Joe Drake's Blog

Boston Marathon Elite Men’s start, taken from B.A.A. 129th Boston Marathon Results Book.

At the end of my last update on April 27, was the line:

Given the likely trend in 2026 cutoff time, I am anticipating keen interest in the upcoming downhills.

So true. But not quite the way I was expecting.

On June 16 the Boston Athletic Association (B.A.A.) announced a change that applies to applicants who use downhill qualifiers in their application to the Boston Marathon. Finish times from those races will be adjusted (‘indexed’) by an amount that depends on the net elevation drop of the course.

Qualifying times from courses having a net elevation drop of between 1,500 to 2,999 feet will be adjusted by five minutes. The adjustment will be ten minutes for races with a net elevation drop of between 3,000 and 5,999 feet. Courses with net elevation drops of 6,000 feet or greater will not be usable as Boston Marathon qualifiers.

The B.A.A.’s rationale for the change is to ensure that athletes running downhill qualifiers don’t gain an advantage over their fellow athletes.

This change will go into effect for the 2027 Boston Marathon. (Thus it is irrelevant for the 2026 race.) It will be in place for at least two years. The B.A.A. reserves the right to make additional adjustments in the future as they deem necessary.

Runners have been clamoring for the B.A.A. to do something about these downhill races for years now. This should appease them somewhat. But from my analysis, it will have minimal impact to future cutoff times. More on that later.

In that same press release, the B.A.A. set the registration period for the 2026 race to be from September 8 to September 12, 2025. For 2027, the qualifying period will begin on September 13, 2025. That is, unlike in previous years, there is no overlap between successive qualifying periods. The “double-dip” period wherein a single race could serve as a qualifier for two successive Boston Marathons, has been eliminated.

My BIB50 races include two downhills (REVEL Cottonwood and Tunnel Lite) that have been double dippers in the past. This time around only the 2024 running of these events can be included in my cutoff time projection.

Here are the final data for the BIB50 qualifiers comparing the 2026 Boston Marathon qualifying period to the 2025 qualifying period.

BIB50 Finisher and BQ data for 2024 and 2025 Boston Marathon Qualification Periods.

Let’s review the trends that I have highlighted in previous updates.

1. The interest in marathon running continues to soar.

The number of finishers to date of the BIB50 qualifiers this qualifying period rose to 438,751, an increase of 10.45% over the 397,244 BIB50 finishers during the qualifying period for the 2025 race.

2. The increase in marathon finishers was very nearly outpacing the effect of the tightening of the 2026 Boston Marathon qualification standards.

Refer to the numbers highlighted in yellow in the chart above.

The number of BQ’s in a qualifying period drives the number of applicants to the marathon which drives the cutoff time.

Using the old standards relevant to the 2025 qualifying period, there were 62,466 BQ’s from the BIB50 qualifiers for the 2025 Boston Marathon.

Now, with the tightened standards for the 2026 Boston Marathon, there are 58,875 BQ’s from the BIB50 qualifiers for the 2026 event.

As I have pointed out in my previous analyses, one might expect that the standards change would result in a drastic decrease in the number of BQ’s this time around. But in part due to the 10.45% increase in finishers, the number of BQ’s is down by only 5.75%.

Hence, the cutoff time for the 2026 race, though it will be lower than in 2025, will still be disappointing for any runner with a small cushion with respect to their qualifying standard.

3. For any given qualifier, race day weather is enormously influential.

The top four qualifiers for the 2025 Boston Marathon were Chicago, Boston, London, and Berlin. Each one of them had significantly different weather this time around and that was reflected in the number of BQ’s.

Chicago and London were hotter than the previous qualification period resulting in 5,166 fewer BQ’s. On the other hand, Berlin and Boston had much more favorable (i.e. cooler) running weather than the previous races. This resulted in 4,219 more qualified runners. Combine the results of these four majors and we have 947 fewer BQ’s this qualification period.

For fun let’s also consider New York City, also a major. The weather was brilliant at the 2024 race, much cooler than in 2023. The result was 476 more BQ’s.

Hence, the year-over-year net effect of these big hitters for Boston Marathon applications is a paltry decrease of 471 BQ’s, less than one percent of the total BIB50 BQ’s from last year.

The weather giveth and the weather taketh away.

I am predicting 34,301 qualified applicants for the 2026 Boston Marathon. This is a large number but well below the record number of applicants (36,393) last year.

I am going to assume that the B.A.A. will accept the same number of applicants in 2026 that were accepted in 2025. That number is 24,069. Using the same algorithm as I used in my earlier updates, my cutoff time estimate for 2026 becomes 5:41(5 minutes 41 seconds.) By comparison the cutoff time for the 2025 race was 6:51, a difference of 70 seconds.

The number of applicants that the B.A.A. will accept is a huge wildcard. Remember that for the 2024 Boston Marathon they accepted only 22,019 runners. The difference of 2,050 accepted runners translates to a cutoff time difference of 69 seconds. If the number of acceptances were to go that low then my cutoff estimate rises to 6:50 which is within a second of the 2025 cutoff time.

Would the B.A.A. tighten the standards only to also reduce the number of accepted applicants and thereby negate any decrease in the cutoff time?

Somehow, I doubt that they would jerk us around like that. I believe that the number will be closer to that of the 2025 race. But I can’t be certain of that. We will soon see.

As for the new downhill indexing policy.

The BIB50 qualifiers include 8 races that will be impacted by the new policy. One of them, REVEL Big Bear, was canceled during the 2026 qualification period due to a snow storm. The remaining downhills yielded 2,229 BQ’s that were included in my above analysis.

When the new downhill indexing policy is put into place it will effectivly decrease the BQ% of these downhill qualifiers. Applying that policy to the 2026 qualifying period decreases the number of BQ’s from the BIB50 downhills by 43.2% to 1,266.

This is not a big effect. By my analysis, if the policy were in place for the 2026 race, the cutoff time would be 5:23.

The drop of 18 seconds in cutoff time is, of course, delightful for those additional runners now accepted into Boston. But it is not large enough to have a meaningful impact on the training and qualification strategy of any runner who is fretting over their ability to achieve the BQ standard.

Personally, I think this is a wise strategy on the part of the B.A.A. They have made a legitimate attempt to placate the athletes calling for action against runners who exploit the downhill marathon advantage. At the same time, when the numbers come out for the 2027 race, they will demonstrate that the vitriol against downhill qualifiers is a bit over-stated.

Let’s keep in mind what this is all about. We are talking about the most basic microeconomic principles: demand for Boston Marathon bibs vastly exceeds the supply. The supply is not likely to ever change. Short of another catastrophe like the pandemic, demand will always go up.

Think of the downhill qualifiers as an attempt by entrepreneurs to address the market opportunity created by the imbalance in supply and demand. Hinder that opportunity by placing a “tax” on the downhills and the market will adapt. Somehow.

Many of the races that are in the 1,500 to 2,999 feet elevation drop window will most likely modify their courses to slip under the 1,500 feet level to avoid the 5:00 index penalty. The REVELS with their 5,000+ foot elevation drops are going to have a hard time avoiding the penalty.

