78 replies to this topic

[Dickie71]

I'm sure this wouldn't be popular for all, especially those that weren't successful entering this year, but is there a possibility that those of us that were successful in securing an entry this year that we would get preference for entry next year?  We'd still need to pay for the race again and we would still need to meet the entry criteria (so may have to run another qualifying time) but it would be nice to not have to go through the pain of the 9am Saturday registration process.

Thoughts?

[Colin]

Still too early to think about this when we don't know what our limit will be etc. We will come up with some way to accomodate current entrants or to give them an advantage, but no it was clear prior to cancelation that we could not offer a deferral and it would be unworkable.

cheers

[loubee]

Considering how hard it is to get into I think it would be unfair if all 2012 entrants got auto entry. I certainly feel for all the entrants, I had hoped to be one myself this year but was unable to make it and decided to plan for 2013, with auto entry that would be another year away. Sadly, it's not unlike any other event affected by weather, sometimes shit happens.

[Mudguts]

I am a guaranteed entry (10 finishes) so no selfish motive here . . . perhaps those who were entered and would have moved to guaranteed status (4 finishes) could be given that privilege a year early in acknowledgement of their misfortune and history.

[walshy2]

Mudguts, on 12 March 2012 - 08:06 PM, said:

I am a guaranteed entry (10 finishes) so no selfish motive here . . . perhaps those who were entered and would have moved to guaranteed status (4 finishes) could be given that privilege a year early in acknowledgement of their misfortune and history.

I like that idea, but can''t find the like button, so  

[vat]

Mudguts, on 12 March 2012 - 08:06 PM, said:

I am a guaranteed entry (10 finishes) so no selfish motive here . . . perhaps those who were entered and would have moved to guaranteed status (4 finishes) could be given that privilege a year early in acknowledgement of their misfortune and history.

I'm seriously considering a tilt at a run at Six Foot next year so this whole thing about 2012 entrants getting preference is a bit of a worry as it would obviously mean less opportunity for me to get a ticket...but I'd actually be cool with this idea.  Good suggestion.

[Unlikelyrunner]

loubee, on 12 March 2012 - 03:19 PM, said:

Considering how hard it is to get into I think it would be unfair if all 2012 entrants got auto entry. I certainly feel for all the entrants, I had hoped to be one myself this year but was unable to make it and decided to plan for 2013, with auto entry that would be another year away. Sadly, it's not unlike any other event affected by weather, sometimes shit happens.

Imagine those that did get in to 2012 but don't get in to 2013? They may have to wait till 2014! Where is the fairness in that?

Just think,  if 2012 entrants got first dibs then EVERYONE ends up waitiing an additional 12 months don't they?

[thomo]

Mudguts, on 12 March 2012 - 08:06 PM, said:

I am a guaranteed entry (10 finishes) so no selfish motive here . . . perhaps those who were entered and would have moved to guaranteed status (4 finishes) could be given that privilege a year early in acknowledgement of their misfortune and history.

So following that line. A novice who entered and didn't get to run would become a veteran.

I don't think everyone should be bumped up the list.

Novice, veteran:)

thomo

[bimblegumbie]

Gday,

I agree with Mudguts, but in my case I am biased and I'll admit that up front.

I was very happy on Dec 3 as this would have been my fifth and I would have received guaranteed status had I finished. In my case I have entered at leisure, at midnight, at 9am at work on a Friday and at 9am on a Saturday. Having jumped through all the qualifying and entry hoops placed in front of me I am worried my luck will run out next year, despite having supported the race as well as I could once I had heard of it (watching Fats destroy the Kembla Joggers mountain running series the summer before he broke the record). It got to the stage where I actually got beaten to the punch last Dec 3, but I put the odds in my favour by getting my sister to enter for me at her computer.

The decision to give guarenteed entry to those who have completed five was that they were going for their buckle, however I am going for my buckle even though I have only completed four races!

This of course follows the point Thomo raised, in that it could be argued that everyone is going for their buckle. To answer that I would be prepared to put my money where my mouth is and sign up for the next 2 races (others possibly up to 6 races?). Others could do the same and each runner would have to put all entry money up front and accept the risk of injury and unavailability years in advance - miss a race and you forfeit the lot. Basically it would come down to those who would prioritise the race in the future, as the living legends have done in the past.

