Author Topic: Ask the registrar (2015 edition)  (Read 12504 times)

Registrar

  • Global Moderator
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 12
Ask the registrar (2015 edition)
« on: January 31, 2015, 04:28:13 PM »
If you have a question that is not answered on the Qualifications page, ask away. I'll do my best to answer then in a timely manner.

--john

Hoot

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: Ask the registrar (2015 edition)
« Reply #1 on: February 01, 2015, 06:28:44 AM »
So how will the first and second waves of the PPA be determined?  Will the median qualification time determine the split some time after registration is complete?  Is there any way to request use of 2013 or 2012 PPA finish times if they are significantly faster than the 2014 finish time?

Registrar

  • Global Moderator
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 12
Re: Ask the registrar (2015 edition)
« Reply #2 on: February 01, 2015, 10:49:03 AM »
What makes you think that there will only be two starting waves? :-)

Taking the median from each qualification type (vet, 13.1, 26.2, GoG) would end up with some odd placements that may not be totally equitable. So for this year I'll be taking the qualifying times vs actual from last year and to produce a regression line based on each type of qualifier. Then for each runner, I'll use their qualifying time as the input to produce an 'estimated' time. Runners will then be ranked by their estimated times and bib's will be assigned based on that ranking. (Folks who have traditionally received #1 -> 99: the award winners, comp entries, previous winners, etc, will continue to be manually assigned. ). Then the field will be broken into X number of equally sized waves.

In terms of which time to use for the Vets, right now I'm leaning toward using their fastest time from the previous two years (if available).

Ultimately the goal is to try and cut way down on the bottleneck when the trail hits the dirt. As a 9x vet, I've seen the result of the "go out fast and get in front of everybody" tacit way too many times and it is the number one complaint I've fielded from folks in the local running community.

--john

Hoot

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 14
Re: Ask the registrar (2015 edition)
« Reply #3 on: February 01, 2015, 03:43:00 PM »
Thanks for the reply.  X waves sounds interesting!  I'd love to see the algorithm for estimating finish time.  That sounds like a job for big data analytics.  I agree that the initial rush is a problem.  With 21 ascents under my belt, I know full well that starting out at a moderate pace is definitely in my best interests.  But it's soooo hard to do.  :-) 
« Last Edit: February 01, 2015, 03:48:36 PM by Hoot »

RufusTFirefly

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: Ask the registrar (2015 edition)
« Reply #4 on: February 02, 2015, 12:46:35 PM »
Wondering about starting times assume first wave will start at 7:00, any plans yet about time between waves?

It can get hot on the Ws even in the early a.m., hope that new plan will not push back start times too much.

Would be great to start before 7:00 but doubt that would leave adequate time to get aid station workers in place, timers to the top, etc..

BTW: Site looks great!

Thanks John

Registrar

  • Global Moderator
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 12
Re: Ask the registrar (2015 edition)
« Reply #5 on: February 02, 2015, 01:15:49 PM »
The number of waves and the spacing between them is still being worked out, but one of the requirements is that the last wave will not start any later than the existing Wave 2 start time of 7:30.

As you noted, starting before 7:00 does present an issue for getting the volunteers for the various aid stations in place. For the Cirque Aid Station the past few years, we were at the summit at sunrise (which is as awesome as it sounds) and then started the hike down a few minutes later. Trying to make that hike in the dark to account for an earlier start time would be a very bad idea.

WT

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: Ask the registrar (2015 edition)
« Reply #6 on: February 03, 2015, 08:48:03 AM »
What makes you think that there will only be two starting waves? :-)

Taking the median from each qualification type (vet, 13.1, 26.2, GoG) would end up with some odd placements that may not be totally equitable. So for this year I'll be taking the qualifying times vs actual from last year and to produce a regression line based on each type of qualifier. Then for each runner, I'll use their qualifying time as the input to produce an 'estimated' time. Runners will then be ranked by their estimated times and bib's will be assigned based on that ranking. (Folks who have traditionally received #1 -> 99: the award winners, comp entries, previous winners, etc, will continue to be manually assigned. ). Then the field will be broken into X number of equally sized waves.

In terms of which time to use for the Vets, right now I'm leaning toward using their fastest time from the previous two years (if available).

Ultimately the goal is to try and cut way down on the bottleneck when the trail hits the dirt. As a 9x vet, I've seen the result of the "go out fast and get in front of everybody" tacit way too many times and it is the number one complaint I've fielded from folks in the local running community.

--john

Fantastic idea.  Thank you very, very much for doing this.  It will make a great race even better.

JasonL

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 5
Re: Ask the registrar (2015 edition)
« Reply #7 on: February 12, 2015, 07:27:34 PM »
I like the idea of starting waves. Last year was my first and I walked alot more than ran because of the crowded trail, but it was the first marathon I ever did where I felt good at mile 23 & 24.

