208 replies to this topic

[Ayla2010]

Looks like everyone who finished in over 3 hours for the half marathon was disqualified Including me. I finished in 3:03.
I thought I would have come in faster than that, but I struggled a bit at the end. I have had about 2 weeks of hardly any running due to a chesty cough, which only just went.
I knew there was a 3 hour cut off, but didn't worry as I thought id be fine. And plus last years results had people finishing well over that.
They should not have let us finish if they really wanted to enforce it.
I am devastated and sure I am not the only one in this boat.

[razorsgirl23]

I feel for you. I think it's terrible that they let people finish and then DQ them.

[frankenstein]

Karen, that's disappointing for you but don't worry about it too much. You DID finish, you got your medal and t shirt, so who cares about an arbitrarily set time limit? But it does seem strange to DQ you in spite of the fact that you were allowed to stay on the course and complete your run, more so since the roads were still closed because of the marathoners using the same stretch.

Enjoy your wonderful achievement and don't let this spoil your experience.

Frank

[Waverider12]

I thought of you today, Ayla and I'm really sorry to hear things didn't work out.  None of your hard work is lost, and I hope once the settles it will only encourage you to get out there again with a vengeance.  I wish you an easy recovery.

[Ayla2010]

yes I just don't understand why they would let us finish. Why have the cut off time at all?
Especially while the marathon runners were going.
I would have preferred to been not let finish rather than let me finish and feel good about it, and then get devastated by being DQ.
If there were more toilets I might have finished in that 3 minutes faster. I had to wait each time I stopped for the toilet.

[undercover brother]

Sorry to hear that and I can understand your disappointment but what would you suggest the race organizers do?

Edited by undercover brother, 03 July 2011 - 06:06 PM.

[razorsgirl23]

Not DQ people who they let finish the race?! What difference does it make?

[frankenstein]

undercover brother, on 03 July 2011 - 06:06 PM, said:

Sorry to hear that and I can understand your disappointment but what would you suggest the race organizers do?

Nothing. She finished the run and didn't affect anyone else. While I understand the need to have cutoff times, in this case it makes no sense as there must have been marathoners on this stretch of the course for at least a couple more hours.

[vat]

So - you finished just outside the clearly stated cut-off time, received a finisher's shirt and medal, and you're upset?  I appreciate you're upset for missing the cut-off, but would you have preferred they just put barriers up at the finish and stop you from crossing the finish line?  Put a stamp on your arm to show you missed the cut-off so you were shunned by the medal and t-shirt people as you left the finisher's area?  Have someone make a call at 20km that you were going to miss the cut-off and take you off the course - denying you the chance to make it home?

What genuine alternative would you have the organisers provide you with that would make you happy?  I'm seriously scratching my head to think of a better outcome for you.

Edited by vat, 03 July 2011 - 06:25 PM.

[razorsgirl23]

So what exactly is the point of a cutoff time if they're going to let people finish anyway? Seems kind of redundant to me. The only thing it achieves is upsetting people who should be proud of themselves.

[Ayla2010]

I would have preferred not to be able to finish.
Look it doesn't matter. I have a right to be upset and I thought I would get some understanding here.
Yes I know it said there was a 3 hour cut off, and I thought id be well under it. But to finish and then be disqualified is not fair.
Yes I got a medal and the shirt.
I was 3 minutes over, if there had been more toilets on the course I probably would have made it.
It doesn't make sense that they DQ us, while there was still plenty of marathoners out on the course. Why did they do it this year and not last year? Last years results had people finishing over 4 hours.

[walshy2]

I would have thought it would be more devastating to be hauled off the course when not meeting the cut-off rather than be allowed to continue on and receive a medal & T-Shirt. I think anyone in this boat should consider themselves lucky.

A cut off is a cut off and the rule was published, so no use complaining about it now.

The cut off policy clearly stated that "participants in all events must finish within the cut off time to avoid disqualification"

Train a bit harder next year and go under the cut off

Edited by walshy2, 03 July 2011 - 06:43 PM.

[Ayla2010]

it doesn't say you will be disqualified though, does it?
I have every right to complain, I am upset, very upset, it just doesn't make any sense. I want an explaination, and will be emailing to try and get one.
I want my results to be offical, im sorry you don't understand that.
BTW I have been training hard, but had some time off earlier in the year due to injury. Please don't assume I haven't been training hard.

