It finishes in downtown Corning, NY which has a history in glass production. The medal is blown glass and very unique!
On to the data!
|AG Group||2016 Qualifiers||2016 AG Total||Percentage||2017 Qualifiers||2017 AG Total||Percentage|
So, Wineglass 2015 didn't go as well as 2014. Looking at the weather, it was a little warmer (44F at the start instead of 34F), but still very good temps. Either way, about a 3.5% rate of qualification decrease year over year.
Squeaker Pack 2016 vs 2017: 33.33% vs 30.32%
This race, interestingly, has a high percentage of less than 5 minutes margin qualifiers.
|AG Group||2016 Qualifiers||20156 AG Total||Percentage||2017 Qualifiers||2017 AG Total||Percentage|
So, the last update, the BQ rate for 2016 was 14.94%. After the 2014 Wineglass results, it remained unchanged. For 2017, the 2015 results bumped the rate down .01%. So about the same, but obviously, this will not make the prediction go up.
The breakdown of margins of qualification:
Squeakers 2016 vs 2017: 26.26% vs 26.27%
Pretty much the same.
The final bit of data... the number of qualifiers achieving at least 148 seconds of margin in the 2016 qualification year for the races we've analyzed is 28814
The buffer has gone up from the last update; there are now 302 fewer qualifiers in 2017 than that above number.
So, all things being equal (including runners' intentions to register and the field size set by the BAA), this implies that there will be no cut off.
Field SizeThis leads me to a question for you all, spurred on by some runners in my running group and a reader's ("On Lam") comment about the BAA's plans as far as the field size of the 2017 race. After the 2013 Bombing (a race that did not fill up after the initial registration weeks and also the first year the standard were dropped 5:59 across the board), the BAA expanded the field size (there were also some folks who were not able to finish in 2013 and had their registrations deferred to 2014).
Over the last 6 years, the field size (this includes all types of registrants including charity runners):
I didn't look for data before 2008, but we can see that it has steadily climbed and never decreased since 2014. 2014 was a bit of an anomaly given (a) the extra deferments, (b) heightened level of interest post-attack.
My conjecture is that given how big the cut off was for 2016, it is unlikely they would choose to reduce the field size for 2017. I could see that if there is no cutoff this year, they may consider reducing the field size for 2018 (though, the precedent to reduce it isn't there, looking at the last 9 years). If I had to bet, I would say odds are better they leave the field size as-is for 2017.
Do you have an opinion/theory on what the BAA will do with field size for 2017? Let's hear it!