All this hinges on the question on the "stand alone" aspect of each race. Sixfoot is not meant to be a club, (there has been previous discussions on the Sydney Striders logo on the t-shirt), yet it is a club of sorts e.g. Living legends, past winners, AURA race winners, buckle+ guaranteed entrants. My proposal would allow people to "buy in" to the club for a set number of future races.

I'm not sure I agree with the above notion, having just typed it out. I think I just really want my registration transferred to next year, for the reasons mentioned above. Others, especially Colin, have volunteered to make these decisions and I will abide by what they decide, and obviously it will be a fair way off. I have thought about wanting to buy multiple races in advance over many a long run and am putting in my two cents worth.

If I am unlucky and never run another then I'll be more than happy, (but gee I want that buckle) Thank you to Colin for all he has done in the past. I counted my blessings and stayed safe with my family on the weekend, sleeping in till 9am and taking the family to the Zig Zag railway and Leura Cascades.

Gary

[B1orB2]

After missing out on a 2012 6ft entry this year I would be seriously p!$$'d if I missed out on a 2013 entry and not given an equal opportunity.

Changes to entry and qualifying have been tightened in recent years, which have been necessary given the popularity of the event, but to give 2012 entrants an advantage getting into 2013 is going way too far. I understand that a lot of people are dissapointed that the race was called off but that is the nature of trail running.

All I can look forward to is another 'fair' chance to get into 2013 6ft when entries open, just like everybody else.

[runhard]

Lose , lose situation!  Someone is going to be p#$@'d no matter what. Whoever it is (could even be me) will need to build a bridge and get over it (preferably over coxes river)

Good luck with the decision Colin

[Brick]

runhard, on 13 March 2012 - 06:50 AM, said:

Lose , lose situation!  Someone is going to be p#$@'d no matter what. Whoever it is (could even be me) will need to build a bridge and get over it (preferably over coxes river)

Good luck with the decision Colin

100% agree.
The problem with giving 2012 entries priority is what happens to the people who gave up a spot to let the waiting list people get in?
Should they get a run before the people who ended up with the entry.

Some hard calls for the RD.

[Rico]

Fwiw I was expecting to have to run the entry gauntlet again for 2013.  I was planning to train for it by trying to enter Kepler.

[Colin]

The last four posts are on the money. You absolutely cannot give the 866 entry list another shot ahead of everyone else, because you would deny those who missed out, got injured, next year's novices who historically made up 45% of field and have already been sacrificed by 10% and crucial to growth etc.

Sorry, it is not going to be fair to everyone. There isn't really anything fair with a canceled event, and it is 100 x less fair on myself who sacrificed his own time and income to put on an event that never happenned. Runners are already thinking about their next race.

If there is to be any advantage to 2012 entrants then my view is that it should only come from , and dependent on, additional numbers in the race.They could have a first shot at that amount of entries giving a neutral effect.

But any ideas are based on assumptions of how things may stand come December.

As for re-quailifying, no decisions yet so the default is 'go forth and qualify' to be safe.

[TropicThunder]

Colin, on 13 March 2012 - 08:51 AM, said:

. If there is to be any advantage to 2012 entrants then my view is that it should only come from , and dependent on, additional numbers in the race.

As for re-quailifying, no decisions yet so the default is 'go forth and qualify' to be safe.

Surely no traffic issues around the finish and access roads this year so shouldn't be any barriers to more numbers in 2013 .

& seriously, how hard is it for our precious princesses to run a qualifier within 12 months ???.........first qualifier should be Mt Solitary - I'll leave the ratios to those mathematically wiser, but a finish in under cut off would surely ensure a finish in six foot under 7hours.

[silver fox]

As a would be first timer in 2012, and as gutted as the next person in regards to the cancellation, I do not expect any favoritism when rego comes around for 2013. I hope the generosity of spirit that has prevailed since the call re 2012 extends to the entry process in 2013...

[vat]

TropicThunder, as per the thread title I don't think the original poster's intent was that a qualifier not be run - I think the idea was that they had autoentry if they had a prequalifier as per the 2013 event conditions.