[vat]

You might do well to read the Cut-Off Policy document, specifically:

Quote

Official Cut Off Time: 3 hours
Start Line Allowance: 10 minutes

So, 3 hours 10 minutes is it, hence you being allowed to cross the line at 3:03.  What happened is exactly in line with policy this year - race conditions change from year to year, and cut-offs are particularly influenced by police, council and road authorities.

I'm sorry that you missed the cut-off, with illness affecting your training, but I think you're being a bit hard on the organisers.

[walshy2]

Ayla2010, on 03 July 2011 - 06:42 PM, said:

it doesn't say you will be disqualified though, does it?
I have every right to complain, I am upset, very upset, it just doesn't make any sense. I want an explaination, and will be emailing to try and get one.
I want my results to be offical, im sorry you don't understand that.
BTW I have been training hard, but had some time off earlier in the year due to injury. Please don't assume I haven't been training hard.

Ayla, it absolutely says that participants must finish within the cut off time to avoid disqualification. Have you read the policy

I feel for your disappointment but think its a bit rich blaming the organisers

[razorsgirl23]

Don't worry about it Karen. They clearly are missing the point.

No one has been able to answer logically as to why you should have been DQ, but allowed to finish. If it was an issue with roads etc. then fair enough, but clearly this wasn't the case. If the HM participants were allowed to finish, then they should not have been DQ as them being out there clearly wasn't an issue.

[maryclaire]

Can I throw a cat amongst the pigeons and query why a medal/shirt is given to arunner who's been DQ'd?  That in itself seems contradictory to me.

As for the cut-off (which seems arbitrary to us runners) it is common practice to not be given official results if one is slower than the cutoff time.  If you want a harsh experience of this, simply look to the Comrades Marathon!  Now THAT is harsh.

[axltk421]

Best solution I ever saw for this was at the Paris Marathon where a truck drove at exactly cut-off pace behind the last runner. If the truck overtook you, you were immediately disqualified and got off the course (I know - I lasted until the 21st km before it got me). I reckon I preferred that; you either finished or you didn't.






edit - double post

Edited by axltk421, 03 July 2011 - 06:55 PM.

[undercover brother]

razorsgirl23, on 03 July 2011 - 06:52 PM, said:

Don't worry about it Karen. They clearly are missing the point.
No one has been able to answer logically as to why you should have been DQ, but allowed to finish

there are several reasons- I guess by my question I was hoping people could figure them out for themselves.
Vat has mentioned one.

I missed a cut-off once.
Didn't blame the organizers, didn't blame injury, didn't blame lack of dunnies.
There was one person I blamed.
And that was hermie!
Sorry thought I better lighten the mood

[razorsgirl23]

maryclaire, on 03 July 2011 - 06:52 PM, said:

Can I throw a cat amongst the pigeons and query why a medal/shirt is given to arunner who's been DQ'd?  That in itself seems contradictory to me.

As for the cut-off (which seems arbitrary to us runners) it is common practice to not be given official results if one is slower than the cutoff time.  If you want a harsh experience of this, simply look to the Comrades Marathon!  Now THAT is harsh.

That's different though. They definitely don't allow people to cross the finish line!!

[Waverider12]

walshy2, on 03 July 2011 - 06:46 PM, said:

Ayla, it absolutely says that participants must finish within the cut off time to avoid disqualification. Have you read the policy

I feel for your disappointment but think its a bit rich blaming the organisers

If you felt for her disappointment, I doubt you'd invest so much energy responding.

[razorsgirl23]

undercover brother, on 03 July 2011 - 06:56 PM, said:

there are several reasons- I guess by my question I was hoping people could figure them out for themselves.
Vat has mentioned one.

What? There being a rule there? That explains the DQ, but doesn't explain being allowed to finish and then being DQ. There has to be logic behind the rule and if there is, then she shouldn't have been allowed to finish.

[SMC42K]

Karen, I'm very sorry to hear you were DQ'd. You trained hard through adversity like the injury in Canberra in April & a cold a couple of weeks ago. But I also know you will come out of this stronger for the experience. I know how disappointed you feel as I had the same thing happen to me in my debut marathon. (I ran 3:36, but the cutoff was 3:30.) Keep working on your speed and endurance and you will smash the cutoff time next time.

[undercover brother]

razorsgirl23, on 03 July 2011 - 07:00 PM, said:

What? There being a rule there? That explains the DQ, but doesn't explain being allowed to finish and then being DQ.

yes it does.