But other entrepreneurs will step in. As I have pointed out before, race day weather is a huge influence on runners’ performance. It is far more significant than elevation drop. I fully expect that qualifiers will come on line touting near-ideal weather conditions, either natural or man-made.

The California International Marathon (CIM) already has a head start. Northern California weather in early December has been consistently near optimal for marathoning. And CIM is a net downhill that won’t get indexed because its net elevation drop is only 366 feet.

But would Boston hopefuls pay big bucks to enter a race that boasts Qatar-like course refrigeration or plentiful cooling misters or air conditioning intended to increase the odds of a PR or BQ?

Yes, some would.

What about super-cooling suits (think: Dune) that runners could wear to keep their core temperature under control?

That technology is already in the works.

Will there be an outcry about runners taking advantage of such strategies?

Oh, absolutely.

Will the B.A.A. step in if the whining gets deafening?

Probably. Eventually. We have precedence. The B.A.A. has now unleashed a new normal of vigilance. It is no longer just performance enhancing drugs that raise an eyebrow.

Then again, there is a brave new world of Climate Change headed our way. Maybe the demand for Boston Marathon bibs will decrease when Boylston Street is under water.

[image error]

Thriving with Parkinson’s Disease, Fri Sept 19, 2:00–2:30pm PDT

Image provided by Medium.

In 2018, just before turning 57, I was diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease (PD). That diagnosis changed my life — for the better.

There is no cure for Parkinson’s. But there is hope. Vigorous exercise has been clinically proven to slow its progression. I embraced that treatment immediately upon my diagnosis. It has served me extremely well.

I chose running as my go-to therapy. I ran my first marathon at age 58. Ever since, I have enjoyed a steady stream of running adventures and achievements. I have met some extraordinary people, many of whom face challenges far beyond mine.

I have written about my adventures on my Medium blog and in my first book. I speak to groups about my experiences. When approached by individuals newly diagnosed with PD, I am eager to share what I have learned in hopes that they will benefit from my approach.

I have been told that I have inspired more people than I know about.

The folks at Medium appreciate my perspective. Hence, they selected me as a speaker at Medium Day 2025. My session, “Thriving with Parkinson’s disease,” is on Friday, September 19 at 2:00 to 2:30 pm PDT. I would be thrilled to have you with me during this session. Registration and details can be found at www.mediumday.com. Clicking on “Join Lobby” will take you to a page that allows you to search through all the sessions.

This year’s theme is “Just Start Writing.” The theme resonates with me. Parkinson’s disease pushed me into writing. For a primer, here is a link to my first blog post on Medium.

You are living the story now, write it down.

Everybody faces challenges. Embrace them and turn them into adventures through your writing. Your perspective can be a comfort to others learning to cope with similar situations.

Your challenge, and how you have managed it, can inspire others to thrive. Write it down.

Medium Day is a free, day-long virtual writing festival that brings together writers of all backgrounds for a celebration of creativity and connection dedicated to the act of “just writing it.”

[image error]

Photo by the author.

As I mentioned in December, I was waiting for the results of the 2025 Boston and London marathons to update my prediction for the 2026 Boston Marathon cutoff time.

Boston and London are two of the heavy hitter qualifiers that drive the number of applications to the following Boston marathon. They are usually cited by the B.A.A. as among the top 5 qualifiers.

Once again, I have tabulated the results from the BIB50 qualifiers (the top 50 North American qualifiers plus Berlin and London) that have completed to date. Here is a brief summary that compares the current qualification period to the previous qualification period (i.e. the one that fed last week’s Boston Marathon.)

Finisher and BQ data for September to late April Boston Qualification Periods.

Let’s review the data in terms of the trends observed so far this qualification period, which I highlighted in my November and December predictions.

1. The interest in marathon running continues to soar.

The number of finishers to date of the BIB50 qualifiers this qualifying period rose to 392,567 an increase of 11% over the qualifying period for this year’s race.

2. The increase in marathon finishers was very nearly outpacing the effect of the tightening of the 2026 Boston Marathon qualification standards.

Look at the numbers highlighted in yellow in the above chart.

To date there have been 54,205 BQ’s among the BIB50 qualifiers as evaluated against the new standards imposed by the B.A.A. (5 minutes tighter for all runners younger than 60 years old, no change for runners 60 years old and older.) This compares to 56,859 BQ’s for the same time period the previous year evaluated using the older standards, a drop of only 4.67%.

That 11% increase in finishers mentioned previously offsets some of the standards change. To date the number of BQ’s generated is down by less than 5%. That is a larger dropoff than what I reported in November, which was 2.98%. Yet it is still a small change in the face of a tightening of the qualification standards.

The number of BQ’s drives the number of applicants which drives the cutoff time.

For some perspective, the BQ’s generated and the BQ rate for the current qualification period as evaluated against the old standards is also shown. The BQ rate hasn’t changed that much, 16.80% this year compared to 16.08% last year.

This means that, on the whole, runners have not gotten appreciably faster year over year when evaluated against the old qualification standards.

3. For any given qualifier, race day weather is enormously influential.

In the 2023 race, the weather in Boston was nearly ideal for runners. As a result, the BQ rate was an amazing 52%. Historically, the BQ rate for Boston is in the mid 30% range, which is where it was for the hotter 2024 race (~38%).

Last week, the ideal weather returned to Boston and the BQ rate was 52% again when evaluated against the old qualification standards. Adjusting for the new standards, the BQ rate was 45%. This is still quite high compared to historical results.

London went in the other direction. It was hot this year along the Thames. The number of BQ’s dropped considerably but by a smaller amount than the increase in Boston BQ’s.

On a side note, the Carmel Marathon was cancelled this year due to the presence of thunderstorms in the area.

Using these data and estimates for the remainng BIB50 races taking into account historical and current finisher rate trends, I am predicting between 34,513 and 35,540 applicants for the 2026 Boston Marathon. This compares to 36,393 applicants for last week’s race.

I assume the same number of accepted applicants in 2026 as was the case for last week’s race, hence 24,069. Using the same algorithm as I used in November and December, a review of the BIB50 data to date suggests a 2026 cutoff time in the range of 5:49 to 6:23 (6:06 +/- 0:17) compared to from the 4:18 to 6:36 (5:27 +/- 1:09) reported in December.

Of course, if fewer applicants are accepted the cutoff time will increase. Remember that for the 2024 race only 22,019 applicants were accepted. A change of 1800 accepted applicants changes the cutoff time by about a minute.

The tighter range of the current prediction reflects that only a few of the BIB50 races remain and none of them have anywhere near the impact of Chicago, Boston, London, Berlin, or CIM (last year’s top 5 qualifiers.)

There are 15 remaining qualifiers in my BIB50 collection for the current qualification period. Perhaps fewer if some of them don’t make it into the double-dip weekend as was the case with Big Cottonwood last year. Downhill races are prominent among these remaining qualifiers.

Given the likely trend in 2026 cutoff time, I am anticipating keen interest in the upcoming downhills.

[image error]

Para Athlete Start of the 2025 Boston Marathon (photo courtesy of the author)

Two days before the marathon, I chatted with fellow Para Athlete Thomas Cantara while we waited for the start of the Boston 5K. Like the marathon, the 5K is put on by the Boston Athletic Association (B.A.A.)

