This year, so many runners were keen on running the UTMB, that registrations were full in less than 10 hours. 10 hours is less than half the time for the best runners to complete the race...

The solutions commonly used for race entry are the following:
  • First come, first served, as this is basically the case now. The registrations were closed after about 7 months in 2005 (I was lucky to get in on the waiting list!), after 2 weeks for 2006 and 10 hours this year. What will it be for 2008 ? My pronostic is 8 minutes (1) if the server can make it. This method discards runners who don't have access internet (2), either at home or at work, depending on the registration opening time. Marginally, this method also filters runners who don't have a credit card, can't get access to one or are reluctant to use it via the internet. The shorter the registration time will be, the more it will be similar to a ballot.
  • Simple ballot to draw 2000 lucky runners. This is fundamentally the fairest solution, but has the main drawback of splitting groups of friends.
  • Newcomers priority: people that have never ran the UTMB enter first.
  • Ponderated ballot. The ballot can be ponderated in order to increase the chance of the runners with the number unsuccessful entry attempts (such as in the London Marathon), with potentially 100% garanty after a given number of attempts. In a similar fashion, the ballot could be ponderated to reduce the chance of runners that have already run it. Both can be considered as smoother versions of the newcomers priority method.
  • Race references that can be strong (such as on the Spartathlon, where you need a 200km race), or weak and then useless for this purpose (as on the UTMB). Moreover it does not open the race to beginners that could potentially make it, as argued earlier on this blog (can novice run the UTMB?).
  • The registration fee could be increased to a extent where not so many people could afford it, or would be motivated enough to raise funds. Given the large number of important sponsors, 120 euros is already quite a lot in my opinion. But the quality of the organisation is worth it.
  • Charities: like in many Anglo-Saxon races such as the London Marathon, a large number of places are given to charities who then choose their runners. They usually choose the best fundraisers, or people that have lots of money (they can pay themselves instead of begging).
  • Arbitrary choice by the organisers without transparence. This method will apply to the elite runners anyway, and that makes sense.
  • Waiting list over the years: like the Marathon des Sables, which is already full for 2008. The main issue is that some runners may be able to do it one year but may not be available the next one.
  • Many other methods could be implemented, such as several waves of first come first served, need to volunteer on the race, ...
As a general trend, very popular French races seem to be more keen on the first come first served basis (Paris Marathon, UTMB, Nice Ironman, ...), whereas Anglo-Saxon ones rely more on ballots and charity selection (London Marathon, New-York Marathon, UK Ironman, ...).

So would be the most acceptable method ? The pure first come first served will definitely not be applicable next year. I (reluctantly ;) ) reckon that I'm more satisfied by the Anglo-Saxon approach than the French mess. But let's state what are the purposes of such a selection. First to reduce the number of runners that can get in and secondly to make sure they can potentially finish the race. As argued earlier, this latter issue has been approached so far by a weak races reference method, which doesn't take into account the rest of the runner's background (mountainering, cycling, hiking, ...) neither his motivation. That's where the charity system seems to be the best in my opinion. It kills two birds with one stone (3). Indeed, you need to be motivated enough to raise funds before you enter the race. And it will clearly cut down the number of runners. Particularly the French ones, not used to such methods... On top of that, these places are usually free for the runner, and a good cause is served. The pending issues are to choose the charities and to find a way to avoid wealthy runners buying their ticket through the fundraising. For runners that are not particularly talented on fundraising, a ponderated ballot could be added, and places could be offered to previous races volunteers. On top of that, a pool of elite runners could be choosen by the organisers anyway. Well, that's pretty much the London Marathon entry system ...

So what actually will be the entry system ? I bid on a ballot-based method, although I'm not sure how they are going to manage it.

(1) Between 2005 and 2006, the time was divided by 15. Between 2006 and 2007 is was by about 33. Following the same double exponential progression leads to 9h50min/(33*(33/15)) = 8 minutes 8 seconds.
(2) Although the organisers said they will accept paper mail registrations sent on the day (08/01/06) for this year.
(3) Just an expression, I've got nothing against birds.

Ultra entry system.