[Supersam1979]

Maybe some of the organisers who should have been pulling people off the course just did not have the heart to pull them out and break hearts. The fact that there were by the sounds of it enough medals made up means at least the organisers had it together. Other events have seen many finish within the legal time frame and get nothing as they have run out of medals and tshirts - I have donated mine on a few occassions to those who did not get (medals clutter up my minimalist living..).

Sorry to those that missed out. I feel for you.

Join me in my running on $14 food a week http://ultrasamssubm...s.blogspot.com/ keeping running real with real issues! Stride for stride on a life changing ride!

Edited by Supersam1979, 03 July 2011 - 07:10 PM.

[Trick]

Are you happy that you finished? Are you proud of yourself for a great achievement? Have you got a pb? I hope you are at least one of those. Life's short, too short to worry about official or not official.

[rodthehornet]

Ayla,

It would be unfair if they put a DNF/DQ and it was not in the rules.  You have every right to be disappointed, but I dont think the disappointment should extend to the organisers. You mentioned insufficient toilets, but I think you run at SMC where there are no toilets provided by the organiser on the course.  It is not fair to blame the organiser for not putting enough toilets out.  We should be grateful they put any toilets out on the course.  We have to deal with these type of situations best we can.

If you were borderline pre race in terms of the cut, I would guess you knew the limit before the race.  If you felt so strongly about being dragged off the course, when the time ticked over you could have walked off the course under your own steam.  You chose to continue on and they chose to impose the time limit.

At the end of the day, the organisers set the rules for the day.  We the runners sign up knowing the rules.  If we dont like the rules, we vote with our feet and dont sign up.  Tough school, but life is full of these situations.  Plenty of us have missed various running goals by a matter of seconds.   It is not the end of the running as we know it.  We pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off and go again.

You finished the HM.  You know what you did on the day.  You got a finishers medal and a shirt.  You finished the course, just not within the time the organisers nominated.  Just because there is no time on the website is not going to change any of that.


Rod

[maryclaire]

razorsgirl23, on 03 July 2011 - 06:57 PM, said:

That's different though. They definitely don't allow people to cross the finish line!!

exactly my point - ie. at Comrades they close the finish line off so you can't pysically cross it - even if you're a meter away.  It is almost a courtesy to be allowed to finish even tho' no officail result will be given.  Still doesn't answer my question about the medal.

I empathise with the heartache of the training and effort required to carry one's body over 21.1km only to have it not recognised -  there have been times when I've been looking over my shoulder for the Grim Sweeper.  However if he (she?) were to ever catch me (and he's come mighty close!) then I'd either pack it in for the day or continue on under my own volition without any expectation of recognition.

I hope you don't give up but use this to make you more determined next time.

[walshy2]

Waverider12, on 03 July 2011 - 06:57 PM, said:

If you felt for her disappointment, I doubt you'd invest so much energy responding.

I do feel for her disappointment, if I didn't I wouldnt invest so much energy responding to your post.

[vat]

razorsgirl23, on 03 July 2011 - 07:00 PM, said:

What? There being a rule there? That explains the DQ, but doesn't explain being allowed to finish and then being DQ. There has to be logic behind the rule and if there is, then she shouldn't have been allowed to finish.

Please read my post above regarding the policy.  Runners up to 3 hours 10 are permitted to cross the finishing line, as the 3:10 incorporates an allowance of up to 10 minutes to cross the start line, so runners whose net time is under 3 hours would be able to cross the finish line and register a legal time as per the Cut-Off policy.  In the original poster's case, it would seem her net time would be more than 3 hours, hence the disqualification.

I'm not going to debate the logic of the rules (personally I'd go straight off gun time), but on the basis of what facts have been presented, the rules appear to have been correctly enforced.

More to the point - Ayla2010, what can we do to help you get under 3 hours for the next half marathon?

[razorsgirl23]

undercover brother, on 03 July 2011 - 07:05 PM, said:

yes it does.

Oh, okay. You've explained everything!

[AndyP]

razorsgirl23, on 03 July 2011 - 07:13 PM, said:

Oh, okay. You've explained everything!

Yes, he has.

[undercover brother]

razorsgirl23, on 03 July 2011 - 07:13 PM, said:

Oh, okay. You've explained everything!

You need to read what vat has said/linked.
He has tried to explain again above.

