Checked RealBuzz and computer says ‘no’. I’m shocked, shocked I tells ya 
1 Like
Was wondering when I was going to hear, then realised I didn’t bother entering the ballot this year 
1 Like
No for me as well. Although I only entered as it’s on my doorstep. It would not have been a focus next year.
Our club gets 3 spots I believe. There’s some criteria to be achieved:
- Must have been rejected from the official VLM ballot
- Must not have won a place in the previous 3 club VLM ballots.
- Must be a first claim member of the club
- Must be a fully signed up member of the club for at least 6 months.
- Must be affiliated with England Athletics.
- During the last 12 months prior to the draw, must have either volunteered for an event hosted by the club or have volunteered at a club session
1 Like
M18-39 GFA was 2:57:20 this year 
So, there’s either that, run under 2:45, or a half under 75 minutes.
that’s only 2:40 below GFA so not enormous and similar to whats seen in line with Boston. To me its a good sign that people are getting quicker again.
I always think the 1:15 half a decent amount tougher than a 2:45, although I guess it stops people sand bagging and going for an easier half target than running a fast marathon as a runner could have a lot more changes to run 1:18-1:19 several times a year rather than the odd marathon or two a year.
“only” 2:40 below is what, 6s per mile quicker?
I’d say that’s quite a bit!
Yeah, 75 does seem quick, but also achievable when you’re knocking at 80 minutes…I say “it seems doable…”
A 2:45 is shifting some.
I aren’t sure people are getting faster at all, just they’re tightening up the speeds for the front of the packers.
I reckon the median time will definitely trend slower (taking the hot years out)
About 8 years of rejections and then this year…I’m in
6 Likes
Awesome!
4th rejection in a row for me
Rejection thankfully!
Think he’s tried that 
I’d disagree with that. I think there’s a big difference between a 79.xx and a 74.xx. You j’just’ have to be a decent runner to go under 1.20 in my opinion. It’s not that that fast, it’s only 3.47s, whereas sub 75 is 3.33s. Unless you’re seriously quick i think that is a big old gap to make up. I know it’s only 14 secs, but a much bigger 14 secs (in my opinion) than say 3.47 to 4.01.
6.16% vs 6.57% 
I would agree sub 75 is harder, but I wonder whether I am just better suited to longer distances. HMs always feel like a sprint to me and there is not much difference between my 5k/10k/HM paces!
not sure its a sign of speed, but that there are now less GFA slots being handed out due to charity
1 Like
Why would it not be achievable for an 80 minute runner?
It’s onlyholding your 10km pace for twice the distance…which is where training comes in…
…such as sensibly upping mileage, whilst adding in tempo work and slowly progressing the interval work?
You’ve ran under 75, right? Or bloody close…so surely you ran about 80 minutes a year or two before the 75…which is what started the dreaming?
Just got my annual rejection, 5th one on the bounce now, think I may give the Liverpool Rock N Roll one a go instead
Tis always windy in Liverpool
1 Like
Tis always windy in Lowestoft/Gt Yarmouth! 
1 Like
Got my rejection, 3rd year on the bounce!
Might have to target a GFA slot for next year.
No you misundestand. I didn’t say it’s not achievable, I just think it’s a big step up. I guess it depends if that 80 is stretching you or not. If it is, then it’s a LONG way to 75. If that’s well within your genetic capabilities, then sure, training and execution may well deliver it. But you need to be either super gifted or dedicated. Look at @trisam . That boy is proper, proper rapid. Yet has just missed out on 75 a number of times.
I’ve breezed under 80, but haven’t made sub 75. Similarly a lot of friends/clubmates etc that can nip under taht 80 mark, but they’re miles away from 75. It’s just a really difficult mark i think. It’s like sub 3 vs sub 2.45. I could breeze sub 3 no worries off limited training. But i’ve tried and broken myself shcasing 2.45. But i think moving from 3.15 to 3 would be ‘easier’.
Maybe that’s me mistakenly attributing my own flattening improvement curve to a set of random number targets (set by some large corporation which have now embedded deeply into running culture).
I think i can go under 75, but it’ll take a great build up and a close to perfect race. I think i can go under 2.45 with a realy good build up and a decent race. May be utter rubbish, but that’s my gut feeling. (i agree that the 2.45 is a tad softer than the 75).
2 Likes