We're just tossing around ideas here. Some people are going to be upset no matter what course is taken.

[Campbell]

As others have said, I can't see why 2012 entrants have any entitlement for 2013...that would make us a little "precious", and I certainly wouldn't want that.

Also, for the record, I don't want any refund of 2012 entry fees. The RFS and other organisations need it more than I do.

[TropicThunder]

vat, on 13 March 2012 - 12:12 PM, said:

TropicThunder, as per the thread title I don't think the original poster's intent was that a qualifier not be run - I think the idea was that they had autoentry if they had a prequalifier as per the 2013 event conditions. We're just tossing around ideas here. Some people are going to be upset no matter what course is taken.

Sure vat, hear you. My point was purely directed to those who find it unfair they may have to run a qualifier. There's a few threads which are approaching the same issues.

[charlieboy]

I don't know why everyone gets so wound up about 6 foot. It is on every year so there is a fair chance you will get in some time. In the meantime there are plenty of other great trail races that you can do that dont require so much angst to get in to. 6 Foot is a great race but there are plenty of others that offer better trails, scenery and diversity.

[undercover brother]

charlieboy, on 13 March 2012 - 01:12 PM, said:

I don't know why everyone gets so wound up about 6 foot. It is on every year...

and the track is open 365 days each year.
though admittedly the bridge crossing being the only option at the moment.
at least all the water tanks are full
a nice piece of trail... one could argue even nicer running it with a few friends one weekend than 800+ people on race day.

[Power]

This was to be my first 6 foot also.
Disappointing yes but Im over it.
Whatever Colin decides then some will be happy others not.
Frankly whatever he decides goes.

For safety reasons alone people should have to run a qualifier. IMO.
Otherwise runners can possibly not run for a long time and qualify.
Train and do qualifier and you will enjoy the run all the more.

I echo Tropic's suggestion - Mt Solitary should be a qualifier too IMO. A few sixfooters are redirecting their training and energy here.

[nickpb]

TropicThunder, on 13 March 2012 - 09:25 AM, said:

& seriously, how hard is it for our precious princesses to run a qualifier within 12 months ???...

There are some people whose running days are limited by injury so they try to limit their running or for whom the 6ft is the only race they have interest in running and have done so for years.  Yeah, these people could do qualifier instead of using the 6ft as they have done previously, but it's just reducing the times they can actually do the 6ft.

I can't see any reason why entrants this year should get any preference next year, as much of a pain as that is for me.  But I can see some reasons why for those people qualifying could be carried over.

[langswm]

Pesonally I am not that fussed, but I do think there is a strong argument for those that used their 2011 6 Foot run as their (only) qualifier for 2012, to be carried over to 2013. It was only a year or so ago, that ANY 6 foot run that you had done previously, effectively granted you a "lifetime" qualifier for future 6 Foot runs. Yes, I know, times have moved on etc etc, but I do think this does deserve some consideration, if only for the unique situation surrounding the 2012 event.

[halfwaydown]

Suggestion re qualifier.
Same as this year but with one amendment  (as a one-off):
Replace "Confirmed 2012 6ft finisher" with "Confirmed 2012 6ft entrant".*
Would cover the bases for the I-only-run-6ft-and-no-others-as-a-qualifier types eg super veterans
And at the end of the day if no fair system can be found (it's a hard one IMHO) that rewards all this year's cancellation runners without disadvantage to others - then at least 2012 6footers not having to pre-qualify again** - have some slight advantage/acknowledgement that they were there the year of the Big Cox Up

*Wave number for 2012 to aid seeding
** But still having to register again

Edit - should have said "then at least 2012 6footers not having to pre-qualify again by some other means.

Edited by halfwaydown, 13 March 2012 - 06:02 PM.

[Tom31]

Surely the idea behind the qualifier is to prove you're fit enough to complete the event in the designated time.  On that basis, carrying over qualifiers makes no sense.

[Nova]

What is fair?

There are a lot of good posts in this thread and it is all just discussion and I guess Colin and his committee can sneak in here and grab the good ideas.