[razorsgirl23]

vat, on 03 July 2011 - 07:13 PM, said:

Please read my post above regarding the policy.  Runners up to 3 hours 10 are permitted to cross the finishing line, as the 3:10 incorporates an allowance of up to 10 minutes to cross the start line, so runners whose net time is under 3 hours would be able to cross the finish line and register a legal time as per the Cut-Off policy.  In the original poster's case, it would seem her net time would be more than 3 hours, hence the disqualification.

I understand this. My issue is with being allowed to finish. If there's a reason for the cutoff, then they should have been made to stop. This obviously wasn't the case though, as they all crossed the finish line, so I still fail to see the logic behind the rule. In my 10km yesterday I would have a totally different opinion as they would have been the only runners out on the road and been impeding traffic. As the marathoners were still running after the HM cutoff time though, I fail to see the problem.

[brewer]

maryclaire, on 03 July 2011 - 06:52 PM, said:

Can I throw a cat amongst the pigeons and query why a medal/shirt is given to arunner who's been DQ'd?  That in itself seems contradictory to me.

maryclaire, on 03 July 2011 - 07:09 PM, said:

Still doesn't answer my question about the medal.

A cynical voice in my head suggests that it is the easiest way to get rid of excess stock. Gotta off load 'em somehow. Value is dropping by the minute.

maryclaire, on 03 July 2011 - 07:09 PM, said:

I hope you don't give up but use this to make you more determined next time.

+1 Best advice.

Edited by brewer, 03 July 2011 - 07:22 PM.

[undercover brother]

Razorsgirl - how do they know her net time until after she has crossed the line?
And well said trick!

Edited by undercover brother, 03 July 2011 - 07:23 PM.

[rohan]

razorsgirl23, on 03 July 2011 - 07:00 PM, said:

What? There being a rule there? That explains the DQ, but doesn't explain being allowed to finish and then being DQ. There has to be logic behind the rule and if there is, then she shouldn't have been allowed to finish.

As a race director I can give some notion as to why a participant might be DQed, based on a time, but still allowed to finish.

The time allowed is normally based on road closures, but also based on the amount of volunteers and officials that you have available, and keeping in mind the other distances you have out there as well.

You allow for the fact that some people will overestimate their abilities and have some personnel allocated to handle this, but you are unlikely to have the spare personnel to haul participants off the course, and potentially have to transport them.  Probably easiest to let the participants return under their own steam.  Most personnel are volunteers and you really don't want to give generous people donating their time the difficult task of dealing with potentially irate or upset people if they have to actively stop them from finishing.

The reason an organizer would want to DQ those past the time limit is that if they don't then it tends to encourage more people who aren't able to complete within the cutoff to participate, because it's seen that the cutoff isn't enforced... so people who can only just do 10km think about doing a half marathon because they figure they can walk most of it and complete in say 3.5 hrs.... because that's what the previous year got away with.... so the organizers have to ask more volunteers, officials etc. to look after the tail end, for even longer.

I can't comment specifically on this situations as I wasn't there, but explaining the possible thought processes.

[Supersam1979]

maryclaire, on 03 July 2011 - 07:09 PM, said:

exactly my point - ie. at Comrades they close the finish line off so you can't pysically cross it - even if you're a meter away.  It is almost a courtesy to be allowed to finish even tho' no officail result will be given.  Still doesn't answer my question about the medal.

I empathise with the heartache of the training and effort required to carry one's body over 21.1km only to have it not recognised -  there have been times when I've been looking over my shoulder for the Grim Sweeper.  However if he (she?) were to ever catch me (and he's come mighty close!) then I'd either pack it in for the day or continue on under my own volition without any expectation of recognition.

I hope you don't give up but use this to make you more determined next time.

Yes indeed - the grim Comrades gun that must be fired come the 12 hour cutoff. This cruel punishment does not seem just when one has almost completed 90Km of punishing hills but still as with death and taxes it to must come to pass.

As Rod said, we have all missed something in life by seconds or minutes, that does not stop us coming back. One chap I know has run 10 Comrades only to finish 1 - 3 times he has been in the stadium when the final gun went - but he comes back each year in the hope of a finish.

Take the medal and hang it up, wear the shirt proudly and then work on a little speed to get you under the 3 hours next time. There is plenty of experience on this site who can and will help you if you ask. Life will go on tomorrow and you can tell your work colleagues that you did finish a half marathon at the weekend and you have the evidence to show them!