A man approached. He greeted Thomas and wished him well in his race.

That man looked familiar. Thomas told me that it was Jack Fleming, the President and CEO of the B.A.A.

I want to let that sink in because I did not fully grasp it at the time. The head of the organization that puts on the prestigious Boston Marathon, who is arguably the world’s most powerful person involved in marathons, took the time to visit with athletes during his busiest weekend and greeted a Para Athlete by name and offered words of support.

This simple gesture indicates the impressive level of commitment that the B.A.A. has made towards the broader running community.

While many organizations in the United States, given the current political turmoil, have been backing off from DEI (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion) initiatives, the B.A.A. has not wavered.

All told, the Wheelchair, Duo, Handcycle, Adaptive, and Para Athlete designations accommodated 300 athletes in the 2025 Boston Marathon.

That is about 1% of the field. Yet, it is a meaningful carve-out for a race that limits the field size to 30,000 runners. Some of the other Majors (e.g. London, Berlin, Chicago, and New York City) relentlessly pursue the title of “World’s Largest Marathon” and have exceeded well over 50,000 finishers. In a few years, some of them will grow beyond 60,000 finishers.

Despite their phenomenal growth, none of the others make the broad inclusivity effort for impaired runners that Boston does.

Taylor Wilson manages the Adaptive and Para Athlete programs within the B.A.A. This includes the races of the Boston Distance Medley (5K, 10K, Half Marathon) as well as the Marathon.

I asked Taylor whether there was pressure on the B.A.A. to scale back their diversity and inclusion efforts. Taylor dismissed that idea and pointed out that the B.A.A. has a steady history of inclusivity. Adaptive runners participated as far back as 1986, the Para Athlete Division started in 2021, and in 2022, the race accepted Non-binary runners. This year marks the 50th anniversary of the Wheelchair division.

In addition, Taylor mentioned some newer initiatives such as course features and signage to support deaf runners and lactation stations in the Athlete’s Village and in the Finish Area.

An entry into the Boston Marathon is a hot commodity. Many would-be runners are rather vocal about the difficulty of gaining entry. Surely there is some pressure to limit the number of runners with impairments?

Taylor said there is likely to be a limit but she has never encountered it. On the contrary, she actively recruits more athletes. She has a habit of handing her business card to anyone who appears to be a good fit for the Adaptive and Para programs.

I asked if the other majors showed any interest in following the lead of Boston. Taylor believes that Chicago might come around. That may be in part due to Chicago and Boston sharing the same main sponsor (Bank of America).

She also suggested the possibility of expanding the number of Para Divisions. A total of 18 Para classifications are supported by the B.A.A. These classifications are combined into seven divisions. If need be, classifications can be separated out to make more divisions.

Of course, word of mouth helps too. Last year was the first for the T35-T38 division. Then, only myself and three women were entered. We all helped to publicize it and this year we had three women again and seven men.

There’s a quote that is variously attributed to Socrates, Robin Williams, Ian MacLaren, and others:

“Everyone you meet is fighting a battle you know nothing about. Be kind. Always.”

One way to express kindness is to learn of other’s battles.

In Copley Square on Friday, I approached a double amputee, Cedric King. He told me that he lost his legs in Afghanistan. He had two tours there and another in Iraq. Cedric has competed in Boston several times after losing his legs, sometimes in a wheelchair, sometimes using a handcycle. This year would be his second one running. “Running it,” he said, “was what made me feel as if I truly came back.”

Cedric is a humble man. He might have told me more about himself. I googled him and found that he is a popular speaker on the subject of resilience, has written a book “The Making Point” about his journey, and last year was featured on the popular Abbot World Marathon Majors podcast “Marathon Talk”.

Honestly, in Boston on Marathon Weekend, one can’t cast a glance without it landing on a hero.

I met Lisa Bostick at a Friday dinner meetup. She was walking with a cane so I asked her about it. An assault at her workplace left her with a traumatic brain injury (TBI). Her brain and eyes don’t communicate with each other well. Peripheral vision is poor so she runs with two guides.

We crossed paths again the next day after she attended the annual gathering of the Black Unicorns held at the Reggie Lewis Track and Athletic Center (RLTAC) of Roxbury Community College. The Black Unicorns celebrate and connect the few hundred people of color who run in the Boston Marathon. People of color are under-represented in marathons and this is not just in Boston.

In 1921, Roxbury Community College was designated a Predominantly Black Institution. Last October, the B.A.A. announced that they would be investing more than $1 Million in a partnership with Roxbury Community College to advance athletic programming and opportunities at the RLTAC.

The Adaptive and Para Athletes gathered early race morning at the Sheraton Hotel. Buses queued outside to take us to Hopkinton.

While waiting to board the buses, I sat next to a runner, Danny Bucklew, and struck up a conversation. By coincidence, I happened to sit next to another runner in my Para division.

A few weeks before the race, the B.A.A. published their Entry List. There were four runners in my division, T35-T38. But I knew that this list was incomplete because it was likely that some Adaptive athletes would attempt classification into the Para Divisions during marathon weekend. This is what I did last year.

Adaptive and Para runners have many of the same perks: the coach bus ride to the start, dedicated holding tents in Hopkinton and at the Finish Line area, and transport of gear from Hopkinton to the finish.

Para Athletes have it better. We get our own start time at 9:50 am shortly after the elite women are sent off. And the top three finishers in the Para divisions earn prize money. There are no prizes for the Adaptive athletes and they start in the back of the first wave of qualifiers. Hence, most of us would prefer to be Para Athletes if possible. Taylor Wilson always makes the effort to have classification available during marathon weekend.

T35-T38 is assigned to athletes with “Coordination Impairment.” Several conditions, typically involving brain or spinal column afflictions, may qualify.

Danny Buckelew has Multiple Sclerosis (MS). He used to be a devoted soccer player but switched primarily to running after his diagnosis. He entertained me with stories of his friend, Bill Rodgers, the Boston Marathon legend. Wow!

I asked Danny to watch my bag while I greeted other friends. Meanwhile, Danny went to use the toilet and when he came back our seats had been taken by another runner who didn’t speak English.

I recognized him. It was Giacomo Grillo, another runner with MS running in our division. Giacomo and I raced in the Boston 5K two days earlier where he finished second to me. T35-T38 must really be getting big if everywhere I turn there is another one of us.

Before the race, at the Sheraton and later in Hopkinton, I caught up with some friends I had met over the years either in person or virtually.

Jeff Lampe lost his leg in a motorcycle accident. He competes in Para Olympics skeleton races, which is like luge but face first. Last year he ran Boston and, six days later, the London Marathon.

My friend Carita Wegner from Salem suggested that I say hello to John Young, a runner of short stature. For some perspective, my marathon would require about 40,000 steps. John said he needed about 75,000.

Lisa Maciel got in touch with me in January with questions about Para classification. I helped her get in touch with Taylor Wilson. She lost her left fibula to bone cancer. The disease also damaged her right arm. She might have classified with either impairment but the arm was a bigger problem so she went with T46, upper body impairment. She won that division.

Bryon Solberg is an anomaly. Born without an odontoid bone, a condition that usually leads to early death. But at age 63 he continues to compete in marathons.

