a year in advance without being 100% sure of what their goals would be the following year, they are not time wasters :rolleyes: A lot of things can change for a person within 11 months. For many, possibly more so pointy end runners, goals can change dramatically and the marathon may not be a focus any more once it rolls around.
And again, Dublin marathon do not care that 20% do not show up, this is what they want and what they cater for. Why do people find this so difficult to understand? if they had a 10% drop out rate they'd be in trouble with t-shirt, medal, water volumes etc so their profit margin would be less. The expected drop out are subsidising everyone elses race.

BeepBeep67 wrote: »

5 of 9 F50 2018 team medalists did not have the 2020 AG standard.

Yep, looked at some of the male age groups and could see a huge % of their championship fields being knocked out and that clubs wouldn't be able to field teams, some wouldn't be able to field senior or M35/F35 teams and they'd be ordinarily top 5 teams. Insane. I wonder did AI approve the new qualification system for the national championships?

Murph_D

RacoonQueen wrote: »

I wonder did AI approve the new qualification system for the national championships?

I’m sure they did. It would be extraordinary if they didn’t.

But they will say the vast majority will get in via the ballot anyway, and they’ll be right. (And no, I don’t think this is a good way to do it.)

TheW1zard

Considering the amount of entries available the average marathoner is more than likely to get a place, considering the booking window is a month and not 6 odd months like previously no?

TheW1zard

Also if I run a 3.01 its considered bad for my age :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Burkie1203

Cona wrote: »

Why would a lotto remove time wasters? If anything it is going to add to it significantly.

Because if they get an entry and have to pay in 3 months time they will have already had a change of mind. If they buy one now and forget about it those numbers are lost to the system. I would guess a lot of the no-shows entered on a whim last November at €70 and had forgotten about it by xmas. I know 2 or 3 who did so and didn't even go for a refund in June/July.

Or else demand won't be as high as expected and everyone who enters gets a race number.

I think we need to let this play out before judging it.

Plumbthedepths

Burkie1203 wrote: »

The lottery is being used to remove the time wasters who sign up and by xmas have forgotten all about it and don't run a single KM training.

I expect the number of people who actually run next year to get close to 21000 as a result.

If numbers drop off or demand isn't as expected they will just go back to how it was previous

I have friends who entered the London for the crack and got in, several wouldn't run a bath but take great pleasure in saying they are in. The lottery will only encourage the 'wasters' as you put it. They have nothing to loose except 15 euro if they refuse a place.

chasingpaper

TheW1zard wrote: »

Also if I run a 3.01 its considered bad for my age :rolleyes::rolleyes:

No not bad, just not "good" relative to serious runners. It can still be a good or great time for you personally.
But remember there are people running an hour faster than that. Women are running 40 mins plus faster. Irish winner was 2:12. Irish women's winner was 2:32.

3hrs is a lifetime away from these times to be fair. And there are hundreds of club runners who meet that standard. 3hrs was about 650th on men's side last weekend.
A 10 year old girl and 9 year old boy have run sub 3.
http://age-records.125mb.com/
70 year old men and 55 year old women have run under 2:55

Vinnie222 wrote: »

It's a National Championship they should be no qualifying times

The marathon is a national championship but it is mixed with lot of half serious runners, joggers, walkers, charity runners.
If you cannot meet the GFA standard you are not really running in the national championship, you are running against the mass entries and whatever entry system they use is appropriate for that level of runner.

It is different from national champs on track where there are no masses. People generally don't turn up and take 135% (3hrs/2:12), or typically way longer, to finish than the top end of the race. The fact that you would be alone on the track miles behind, or getting repeatedly lapped, is generally a deterrent, so qualifying system isn't required.

Imagine sticking a massive park run along with national 5k race on track, you could finish in 19 mins, get lapped 4 or 5 times, still be top of park runners though and feel good about yourself, but you are really in a different race. That is the marathon.

Damo 2k9

chasingpaper wrote: »

No not bad, just not "good" relative to serious runners. It can still be a good or great time for you personally.
But remember there are people running an hour faster than that. Women are running 40 mins plus faster. Irish winner was 2:12. Irish women's winner was 2:32.

3hrs is a lifetime away from these times to be fair. And there are hundreds of club runners who meet that standard. 3hrs was about 650th on men's side last weekend.
A 10 year old girl and 9 year old boy have run sub 3.
http://age-records.125mb.com/
70 year old men and 55 year old women have run under 2:55

So running 3:01 doesnt class you as a serious runner? Whats the magic number we have to hit before we can call ourselves serious runners?

tunney

Damo 2k9 wrote: »

So running 3:01 doesnt class you as a serious runner? Whats the magic number we have to hit before we can call ourselves serious runners?

2:59

ooter

has anyone got a link to the GFA times on the official site?

skyblue46

chasingpaper wrote: »

The marathon is a national championship but it is mixed with lot of half serious runners, joggers, walkers, charity runners.
If you cannot meet the GFA standard you are not really running in the national championship, you are running against the mass entries and whatever entry system they use is appropriate for that level of runner.

People who won medals in masters team events in the Nationals won them with times which didn't meet GFA requirements. I think they were "really running".

As Murph said most will probably get in through the public ballot anyway.

Tigerandahalf

How much will it actually cost now to enter?
You pay €15 for the lottery. How much more do you pay if you are successful?

Thanks

Plumbthedepths

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

How much will it actually cost now to enter?
You pay €15 for the lottery. How much more do you pay if you are successful?

Thanks

78.

skyblue46

Tigerandahalf wrote: »

How much will it actually cost now to enter?
You pay €15 for the lottery. How much more do you pay if you are successful?

Thanks

Another 75 plus 3 admin...the same as the top tier last year. Tiered pricing is gone.