Source
driveling•

Because the bombing occurred very late, most of the runners who had not crossed the finish line were charity runners who never had a qualifying time.

5
holmw13•

And......?

2
qwer213•

The implication being that these 5633 entries have to come from some where and some people think they should come out of the allotment of charity runners.

The beginning of the boston course starts in a small town and can't accommodate an unlimited number of runners, so the BAA has always capped the number of entries. Traditionally the BAA has given 20% of entries to non-qualifiers (Charity, sponsors exemptions etc....). The questions is are they going to eliminate some of the BQ spots to make room for these runners or are they going to eliminate some of the non-qualifier spots or some other option?

2
holmw13•

The Centennial race (1996) had 38k+ runners. This year there was 27k+. The BAA has not commented on the size of next year's race yet so it looks like they are preparing to expand the size to accommodate the 5k that didn't finish this year. The number of qualifiers won't suffer; the BAA is too much of a class act to allow that to happen.

3
baddspellar•

I agree. I don't think it will be a particularly hard sell for Dave M to convince towns to allow a larger field for next year.

"Next year's marathon will be even bigger and better." - Gov Deval Patrick

"next year's Boston marathon will be bigger, more spectacular, attended by more people than any marathon in the history of the United States of America, because that's who you are." -Vice President Joe Biden

Let's see how many town managers will want the bad press that would come from denying a request for a one-time increase in field size.

3
room317•

Good for them, and good for the runners. I hope they have a wonderful re-do!

2
cloudsdale•

Very good of them.

1