One complaint about the requirement to sign up using the last PPM time. For me I've been improving my marathon time alot (almost an hour for a Jan marathon - shoulda coulda been more), so using my PPM time would stink. I want to break 5 hours but no matter how much I get hyped up I know I wont be passing people on the trail because its simply too dangerous from my POV. Why not allow recent marathon times from other races for PPM vets?

Please consider lots of waves with small differences in time for the marathon.

To help your predictions look at the elite runners and you'll find a 1.6-1.7 factor between a flat land marathon and the PPM finish time. For me my time was 4:30 flat and 7:10 PPM which was on target. Also reached the top at 4:30 as predicted by Matt Carpenter's website!

Thanks for the chance to make some comments :) and for helping to organize the race!

Registrar

  • Global Moderator
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 12
Re: Ask the registrar (2015 edition)
« Reply #8 on: February 13, 2015, 10:23:36 AM »
The main purpose of using the PPM time for seeding is to try and use a number that has the best chance of indicating how somebody will do on Pikes Peak. It is a bit too easy to game flat marathon times (downhill, sea level, or both), and fast flat times don't always translate to fast peak times.

My main goal is to assign folks to a starting wave that will start them with others of a similar ability level. The hope being that a 4:00 ascent time runner won't be tempted to try and keep up with somebody who regularly posts 3:00 times and burn out after the first switchback.  It will not be perfect, but hopefully it will be much better than the current scenario.

Right now I'm reading the comments from folks and taking notes. I'll use the data from the past few years to try and simulate the effects of various predictors to see if it causes problems. Thanks to the new timing system, we have a few years of data so I can look at data not only at the start and finish, but also at NoName, Barr Camp, and A-Frame to make sure I didn't just move the bottleneck further up the trail.

--john

Amy Carpenter

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: Ask the registrar (2015 edition)
« Reply #9 on: February 22, 2015, 07:39:44 PM »
I will be running the ascent for the first time this year. 2 Q's: 1.) I ran Colfax marathon  May 2013, which is less than 2 years from registration but more than 2 years from the race. Is that OK? 2.) is there a way to enter than qualification info before the actual registration date? I don't know how quick Pikes Peak fills up but I have run Imogene the past few years and it always fills up fast, so if Pikes Peak is the same, I don't want to be wasting time entering that info once registration opens. Thanks!
-Amy

Registrar

  • Global Moderator
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 12
Re: Ask the registrar (2015 edition)
« Reply #10 on: February 23, 2015, 09:44:17 AM »
Amy,

Yes, your May 2013 Colfax marathon time is acceptable for entry into the 2015 Pikes Peak Ascent or Marathon. In general, any full or half marathon (PPA only) run since Jan 1st, 2013 is acceptable.

There is no way to pre-enter your qualification information. Everybody who registers (including the veterans) need to provide a Race Name, Year, Time, and link to the qualifying race results during registration. So while it will slow you down by about 15-20 seconds, it slows everybody down by about the same amount. Even though the races fill quickly, historically the PPM takes a few hours, not minutes or seconds. For the PPA it traditionally takes a few days to fill.


--john

princesscards

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Slower overall times?
« Reply #11 on: March 02, 2015, 09:16:24 PM »
This is a question about the new registration.  Since Wave 1 typically did not fill as fast as Wave 2 for the PPA, with this new system change the make up of the race toward being slower?

If everyone registers Day 1 and the first 1800 who qualify, get in, it seems like the race will fill faster but overall with a tilt toward a slower field, correct?

Registrar

  • Global Moderator
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 12
Re: Ask the registrar (2015 edition)
« Reply #12 on: March 03, 2015, 01:05:58 PM »
It depends...

For the Marathon, the two fields would trade off each year in the race to be the first to fill, and the fill times were rarely too far off from each other. So I expect little to no changes in the average times.

For the Ascent, I do not expect a major shift compared to years past. While the old wave 1 would take a while longer to fill, the majority of the wave 1 runners would still sign up while wave 2 was still open. A few wave 1 folks would drag their feet because they knew they could, but this year I expect them to be on top of it a bit more and register sooner. Note that last year was a bit of an oddball one with the WMRA competition adding a large number of unusually fast runners to the race. Thus this year would be "slower" than last simply due to that fact alone.

bcoffelt

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
Re: Ask the registrar (2015 edition)
« Reply #13 on: March 11, 2015, 11:14:31 AM »
For seeding purposes in the Marathon, will you use a runner's last year's time or an average of their last 3 years finish times? Will you use the best time available under the guidelines?

Registrar

  • Global Moderator
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 12
Re: Ask the registrar (2015 edition)
« Reply #14 on: March 11, 2015, 02:22:28 PM »
I'm leaning toward using the best time in the last two years. This way if you have a bad day it would not count against you.