Jul 14-Jul 31, 2:00 PM UTC

FloSports Channel

Oct 10, 12:45 PM UTC

HOKA Kodiak Ultra Marathons by UTMB

Oct 11, 12:15 PM UTC

Chicago Marathon

NOT AVAILABLE IN YOUR AREA
Oct 16, 8:30 PM UTC

JennaStrong Fall Classic

Oct 24, TBD

GTWS | Muju Trail

Oct 25, TBD

Frankfurt Marathon

Nov 21-22, TBD

NACAC Road Running Championships

Nov 21, 2:00 PM UTC

Brooks XC Northeast Championships

Nov 28, 1:30 PM UTC

Brooks XC South Championships

Nov 28, 3:30 PM UTC

Brooks XC Midwest Championships

Nov 29, TBD

Shanghai Marathon

Dec 3-4, TBD

HOKA Chiang Mai Thailand by UTMB

Dec 4-5, TBD

Sharon Colyear-Danville Season Opener

Dec 5, TBD

RunningLane XC Championships

Dec 5, 3:00 PM UTC

Brooks XC West Championships

2026 Chicago Marathon

Have Boston Marathon Qualifying Standards Gone Too Far?

Have Boston Marathon Qualifying Standards Gone Too Far?

Has the Boston Marathon Qualifying system reached the end of the road, or is the system right? FloTrack's John Davern breaks down his thoughts.

Oct 1, 2026 by John Davern
Have Boston Marathon Qualifying Standards Gone Too Far?

Tuesday, the Boston Athletics Association (BAA) released the cut-off time for Boston Marathon Qualifiers, which was 5 minutes and 17 seconds faster than the existing Boston Age Group Qualifying Standards.

Of course, comments and the public weren't too positive and I get it if you were one of those 8,019 people who were cut despite hitting your BQ. It must sting and I can sympathize with those people.

However, some are calling for change - and that’s where my line is drawn.

I'm all for making stricter standards that would naturally be more clear - but we have to take a step back and understand why the BAA’s current system works. The BAA is trying to limit participation to 30,000 runners, but also trying to fill the race. Having a standard slower than the actual cut-line allows for the BAA to guarantee that end result by encouraging applications.

Maybe a change is as simple as renaming the Boston Qualifying “Standards” to Boston Qualifying “Guidelines” or just making the standard stricter in general so that 8,000 people aren't on the cut list.

But again - I think these solutions would address non-issues. When you run a Boston Qualifier - you know that you’ll likely need to be 5 minutes under the qualification standard. This is a well-known understanding in the running community.

The Boston Marathon is the most prestigious marathon in the United States, if not the world - so when it comes to the ongoing conversation of increasing inclusivity by increasing the number of participants (or even making Boston a multi-day event) - I’m not on board.

It should be hard to qualify for Boston.

That’s part of what makes the Boston Marathon special. It means something to be there because it is difficult to get there.

By increasing the field size, you risk taking away from the allure of qualifying in the first place.

In my age group the qualifying standard plus the cut-down means it takes a 2:49 to qualify. That’s fast and hard, but it’s supposed to be hard and I think that’s okay.

But I want to be clear - I think there are other ways that we can increase inclusivity when it comes to the Boston Marathon outside of the ever-increasing BQ standards.

Currently, there is a lottery for those that hit age-group qualifying standards but miss the final cut-off. 1000 runners of the 8019 cut will earn bibs through this process.

But I’m a proponent for expanding on that process and making it more dynamic.

That’s where I think Boston can learn something from a very different race: the Western States 100 Mile Endurance Run.

The Western States is a 100-mile endurance race from Olympic Valley to Auburn, California. It's one of the most prestigious ultramarathons in the world, and getting into the race is incredibly difficult.

But the lottery system is what Boston can mimic.

For the average-joe runner like you and I, the process starts by completing one of Western States' designated qualifying races. Once you've done that, you can enter the lottery.

If you don't get selected and qualify again the following year, your number of lottery tickets doubles. Continue qualifying year after year and your number of tickets continues to double, progressively improving your chances of eventually getting into the race. By year five, you would have 16 tickets compared to the one ticket that a first time qualifier would have.

That's the part of the system I think Boston could borrow.

Obviously, the Boston Marathon is a much larger event, and the logistics would be completely different. But the underlying idea has merit: reward people who continue meeting a difficult standard, even if they repeatedly miss out on an entry.

Boston shouldn't become easier simply for the sake of getting more people into the race. The difficulty of qualifying is part of what makes Boston special.

At the same time, there should be a way to recognize the runner who spends five, six or seven years consistently chasing the standard and coming up just short of actually getting onto the starting line.

A system inspired by Western States could accomplish both.

FloTrack Archived Footage

Video footage from each event will be archived and stored in a video library for FloTrack subscribers to watch for the duration of their subscriptions.

Join The Track & Field Conversation On Social