Personally if it was up to me and making fairness (for RD and everyone else) the deciding factor I would be recommending the following:

1.  Entry criteria for 2013 be the same as 2012. Colin and others prepared a well thought out entry criteria.  This should be acknowledged and supported.
2.  Try to ask for permission to have 900-1000 runners based on the unfortunate cancellation of the 2012 event.
3.  Those that are one race short of auto qualification will have to wait another year to have that privilege (I know if that was me I would be anxious before entry and angry if I missed out but I should now have the experience to get a golden ticket to the event)
4.  Strongly recommend everyone runs a new qualifier.  However review those who have used a 2011 SFT race as qualification and based on that review it could be an individual basis call.
5.  We are all adults and understand that the unfortunate weather events created a set of circumstances beyond our control and we need to approach 2013 like any other race.  Each year on its own merits.

these are just some of my thoughts and I am sure in 24 hours I will want to modify or change some.

[halfwaydown]

Tom31, on 13 March 2012 - 05:17 PM, said:

Surely the idea behind the qualifier is to prove you're fit enough to complete the event in the designated time.  On that basis, carrying over qualifiers makes no sense.

Don't disagree but I am not suggesting carrying over qualifiers - 6ft 2012 is a qualifier for 2013. To explain:
If you use the logical that those that entered 6ft, having qualified and made it to the start line would have all (except a very few - 6ft has a very low DNF - because of the qualifier) have completed the event -
Then you add the logic that the fact the event wasn't run was the only thing stopping them all (except a few) from obtaining the qualifier they were all going to get when they finished the 2012 6ft marathon.
Yuo come to the logical conclusion that 2012 6ft confirmed entry on race day pretty much guarantees (except for a very few) a qualifier for 2013.
Ok - a very FEW will sneak through - but hardly any wouldn't have achieved a qualifier in the first place.
AND if you don't allow this as a qualifier - then you are (logically) penalising the 2012 event further ie Yes you can still use 2012 6ft as a qualifier but only if you ran it under the cut off time
I rest my case . I now need to lie down.

EDIT - Assume Tom31 your entry was in response to mine - if not - then deep apologies - and please read as a general explanation to my earlier input. ie more waffle than probably neccessary + I made a mistake in the original comment that has an edit added

Edited by halfwaydown, 13 March 2012 - 06:03 PM.

[johnnyboyrun]

Why shouldn't people who entered 2012 and didnt pull out prior not get a priority entry to 2013?
No system is completely fair, but i cant see how that is any less fair than any other system.

[Witblits]

My two cents worth. Let everyone go into the draw as per usual. Those that miss out and had entered 2012 go to the top of the wait-list and if there is an increase in numbers for 2013 then guarantee those extra spots for the 2012 entrants as well.

[Rico]

What proportion of the field use the previous 6ft as their qualifier?

[hatless]

Rico, on 13 March 2012 - 07:08 PM, said:

What proportion of the field use the previous 6ft as their qualifier?

Not sure exactly for 2012, but historically, about 55% of racers had run the race before. This year was the first year that a veteran could use a non-6FT race a qualifier, so the proportion was probably around 40%.

h.

[hatless]

Something else that everyone seems to have forgotten. Both this year and last, everyone on the waiting list (200 or so) had the opportunity for a run. I realise not everyone made it to the waiting list, but the line is a little longer than it seems.

As for the next few months, let's all let Colin get his life back to normal before we start making too many demands on him...

h.

[vat]

TropicThunder, on 13 March 2012 - 01:01 PM, said:

Sure vat, hear you. My point was purely directed to those who find it unfair they may have to run a qualifier. There's a few threads which are approaching the same issues.

All good - suspect we're actually in agreement on this point.

[Pasty]

Wow Colin, even I feel sorry for you right now.....

My opinion (even though you'll probably say it is being critical of 6ft) is as follows:

1.  Offer nothing to 2012 entrants regarding 2013 entry.  Jeez, I laughed when I saw the first post asking for an automatic acceptance into 2013.  There are too many exceptional cases.  Interstate entrants ate lots of costs over the cancellation (god, that was an expensive weekend for nothing....), so how will you discriminate over veterans/interstaters/others to determine who is more worthy.  Answer:  You can't without lots and lots of criticism.  Be strong and hold a firm line in the sand.  