Cedric King greeted me enthusiastically as he was preparing to strap on his racing blades.

I met Jamie Bryson in person for the first time. We have been on Zoom calls together. Jamie started “The Parkinson’s Fight Club” Facebook group that advises and encourages people with Parkinson’s to stay active. He got the group of runners with Parkinson’s together for a group photo that included both of us and Cristina Burbach, Craig Revie, Greg Schaefer, Joe Barret, and Rune Bjerke (from Norway).

Cristina won the Women’s T35-T38 division last year and repeated this year. Craig ran in the Adaptive division last year and was classified for the Para Division this time. Both Jamie and Greg received the T35-T38 classification but opted to run as Adaptives.

The Para Athlete tent is in the Hopkinton town common away from the teeming Athlete’s Village. The elite runners have a tent there as well. Ash Street, adjacent to the common, is closed off from vehicle traffic to allow the athletes to prepare for the race.

Best warm up ever. I exchanged a fist bump with Paula Radcliffe, former world record holder, who had come out of retirement to earn her Abbott World Marathon Major Six Star medal in today’s race. I got a glimpse of Des Linden, a local fan favorite and winner of the 2018 race, who announced that this would be her last Boston as she enters retirement. I also met Sara Vaughn. Sara would go on to finish 20th in the race.

Heady stuff. But I decided that I should stop being a nusisance and let these ladies prepare for their race.

It was cooler this year than last. That made a big difference, the heat can be very dangerous during a marathon. I did not witness any on-course emergency medical procedures this time. As usual the route was lined with hundreds of thousands of enthusiastic spectators. Crowd support is one reason to keep coming back to Boston.

Support came from other runners as well. Para athletes wear their bib numbers on their backs as well as on their chests. The back facing bib warns faster runners to exercise caution when passing. It also appears to ellicit empathy. I heard many times “Looking good, P125”, “You got this!”, or “Keep it up!” as runners passed me.

Several very fast friends from Seattle, where I live, also greeted me on the course. Griffin Miller, Huy Son, and Peter Vosshall all chatted briefly as they flew by.

One runner yelled out, “Hey Alki Beach!” The Alki Beach trail in West Seattle is a popular spot for workouts and I often train there. I don’t know who that runner was but apparently he recognized me most likely from my trademark pink socks. We will certainly meet before too long.

It is surreal that despite the many runners easily outdistancing me, I was nonetheless in a contest for a division championship.

In all my previous marathons, I have never raced anyone. My competition had always been the clock and my own limitations.

Last year I was Champion of the Men’s T35-T38 Division only because I ran unopposed. This time I was competing against other runners.

I did not know the full extent of my competition. There could be others besides Danny Buckelew who were newly placed in the division.

I had an idea that Giacomo would be someone to watch out for. For much of the race I must have held a slight lead on him. Through the halfway point I ran at about a nine minute per mile pace. But the wheels started to come off shortly afterwards. He passed me just shy of the 22 mile mark.

I didn’t have much left in the tank but I decided to keep up with him until the end. The finish line was only a few miles away. We jockeyed back and forth a few times. He spoke to me on passing once. I could not understand his Italian though I suspected that he was asking if I was “Drake”, the guy he raced in the 5K on Saturday.

I passed him again at about 23 miles.

My championship last year was a fluke. I wanted to win it for real this time. This would likely be my last chance. I am not fast and the division is growing. If I ever compete in it again it would almost certainly be as an also-ran.

But I was fading and, frankly, not sure if there was someone in front of us who may have already taken the title. All I could do at that point was run as hard as I was able and hope for the best.

It was painful but I opened up a 3 minute lead on Giacomo. I checked the tracking app after crossing the finish line and found that I came in first.

The effort took a toll. Wobbling to the Para finish area tent, several volunteers and medics asked me if I needed help. I just smiled, waved them off, and stumbled into the tent.

I greeted Giacomo there. Though we didn’t share a language we were able to get some concepts across.

He pointed to me. “Drake?” he asked. I nodded.

“Primo?” I nodded again and pointed to him. “Secondo,” I said.

He made a face of mock exasperation and lightly swatted my head.

I figured that, with the language barrier, he might not know the routine for claiming his second place award. I showed him a photo of me holding the 5K trophy and pantomimed that he should follow me to the Sheraton Hotel where the awards were given out.

When we got there he called his wife, Clarita, and then handed me his phone. I directed Clarita to the Sheraton where she served as our translator.

Giacomo was diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis in 2011. This race was his 158th marathon or ultramarathon since his diagnosis. Amazing.

Giacomo insisted that we have a photo taken together. We now follow each other on Facebook and Strava. My daughter, Kinsey, who is fluent in Italian commented to him on a Facebook post, ”Giacomo Grillo, credo di aver trovato l’edizione italiana del mio papà.” (I think I’ve found the Italian edition of my dad.)

It is a small world. I suspect we will meet again. Giacomo is a competitor. No doubt he is eager to even the score next year. I have youth on my side though. At 66, Giacomo is two years older than me.

Giacomo (left) and I with our trophies (photo by Clarita Reali)[image error]

Update to my November prediction for the 2026 Boston Marathon Cutoff Time and “What’s the deal with those older runners?”Retrieved from baa.org

On November 22, I posted my first analysis of the 2026 Boston Marathon cutoff time. Twenty of the BIB50 races had been completed by then.

Since then, four more BIB50 qualifiers have taken place — Philadelphia, CIM, Honolulu, and Dallas. In the November analysis, I made observations regarding trends shown in the earlier qualifier data. Below, I will update those trends for the new data and revisit my cutoff time projection.

1. The interest in marathon running continues to soar.

Year over year the number of finishers for the first twenty BIB50 qualifiers increased by more than 17%. That trend has cooled off some.

The combined number of finishers for these last four races was down by almost 5% since 2023.

Most surprising was CIM. Typically one of the top five qualifiers for Boston with robust annual growth, CIM saw an 11% decline in finishers this year.

The recent data pushes the year over year increase in the 24 BIB50 finishers to date down to 13.5%.

Does this suggest that we should expect a further deceleration of marathon finishers for the remaining 2026 Boston Marathon qualification period?

Probably not. Interest in marathoning still remains absurdly high as is evidenced by the recent news from Chicago. The Chicago Marathon reported that 160,000 runners applied for its 2025 race, a jump of 33% from 2024.

Still, the 13.5% aggregate growth rate in finishers year over year is more sustainable than the 17% seen a month ago. I will use the 13.5% for this update to the cutoff time prediction.

2. The increase in marathon finishers was very nearly outpacing the effect of the tightening of the 2026 Boston Marathon qualification standards.

The BAA dropped the 2026 qualification standards by five minutes for all runners under 60 years old (more about this peculiarity later). However, that change did not cause the large drop in qualified 2026 Boston potential applicants as expected. For the first 20 BIB50 qualifiers given the significant increase in finishers, the number of BQ’s by 2026 standards was down by only 3% from those same qualifiers a year ago based on the 2025 standards.

Philly, CIM, Honolulu, and Dallas did not maintain that trend in finishers. Including these races the total number of BIB50 qualified potential applicants is down by 6.6%. This is the number that most influences the cutoff time.

