Show HN: Will I run Boston 2025?

BHAG = big hairy audacious goal

https://www.jimcollins.com/concepts/bhag.html

> Boston has some kind of mythical status among marathoners. You're _not_ really there until you've qualified for Boston. I do not know where this comes from

It's literally because BQ is a tough target time. Even if you don't run Boston it's a mark you're in the top X% (X is a bit hard to calculate). So it's a status symbol. Just like 'Ivy League' or "D1 sport".

Similarly in the UK, it's the London qualifying time known as Good For Age or the more challenging 'Championship Place'.

And it's self-fulfilling. You get the time so you chose to run because you have it which keeps the time hard for others.

The race itself is, I'm told, a pain-in-the-ass because of the logistics but also the profile - despite being net-downhill it's got a nasty hill at mile 20. Plus with the race route being pretty much "26 miles straight, then hook a right", if there's a headwind, there's a headwind for 26 miles. If there's driving rain, it's in your face for 26 miles (see 2018's race).

(As an aside, there's a few tricks for the Abbot Majors to get places [aside from just buying one of the expensive guaranteed tour company places or being an elite runner])

Not a marathon runner but live in Boston and I have been told the route is fairly high difficulty due to hills in particularly challenging stretches. Not sure how true this is but one of my coworkers ran it competitively last year and he got wrecked by the elevation changes.

Here's a good roundup of the science for anyone who is curious -- https://www.doctorsofrunning.com/2020/04/footwear-science-ev...

My favorite part: "Despite all the evidence and research I have laid out above, it should be noted that only certain people seem to get benefits from the foams, carbon fiber plates and other technologies associated with these shoes. Research has come out just recently that the actual benefit derived from each subject varies greatly based on individual factors (Herbert-Losier et al., 2020). These performance changes can be as great as 10% (or more) in some people and for others may actually be detrimental. So as much as we talk about the percentages gleaned from the research suggesting how much certain elements contribute to changes in economy, remember that each person is unique in that effect."

I wish you luck, because I think this space is about to get a lot more crowded.

That said, I suspect that Strava and Apple (and likely even Google) have more data than Garmin. Maybe quality of data is lower (garmin is higher % athletes?).

There are a lot of companies planning or starting to tell you about fitness. Oura and Whoop and now Fitbit are happy to give you basic training readiness info. Google will help you plan runs, Apple will give you “training load”.

I’m not sure what your target market is, but don’t forget to look broadly. Garmin is favored for training athletes but fitbits and Apple Watches are favored for casual workouts. If you’re trying to train models on metabolic or other physiological training ability, don’t forget to look at non-athletes or early-athletes.

I used to live on beacon st in Brookline. Every year the marathon was a nightmare. Drunk people on my stoop. Trash everywhere. It was wicked cool to see the old timers and charity runners running even after it got dark. Would always give them a big cheer as they came by.

But that's for 2026 - the 2025 time qualifying time is 3:00.

Yes yes, discount the fact he'd just finished a battle and ran over 100 miles to get there in the first place.

> He ran about 240 km (150 mi) in two days, and then ran back. He then ran the 40 km (25 mi) to the battlefield near Marathon and back to Athens to announce the Greek victory over Persia in the Battle of Marathon (490 BC) with the word νικῶμεν (nikomen[8] "We win!"), as stated by Lucian chairete, nikomen ("hail, we are the winners")[9] and then collapsed and died.

But sure, it's the last 25 (50 given both ways) that really killed him, not the other 150 miles.

Yea, I think Cochrane decided that wasn't an adequate sample to include.

I'm not here to argue for not doing marathons. It's safer than walking out with a risk of thunder, its a bit less safe than walking by a bee hive.

I do note that every marathon runner I know (thats about 5) carries some burdens afterward above and beyond simple post-race injury: there is an effect on your health, it's multi-dimensional, and it goes on a while. They enjoyed the run so I guess it's a fair exchange. Knowing when to stop is part of the process I guess.