2. Include a contingency in your website.  Have a look at Falls Creek Triathlon - they moved the race date from Sunday to Saturday, lost big time on the number of entrants this year, but had a backup if the weather was crappy.  Maybe your contingency is nought, and cancellation is the only option.  So be it, but PLEASE say it up front.   You earned lots of respect by cancelling on Thursday (and saved interstaters money) - with this good will make some hard decisions.

4. Hold your line on entry qualification.  You know my opinion is that it is risk mitigation for your event, so you need (and happily changed) your qualification criteria to make sure that runs need to be recent.  Stick to your guns here - you are on the money.  Consider tightening it slightly again, make sure qualification relates to recent events, and DO NOT carry over 2011 6ft completions as qualifications for 2013.

3. Please fix the entry process with Active and make it fair.  Please - you know what I mean.

[Action]

hatless, on 13 March 2012 - 07:56 PM, said:

As for the next few months, let's all let Colin get his life back to normal before we start making too many demands on him...

h.

Yes, agree, give Colin his life back - for a while... however, as everyone else is putting in their 2c worth here's mine, recorded for consideration in a few months time.

The finish rate of 6ft is pretty high these days.  Therefore everyone still entered when it was cancelled gets a credit of a 6ft finish. No other consideration.  No other bonus.  Just a credit of a finish. As if the race in 2012 happened and all finished.  That would give all those affected a +1 to their race count, therefore some will step up to vet, some to guaranteed, and all will have a qualifier, albeit only to Wave 5 Very simple to administer.  Nothing special for next year.

Just a thought.

[Horrie]

No need for any special provisions. Everybody needs to run a qualifier from 1 December 2011 to March 2013. Those people who use 6 Foot as a qualifier each year should be fit enough to run a qualifier between now and next year. Time to get out a bit more and support some other races.

[Jogger]

Quote

Be strong and hold a firm line in the sand.

advice for colin ? the colin ?

Quote

everyone still entered when it was cancelled gets a credit of a 6ft finish.

action - how will you feel when you get awarded your lifetime legend award for 24 finishes under the cut ... when you have only run 23 ? cheated ?!

[ausrunning]

"Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex. It takes a touch of genius, and a lot of courage, to move in the opposite direction."

(Not aimed at the RD)

[Colin]

pastyboy, on 13 March 2012 - 08:04 PM, said:

Wow Colin, even I feel sorry for you right now.....

My opinion (even though you'll probably say it is being critical of 6ft) is as follows:

Not a great way to start advice , but I bear no grudges and actually agree with most of what you say...except we have always been upfront that there isn't a fall back date due to the availability of RFS- there are 25 squads involved.

Jogger, on 13 March 2012 - 09:01 PM, said:

advice for colin ? the colin ?

Yes, see above. No need for a dig especially when someone is already down. Before I wrote the email to entrants you were the first person I called - and we don't speak that often- out of courtesy as the previous RD.

ausrunning1, on 13 March 2012 - 09:07 PM, said:

"Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex. It takes a touch of genius, and a lot of courage, to move in the opposite direction."

Don't you worry about that. I am not in the habit of making simple things complicated. There won't be much change from this year.

People just have to accept that 2012 did not happen, put your head down, bum up and go and run some qualifiers.

BTW, about 'life getting to normal', I am doing a timing gig this weekend, SMC next weekend and another timing gig the week after...so, yes pretty normal if that is normality.

[Jogger]

Quote

No need for a dig

Colin - it wasn't a dig.
The advice was to be firm and stick to your guns - you always do that, hence you of all people don't need that advice. That was what the comment meant. It was more a compliment than a dig.

[Colin]

No worries Kevin, thought it was meant that I wouldn't take advice from Pasty in particular, but he has a few good points. As you know a lot of the decisions are based on my (yours in past) own gut and experience and what I feel would enhance the race organisation. I do 'consult' or rather tell others involved, but the decisions are pretty much firm because if you asked 850 people then you would never do anything.

And based on the race under your management, and now the last three years , we have mostly got it right and hopefully will continue to do that to maintain the nature of this race.