Using the same algorithm as I used in November, a review of the BIB50 data to date suggests a 2026 cutoff time in the range of 4:18 to 6:36 (5:27 +/- 1:09) down from the 4:45 to 7:15 (6:00 +/- 1:15) reported earlier.

Hence, if the current trends hold, we could still be looking at a cutoff time in the 5 minute range on top of the 5 minute drop in qualification standards. But the likelihood of third consecutive record number of applicants has diminished.

One other thing related to the November analysis:

3. For any given qualifier, race day weather is enormously influential.

The earlier analysis mentioned that ideal race day temperatures in Berlin and New York City drove up the BQ rates — referenced to the 2025 standards — in those two marathons this year. These races are huge. Each had more than 50,000 finishers.

These last four races are smaller. Amongst them, the largest contributer of BQ’s is CIM — 2,163 BQ’s this year (2026 standards) — and its temperature and 2025 BQ rate were similar to last year. Likewise, Honolulu did not move much since 2023. Both Philly and Dallas were hotter this year and their 2025 referenced BQ rates dropped slightly.

Assuming that the BAA allows the same number of entrants in 2026 as in 2025 (~24,000), weather remains the big wildcard influencing the cutoff time. Race day temperature in Boston on April 21 and in London on April 26 will determine whether we are at the high or the low end of the predicted cutoff time range.

Some have wondered about the BAA decision to keep the 2025 standards in place for runners over 60 years old while lopping five minutes off the qualifying time for all younger runners. Why the special treatment for the seniors?

I can’t answer that question as I prefer not to judge the intentions of the BAA. But I can provide some perspective.

For the first 24 BIB50 races of this qualifying period, runners over 60 years old accounted for only 6.41% of the total number of finishers. In the 2024 Boston Marathon, 11.2% of the finishers were from this demographic. Compared to the 2020 census, which reports that 20.6% of the U.S. population was older than 62, these numbers are small.

I am in this group. Cut us some slack. The bucket list is of special significance to older folk.

I re-ran my analysis assuming that the five minute tightening of the qualification standards applied across all ages. Using that lens, and given the tiny number of BQ’s from 60+ runners, the effect of the BAA’s qualification change is on the order of 18 seconds.

Thus, by my current analysis, five minutes across the board would mean a cutoff time of 5:09 +/- 1:09 compared to 5:27 +/- 1:09 with the standards as the BAA set them.

In other words, if my analysis is correct, a 60-year-old would need a qualifying time of 3:39:51 (3:45:00 less 5:09) if the five minutes were across the board and 3:44:33 (3:50:00 less 5:27) as is.

I like to compare it to Social Security. The younger crowd subsidizes their elders. Thank you for that.

[image error]

Retrieved from baa.org.

After two straight years of record applications for the iconic Boston Marathon, the Boston Athletic Association (BAA) tightened the qualification standards for the 2026 race by five minutes for all runners younger than 60. The standards for runners 60 years old and older were left unchanged.

Runners had been expecting the standards change ever since a cutoff time of 5 minutes 29 seconds (5:29) was imposed for the 2024 race. Yet the BAA left the same standards in place for another year resulting in an even longer — 6 minutes 51 seconds (6:51) — cutoff time for 2025.

It is reasonable to assume that the stricter standards will result in fewer qualified applicants for the Boston 2026 and, hence, a significantly shorter cutoff time. However, based on my review of qualifier data, that may not be where we are headed.

As always, predicting the cutoff time begins with an estimate for the number of qualified runners who will apply to run in Boston.

For my predictions, I look at trends in the number of finishers and BQ rates (percentage of finishers who meet their Boston qualification standard) of my “BIB50” qualifiers. The BIB50 includes the top North American Boston qualifiers plus London and Berlin. These races have accounted for roughly 60% of all entrants to the Boston Marathon. My assumption is that trends seen in the BIB50 are representative of the applicant pool as a whole.

One trend is clear and it is not so surprising: Interest in running marathons continues to soar.

As of November 16, twenty of the BIB50 races had completed, the last one being the Richmond Marathon.

During last year’s 2025 Boston Marathon qualifying period, these twenty events yielded 192,527 finishers. In the current, 2026 qualifying period, that number rose by over 17% to 225,492 finishers.

What really matters, though, is the number of BQs that are achieved. It gets interesting here. The chart below compares data from the current qualification period to the relevant portion of the 2025 qualification period*.

Finisher and BQ data for September to mid-November Boston Qualification Periods.

The chart shows that these twenty qualifiers yielded 27,817 BQs during the 2025 qualification period, a BQ rate of 14.45%. Judging by the 2025 standards, those same races in the current qualification period created 33,637 BQs. The BQ rate for the current period was 14.92%, not much different than the prior year. In aggregate for these qualifiers and judged by the same standards, runners are not getting significantly faster.

But the 2025 standards no longer apply. Adjusting for the current standards the BQ rate drops by nearly 20% to 11.97% and the number of BQs generated was 26,989.

This is an important point. Though the BQ rate dropped as expected, the number of BQs — the factor that drives applications to the 2026 Boston Marathon — is nearly the same, a mere 3% drop.

To be clear, the increased interest in marathoning as evidenced by a large increase in finishers, is very nearly outpacing the effect of the tighter standards.

It is still early in the qualification period for the 2026 Boston Marathon. There are some major hitters on deck — CIM, Boston, and London — and there is no guarantee that the current trend in marathoning popularity will persist through the rest of the cycle.

Indeed, there is another major effect that is worth noting: For any given qualifier, race day weather is enormously influential.

Here’s an example:

Berlin was one of the top five Boston Qualifiers for 2025. According to the BAA, 809 runners used their 2023 Berlin finish time to get into next April’s race. Berlin is well known for being a fast, flat course where world records are frequently set. In 2023, Berlin generated 7,559 BQs.

On race day in 2023, the temperature at the start was 55 degrees (F) and eventually rose to the high 60’s. I ran that race, it was hot. I had some trouble near the end as did many other runners.

The temperature at the start of this September’s Berlin Marathon was 48 degrees. It got a touch hotter — mid 50’s — as the day wore on. Spectators may have felt a chill but these are heavenly conditions for marathoners.

The average finish time in the hotter 2023 Berlin Marathon was 4:11:48. In 2024, seven degrees cooler, it was 4:02:11. Nearly 10 minutes faster! 8,790 runners BQ’d in 2024 Berlin to the new tighter standards.

Let that sink in.

Many more runners (1,231) BQ’d on the same course despite the stricter standards for those under age 60. Temperature makes that much of a difference.

You might think some other factor, like super shoes, might be at play here. Maybe. But I suspect that the effect of the super shoe revolution has approached saturation. Few serious runners are not racing in them. Weather conditions will overwhelm the best of shoes.

For example, I have run all of my 16 Majors in super shoes and have managed sub-4 hours only once — in 2023 Boston when the temperature throughout the race was 48 degrees, similar to Berlin’s conditions this year.

In projecting the results of the rest of the current qualification period, it is tempting to apply the 17% increase in finishers seen until now.

That approach fails sanity checking. Each of the remaining qualifiers has their own character that need be considered. The number of Boston Marathon finishers, for example, will never change by much given its fixed field size.