[Ayla2010]

Ok yes I just read the policy so they had every right to dq me.
I should not have blamed the organizers about any of it, esp the toilets . Can only blame myself for being fat and slow and having a tiny bladder.
Yes I run at smc but have only done shorter runs there so did not need the toilets.
I am happy to have finished and yes disappointed with my time but I can only improve from here.
I am more determined to get this weight off and train hard for the m7 relay.
Yes I cried seeing my dq for my first half, but it's the rules so I guess I'll get over it.

Ok yes I just read the policy so they had every right to dq me.
I should not have blamed the organizers about any of it, esp the toilets . Can only blame myself for being fat and slow and having a tiny bladder.
Yes I run at smc but have only done shorter runs there so did not need the toilets.
I am happy to have finished and yes disappointed with my time but I can only improve from here.
I am more determined to get this weight off and train hard for the m7 relay.
Yes I cried seeing my dq for my first half, but it's the rules so I guess I'll get over it.

[razorsgirl23]

rohan, on 03 July 2011 - 07:29 PM, said:

As a race director I can give some notion as to why a participant might be DQed, based on a time, but still allowed to finish.

The time allowed is normally based on road closures, but also based on the amount of volunteers and officials that you have available, and keeping in mind the other distances you have out there as well.

You allow for the fact that some people will overestimate their abilities and have some personnel allocated to handle this, but you are unlikely to have the spare personnel to haul participants off the course, and potentially have to transport them.  Probably easiest to let the participants return under their own steam.  Most personnel are volunteers and you really don't want to give generous people donating their time the difficult task of dealing with potentially irate or upset people if they have to actively stop them from finishing.

The reason an organizer would want to DQ those past the time limit is that if they don't then it tends to encourage more people who aren't able to complete within the cutoff to participate, because it's seen that the cutoff isn't enforced... so people who can only just do 10km think about doing a half marathon because they figure they can walk most of it and complete in say 3.5 hrs.... because that's what the previous year got away with.... so the organizers have to ask more volunteers, officials etc. to look after the tail end, for even longer.

I can't comment specifically on this situations as I wasn't there, but explaining the possible thought processes.

Thanks for that response. It gives me some idea as to why it happens other than "that's the rule".

[vat]

razorsgirl23, on 03 July 2011 - 07:19 PM, said:

...so I still fail to see the logic behind the rule...

Can't help you there.  The rules as presented appear to have been correctly enforced.  As I mentioned above, organisers are subjected to a lot of external influences - rules of various athletic federations, councils, state governments, police, road/traffic authorities and so on.  The original poster could contact the race organiser but I suspect they'll simply be referred to the published cut-off policy.

[Waverider12]

walshy2, on 03 July 2011 - 07:12 PM, said:

I do feel for her disappointment, if I didn't I wouldnt invest so much energy responding to your post.

Rohan that makes sense.

[Ayla2010]

I'm accepting my dq and am determined to do better next time

[Blue Dog]

Another strong case for the introduction of Exploding Timing Chips.

Dog out.

[thomo]

Ayla2010,

Nice work that you have finished your first half.

Ayla2010 self seeded and if she hadn't been considerate she may of met the cutoff.

Edited by thomo, 03 July 2011 - 07:51 PM.

[undercover brother]

Net time thomo - nice edit btw!

Edited by undercover brother, 03 July 2011 - 07:54 PM.

[Ayla2010]

thomo, on 03 July 2011 - 07:48 PM, said:

Ayla2010,

Nice work that you have finished your first half.

Ayla2010 self seeded and if she hadn't been considerate she may of met the cutoff.

Thanks thomo, I finished and I am still 25 kg overweight so I'm happy I did it at all. Dq still stings but nothing I can do about today.

[thomo]

undercover brother, on 03 July 2011 - 07:53 PM, said:

Net time thomo - nice edit btw!

Thanks

[rodthehornet]

thomo, on 03 July 2011 - 07:48 PM, said:

Ayla2010,

Nice work that you have finished your first half.

Ayla2010 self seeded and if she hadn't been considerate she may of met the cutoff.

Please at least add an emoticon so that we know this was in humour.  You altered another part of your post that I was trying to check out, but when I came back to it, it was gone.

If it is net time, what is the difference where you start in the pack???

[Ayla2010]

Trick, on 03 July 2011 - 07:07 PM, said:

Are you happy that you finished? Are you proud of yourself for a great achievement? Have you got a pb? I hope you are at least one of those. Life's short, too short to worry about official or not official.

Yes to all. It was my first half.

Edited by Ayla2010, 03 July 2011 - 08:06 PM.