[Mudguts]

Jogger's comment was a compliment. I read it as meaning something aliong the lines: . . . Colin has a reputation for taking pragmatic decisions without fear or favour and always in the best interests of the race which makes such advice redundant.

[runhard]

I would add:

Mudguts, on 14 March 2012 - 07:59 AM, said:

Jogger's comment was a compliment. I read it as meaning something aliong the lines: . . . Colin has a reputation for taking pragmatic decisions without fear or favour and always in the best interests of the race (and Runners) which makes such advice redundant.

[Digger]

Horrie, on 13 March 2012 - 08:45 PM, said:

No need for any special provisions. Everybody needs to run a qualifier from 1 December 2011 to March 2013. Those people who use 6 Foot as a qualifier each year should be fit enough to run a qualifier between now and next year. Time to get out a bit more and support some other races.

I have never understood the complains/pressure about 'getting a qualifier'.

This is about the toughest race in Australia where 100's enter and 100's get cut by the entry process. If in the previous 12 months you don't run another marathon, or accepted qualifier race(and actually qualify), then how  do you expect to finish/survive the Six Foot Track. And if you are just a 'trainer who doesn't race', well move over and make room for those who support road/trail running by running/racing in other events. You don't get to the 'Grand Final', unless you play in the 'Home and Away' rounds.

[Running Angel]

Everyone has different ideas about what would be fair for 2013 based on their own situation. Those who were guaranteed entrants for 2012 will feel we have missed out if we don't get in again next year. Those who were not entered this year will feel unfairly treated if 2012 entrants are given priority. At the end of the day the RD has to do what is right for the race going forward and attempt to be fair to everyone. Lets not forget that everybody who wants to race usually gets a spot, regardless of whether they get an entry straight away or if they end up on a waitlist. There is no reason to believe this would be any different next year, especially if Colin manages to get additional spaces agreed.

As for qualifiers for next year, even the guaranteed entrants still have to run a qualifier every year so why should we be any different? We are just coming into marathon season so go out and use all that 6FT training to run a sub 4.20 marathon. Plenty of time to run a better qualifier later in the year if you want to get a better wave allocation. I've entered Mt Mee marathon end of April to try and get it out of the way early

There are plenty of other races coming up which we can focus our attention on now and give Colin a bit of a break - TNF is only 9 weeks away...

[walker1st]

years ago the discussion on the issue was heated. about what the qualifier means
I assume that ages ago, the event was not sold out and for safety reason the qualifying criteria were established, so every entrant was fit enough to complete the course
and not creating some kind of emergency situation.
However as the interest in 6FT is getting much bigger, the original meaning of qualifiers become less and less important for the selection of entries process.
if the course allows 850 limit and 5000 runners do better than qualifiers ? yes it still takes care of the safety issue but does nothing to entry selection system.

Lots of races simply take an approach first with the fastest Internet gets the spot within 20 seconds of opening and thats it, or they have a lottery system in place.

another approach is : if 6ft is national championship, than to qualify will mean to select by quality, by time and/or by placing on other races, basically you need to get entry by quality, say 500 fastest to men, 250 to females and 100 to masters, oops and what happens to buckle collectors ?

ideally each state should hold qualifying selection race for 6ft of similar length and profile and nominate the entrants.

or if olympics system is used, only 3 M and 3F from Sydney could run - OK not very funny.

to Horrie - sorry that I dare to post without your permission

[Digger]

Running Angel, on 14 March 2012 - 08:38 AM, said:

. I've entered Mt Mee marathon end of April to try and get it out of the way early

Wish you luck trying to break 4-20 on the Mt Mee course.  3-45 road Marathon Runners struggle with 4-30.

[chops]

walker1st, on 14 March 2012 - 08:41 AM, said:

to Horrie - sorry that I dare to post without your permission

Like this!

[Running Angel]

Digger, on 14 March 2012 - 09:14 AM, said:

Running Angel, on 14 March 2012 - 08:38 AM, said:

. I've entered Mt Mee marathon end of April to try and get it out of the way early

Wish you luck trying to break 4-20 on the Mt Mee course.  3-45 road Marathon Runners struggle with 4-30.

Qualifier is 5.15 Digger