Rather, I reviewed historical data for each of the remaining BIB50 races and developed low and high estimates for the number of BQs that will come from them. This approach takes into account both established growth trends and race day conditions for each qualifier.

Combined with the qualifier data to date, I foresee between 56,224 and 63,998 total BQs for the BIB50 races.

Not all BQs become applications to run Boston. Using the same ratio as was seen for the 2025 qualification period, I arrive at between 32,610 and 37,119 applications for 2026 Boston. This compares to the record 36,393 applications received for 2025 Boston.

To get from applications to a cutoff time requires some insight into the distribution of BQs with respect to BQ margin. The graphs below helps with that perspective.

BQ Margin data for September to mid-November Boston Qualification Periods.

The graphs depict the distribution in BQ margin for the 2025 qualification compared to the current period. Both take into account the standards relevant to their qualification period.

The two graphs are very similar. There is a small increase in density near the zero margin point for the current period but not enough to act upon. Hence, a good first approximation is to assume that the distribution of BQ margin for the 2026 race will be close to what we had for 2025, that is, about 30 runners/second. I am also assuming that the number of accepted runners will be close to the 24,069 accepted for 2025.

Extrapolating from these data, I am projecting a 2026 Boston Marathon cutoff time between 4:45 and 7:15, or 6:00 +/- 1:15 (referenced to the new tighter standards.)

In addition to maintaining the surge of marathon popularity, to reach the high end of that cutoff range requires ideal conditions throughout the rest of the qualification period. Climate change suggests that more difficult, warmer conditions — and fewer applications — are more likely. Nevertheless, something like a five minute cutoff time on top of the five minute standards change is a distinct possibility.

Last year at about this time I made my first prediction for the 2025 Boston cutoff time. Later on as more results came in I provided updates.

My initial estimates for 2025 followed a line of thought similar to what I describe above. They turned out to be fairly accurate. Therefore, I am comfortable using this approach again.

For 2025 Boston, my later updates employed a Utilization Rate model. That model projected the cutoff time by predicting the number of applicants from each qualifier race based on the prior year applications. That model didn’t work very well. It did not allow for a year over year increase in utilization rate. Thus, my later predictions last year underestimated the cutoff time significantly.

I expect to update my prediction in April after 2025 Boston and hope to have the bugs worked out of my Utilization Rate model by then. If I can’t improve on last year’s Utilization Rate model, I will stick with the above approach for the April update.

*These races occur from September at the start of the qualification period to mid-November after conclusion of the Richmond Marathon. Although both periods include 21 BIB50 races, each of them had a weather-related race cancellation. For Boston 2025, Twin Cities was cancelled due to excessive heat and for Boston 2026, REVEL Big Bear was cancelled due to snow.

[image error]

An even deeper dive into the Cutoff Time for the 2025 Boston Marathon and the behavior of marathonersAcquired from www.baa.org.

Since last December, I have posted to this blog with my predictions for the cutoff time for the 2025 Boston Marathon. My most recent post in June introduced the concept of “Utilization Rate” for a Boston Marathon qualifier race.

Utilization rate (UR) is the percentage of runners achieving the Boston Marathon qualifying standard in a qualifying race who then use that result to apply for entry into the Boston Marathon. Many runners who BQ do not end up using that result to apply for Boston. The desire to use the BQ for Boston varies widely among the various qualifying marathons.

Some very large influential marathons like London have a surprisingly low UR. Others, like those who market themselves as BQ-generators (read: the downhill marathons), have a high UR.

In that June post, I also introduced the BIB Index (“Bring It Boston!” Index) wherein I look at the data from 50 top qualifiers (the BIB50) to predict the Boston Marathon cutoff time. By identifying individual runners in the 2024 Boston Marathon entry list and the qualifying race they used on their Boston application, I am able to assign UR’s to all the BIB50 qualifiers.

Those 50 races represent 62% of all entries to the 2024 Boston Marathon. There are more than 470 additional qualifiers that were used for entry. In aggregate they account for 38% of the entries yet none of them on their own are very influential. Hence, I am comfortable that trends identified in the BIB50 represent the qualifier world as a whole.

Prodded by reader comments and a restless mind, I felt the urge to reconcile the BIB with other trends being discussed. Specifically, there has been a lot of anxiety about the following:

The total number of BQ’s for all qualifier races has increased year over year.Finish times for many marathons are trending faster.

Either of these trends would push the 2025 cutoff time higher. All things being equal, together they represent a serious risk to those who aspire to run Boston next April.

Although these trends are real, and they will influence the 2025 cutoff time, they don’t tell the whole story. The main point of my June post is that not all BQ’s are created equal. What really matters is the finish times of the likely applicants to Boston. The overall trends in BQ numbers and finish times have to be sampled judiciously in order to determine how they ultimately affect the cutoff time.

I have been obsessing about this point all summer.

With the data I have collected, I should be able to arrive at an algorithm that takes into account UR to re-construct the scenario that forced the B.A.A. to establish last year’s 5:29 cutoff time.

An algorithm that matches the 2024 cutoff time to within a few seconds would be a compelling sanity check. I could then apply that same algorithm to the qualifier data of the current qualifying period to predict the 2025 cutoff time with high confidence.

That goal was elusive. That is until today, the eve of the double-dip qualifier weekend.

I have always maintained that in addition to identifying the number of applicants to Boston, a model must be able to describe the mathematical distribution of the cutoff margin times. In the case of re-creating the 2024 cutoff time, the model must be consistent with the distribution data published by the B.A.A.:

During the registration period, the breakdown of accepted Qualifiers was as follows:

6,182 Qualifiers met their qualifying time by 20 minutes, 00 seconds or more.8,858 Qualifiers met their qualifying time by between 10 minutes, 00 seconds and 19 minutes, 59 seconds.6,979 Qualifiers met their qualifying time by between 05 minutes, 29 seconds and 9 minutes, 59 seconds.11,039 qualifier applicants were unable to be accepted into the 128th Boston Marathon.

My original idea was to use the UR that I calculated in June to sample the full set of unique BQ’s for each of the BIB50. If, for example, a qualifying race had a BQ of 50%, I would randomly sample 50% of the full set of cutoff margin times for that race. The sample then represents the finish times that would be submitted to the B.A.A. for acceptance to the Boston Marathon. Do this operation across all the BIB50 races to create an aggregated sample set of all applications to the Boston Marathon.

One sample would not be adequate. I would have to perform a Monte Carlo simulation wherein many such random sample sets were taken and the results aggregated to create the cutoff time estimate.

That approach failed. It overloaded the cutoff margin segments longer than 10 minutes thus driving up the predicted cutoff time.

The breakthrough observation was that the UR rate is not a constant across all finish times of a given qualifying race. Rather, it turns out, runners with longer cutoff times are less likely to apply to Boston than runners with shorter cutoff times.

The plots below demonstrate this effect. In each figure I plot the histogram of all of the BQ’s for a specific qualifying race (All BQ) on the same axes as I plot the histogram of cutoff times actually accepted into 2024 Boston (Accepted Entries).

The relative shape of the orange histograms compared to the blue histograms describe the phenomenon.

The table below summarizes the data for some of the larger qualifiers. The 2023 Boston Marathon represents an exception in that the UR is fairly constant across all cutoff margin segments. All the others show a distinct trend with higher utilization rates in the 5:29 to 9:29 range compared to the longer ranges.

My conclusion is that runners with larger cutoff margins are less likely to apply to the Boston Marathon. A higher percentage of applicants come from the ranks of runners who have smaller cutoff margins. These runners are the ones most interested in getting into Boston.

It is a window into the behavior of marathoners. Those runners who are ever so close to getting into Boston are the ones most likely to apply. Many runners who can get into Boston with ease don’t apply, for whatever reason.

This may not sit well with many of you. But it is a strong trend that holds up for all of the BIB50. And face it, if you are reading this, you are likely to be in that higher utilization rate group. That perspective causes bias. Perhaps you see all these faster finish time trends and you fear getting crowded out. That may happen, but the reasons for it are nuanced.

To be clear, I have already eliminated elites from my dataset and have filtered out the slower finish times for runners who have earned multiple BQ’s from more than one qualifier.

I apportion 62% of the available entry spots to BIB50 races and the remainder to the non-BIB50 races. I’ve confirmed that the BIB50 races uniformly represent ~62% of the applications across all BQ margin segments. Hence, those non-BIB qualifiers do not skew the BQ margin distribution. In the Monte Carlo simulation the cutoff time solutions converge rapidly.

My sanity check on the 2024 Boston Marathon dataset arrives at a cutoff time of 325 seconds (5:25), just 4 seconds off from the actual cutoff time.

Using that information as validation, I calculated the expected number of applications for the 2025 Boston Marathon. Despite the concerns raised above, I see a modest 4% increase in the number of applications compared to last year. Specifically, I anticipate 34,402 applicants for the 2025 race compared to 33,058 last year.

I then broke up the full set of BQ data each BIB50 qualifier into segments and randomly sampled them using the appropriate UR’s of each segment. Again, a Monte Carlo simulation was employed to aggregate a number of random samples to create the cutoff estimate.

Using the same number of accepted applicants as the B.A.A. allowed in 2024 for 2025 (22,019), I get a predicted cutoff time for 2025 of 371 seconds (6:11).

This raises an interesting point. The number of accepted applicants in 2024 was historically low. The B.A.A. could choose to raise that number closer to the historical range of 23,000 to 24,000. By my model, increasing the number of accepted applicants to just 23,000 would drop the cutoff time by 32 seconds to 339 seconds (5:39).

I suspect that is partly why the B.A.A. has resisted dropping the qualification standards by 5 minutes as so many of us have anticipated. They have this other tool at their disposal; the eventual standard change can wait.

I ran a few other combinations of the number of applications and the number of accepted applicants. My current best estimate for the 2025 Boston Marathon cutoff time is in the range of 330 to 375 seconds (5:30 to 6:15). Two BIB50 races have yet to occur (Erie Marathon at Presque Isle and The Tunnel Lite Marathon) but they are small races and I don’t believe they will move the needle much.

As always, comments are welcome. However, with the application period opening up next week we are in the “time’s up, game over” phase and we will have the real answer shortly.

[image error]

University of Washington’s Husky Stadium Plaza at 6:00 am Sunday September 1, 2024 (J. Drake photo)

I took Lyft to the Husky Stadium Plaza. My driver, Tony, asked if I worked at the University.

“No,” I said. “I’m going to run around Lake Washington.”

Tony took that news in stride. I was impressed. Maybe he does this often. Picks up folks at 5:30 am so they can get an early start on a 50 mile run around the lake.

We chatted amiably the rest of the way. Tony dropped me off a little before 6:00 and wished me luck.

I wanted an early start because the forecast called for temperatures into the 80's. With an early start, I would get in a few more miles before wilting.

My wife, Lynn, offered to get up early and drive me to the stadium but I declined. She would be meeting up with me later in the day. No need to mess with her morning.

I gave Lynn a printout of my route with checkpoints highlighted. I chose to run the Lake Washington Loop (LWL) counterclockwise from Husky Stadium. Navigation is easier going clockwise from the stadium because the first 10 miles is on the well-marked, pedestrian-friendly Burke-Gilman Trail. But I decided to save that part for the end of the day when my brain was likely to be muddled. Better to negotiate the trickier southern end of the lake in the morning when I still had some wits about me.

My thinking was spot on. Within a mile, I had already gone off course.

That error cost me an extra 100 feet or so of climbing but I was soon back on track.

Two weeks before, I did a different 50-miler. My Garmin had recorded a burn of ~5500 calories on the previous adventure. I wanted to carry on me close to that amount for the LWL in the form of carbs. I stuffed my hydration pack and waist belt with 22 Untapped Maple Syrup gel packets (2200 calories) and ten of my brown butter sugar cookies (2000 calories).

The maple syrup was chosen because it tends not to upset my stomach on long runs. As a liquid, it is digested quickly. I brought the cookies because they are delicious (the trick is to burn the butter, I mean really burn it, so that there are blackened specks of carmelized milk solids in the pan) and, likewise, have never caused gastrointestinal distress.

The hydration pack held two liters of water. I mixed into that three scoops of Tailwind Endurance Formula (another 300 calories). I also included four Zym electrolyte tablets in the water. Between the Tailwind and the Zym, I was carrying 2130 mg of sodium.

On a hot day like this I anticipated the need for as much as 10,000 mg of sodium for sweat replenishment. To top off my electrolytes I also carried another 50 SaltStick tablets (215 mg of sodium each). Overkill, perhaps. But the muscle cramps caused by inadequate sodium replenishment are nasty. Better to have and not need.

Two liters of water would not last much further than 15 or so miles. Refilling my pack along the way should not be a problem. If a water fountain couldn’t be found, I could always purchase bottled water somewhere.

Four weeks ago I did a 4x4x48 while fighting off a flare-up of sciatica. The sciatica pain had diminished greatly by the time I did the 50-miler two weeks ago. Yet, at the end of that first 50-miler, hip and knee pain forced me to walk much of the latter half of the challenge.

Expecting a return of hip and knee pain or other limitations, I planned a walk/run strategy. I would run 10 miles, walk 2, then repeat this sequence. I figured that this approach would be sustainable. It would be so nice to go 30 to 40 miles before being forced to walk the rest of the way.

All went according to plan at first. I hit the first four checkpoints on time (16.5 miles).

By 9:30, the temperature had risen to 70. I had run out of water and was drenched in sweat. Stopping at Gene Coulon Memorial Park in Renton, I refilled my hydration bag and doused myself at the water fountain.

Until then, the course had been on roads. Some of it was in seedier parts of Seattle at the southwestern end of the lake. After Gene Coulon, though, was the East Trail, a lovely five mile path along the eastern shore of the lake. I had not known of this trail beforehand. A welcome discovery.

I texted Lynn to let her know that although I was on schedule, I wasn’t going to be able to keep up the pace. The heat was getting to me. We had planned for this — she was tracking my cell phone.

Otto joined me for this stretch on the East Trail just as the familiar pain from two weeks ago returned. My left hip and knee were protesting.

“How about that?” said Otto. “Just like last time.”

I shushed Otto and decided to break up the running into smaller chunks. A mile run, a mile walk. That didn’t help much. The whining was getting louder, more insistent.

Otto piped in, “Maybe you should stop?”

“Fuck it,” I said. I was about 22 miles in and at the end of the East Trail. Not even half way and the run was over.

The Autonomic Nervous System (ANS) controls all functions of the body that don’t require deliberate thought. There are many such functions — sleep, digestion, temperature regulation, breathing, pain sensation, all the senses — the list goes on and on. The ANS keeps the machinery working.

There is evidence that Parkinson’s disrupts the workings of the autonomic nervous system (ANS) via damage to a part of the brain called the hypothalamus.

In the Central Governor Model, the brain, acting as the central governor, aims to maintain homeostasis. When the body is in danger of overexertion, the central governor steps in by limiting motor functions and restricting other resources. The central governor is the arbiter of fatigue, the ever-vigilant holder of the “STOP” sign.

Autonomic Nervous System. Central Governor. It has several names.

I call mine Otto.

Otto is a dipshit.

Damaged by Parkinson’s, it has become overprotective. Muscle cramps. Knee, hip, and back pain. These are all tools that Otto deploys to slow me down. And I do slow down, I have little choice but to obey. Otto is clueless indeed but is also powerful and persuasive.

As a result, I feel that I am prevented from reaching my potential.

I recover from marathons, ultra-marathons, and other ridiculous challenges faster than most runners I know. (This is my second 50-miler in two weeks, after all.) I think that is because Otto is way, way overdoing it. Like a mollycoddling parent, Otto prioritizes protecting me from harm at the expense of performance.

I think that Otto was behind my recent sciatica flare-up. Otto can quite literally be a pain in the ass.

How I wish that Otto would just ease up. Be not so quick to play the muscle cramp or hip pain or whatever cards it has in its hand.

Let me just run hard for a long time unimpeded. Allow me to trash myself for the sake of a respectable finish time. Afterwards, I’ll take off a month or so, flat on my back, to recover like a normal person.

I could still walk.

I chose 12 minute per mile as a conservative, sustainable running pace. When that plan went belly up, I resolved to walk as fast as possible. The best I could do was 16 to 18 minutes per mile.

Walking changes things. At the lower intensity, fat burn becomes efficient. All the carbs I was carrying had become dead weight. I had ample fat to see me through the rest of the loop.

Besides, the maple syrup and even my precious cookies had become a nauseating turn-off. Of the 22 Untapped gel packets, I only managed to consume four of them. I ate six of the ten cookies. I planned to ditch all the extras when I got together with Lynn later.

Bellevue rose up at Mile 25 and I was amazed. I hadn’t been in Bellevue in a few years. The city gleamed. Every building looked brand new and shiny.

Lynn’s sister, Ann, met me there at 1 pm. Via cell phone tracking, Lynn was able to give Ann precise directions for our meetup. We walked together for a mile and a half sharing observations about Bellevue and the other neighborhoods I had just been through.

Ann broke off as I headed into Kirkland where Lynn and her sisters grew up. Lynn was waiting for me at Houghton Beach with our Miniature Schnauzer, Angus, some ice water, and other supplies. I changed into a fresh kit and as Lynn drove further ahead I walked Angus into downtown Kirkland.

When out with a Schnauzer, it is more like a “smell” than a walk. They have to sniff and pee on everything. Kirkland is new territory for Angus complete with a new assortment of fragrances. We made slow progress.

With Angus at Houghton Beach (L. Drake photo)

Lynn joined us and we walked together for a mile up Market Street then she and Angus turned back while I headed to Juanita Beach Park where Simon planned to meet me at 3 pm.

Simon and Joe near Juanita Beach Park (J. Drake photo)

Simon had just returned the day before after two weeks with his family in the UK. He remarked that running with me for a portion of the loop would help with his jet lag. I apologized that the run had, sadly, become a walk but Simon didn’t mind.

I was glad for Simon’s company. The next stretch was a three-mile, 400 foot climb, the largest hill in the Lake Washington Loop. Chatting with Simon allowed the distance to pass quickly and we covered a lot of topics most notably that we had Miniature Schnauzers in common. Simon’s is named Max and is 12 years old while Angus is 5.

As we discussed our favorite breed, I noticed another one up ahead. What a coincidence! Until I looked closer and realized it was Lynn and Angus in place for our next rendezvous.

Simon expected to call his wife, Susan, for a pickup after walking with me to Kenmore. Lynn offered to drive him back. That gave Angus and Max a chance to get acquainted.

Schnauzer meetup. Max (top), Angus (bottom) (L. Drake photo)

The last 10-mile stretch of the LWL is via the Burke-Gilman trail starting at Kenmore. It was 4:40 pm. I was getting wobbly but no muscle cramps and pain was tolerable.

I tried running some more. Nothing fancy. Just 100 running steps then 100 walking steps, etc. I didn’t get very far before the pain started up again.

“How about that?” said Otto. “Just like last time.”

“Fuck off, Otto.”

But Otto was right. Running was still out of the question.

On the final stretch, Lynn greeted me several times to see how it was going. Near Matthews Beach Park she brought me a hot dog and a cold lemonade. It was heaven.

There’s something about a cold drink that makes all the difference. I wasn’t thirsty for warm water. The thought of it made me queasy. But the cold lemonade was fantastic.

At 8:15 pm, I was back again at the Husky Stadium Plaza where Lynn and Angus were waiting for me. Total distance was 48.4 miles and it took a touch over 14 hours to complete it.

Lake Washington Loop (from J. Drake Strava post)

It is now Tuesday, two days after the loop. Yesterday I felt sore and wobbly but not as spent as I did two weeks ago in the previous 50-miler. Today is a day for light stretching and strength training. Tomorrow I see my physical therapist, Erin. She will help me undo the damage from Sunday’s adventure and, hopefully, get me on track for my next one coming up in two weeks, the Orca Half Marathon.

They run the Orca on Saturday September 14 and again the next day. I will be running both of them.

I’m hoping that a half marathon is short enough that Otto won’t feel obliged to come along.

*The Lake Washington Loop is the last of three self-inflicted endurance events dubbed “Running 4 Type 2 Fun” that I undertook as part of the Michael J. Fox Foundation Summer Challenge Fundraiser. If you would like more information and/or instructions on how to make a donation, make a comment to that effect on this page and I will provide.

[image error]

Included with permission from Mark Remy (dumbrunner.com).

The Backyard Ultra is the brainchild of Gary “Lazarus Lake” Cantrell, who often goes simply as “Laz”. He’s wildly creative and, I assume, cheerfully sadistic. Laz’s other claim to pain is the notorious Barkley Marathons, “The Race that Eats its Young”, which is so hard that very few who enter are able to finish.

Laz started a craze in 2011 with his Big Dog Backyard Ultra in Bell Buckle, Tennessee where he lives. The race takes place in his backyard. There are many other Backyard Ultras around the world now. Big Dog, though, remains the flagship event.

It is a multi-loop race wherein each loop is 4.167 miles. Runners have one hour to complete it. Upon finishing a loop, runners have the remainder of the hour to rest, refuel, hydrate, use the toilet, or whatever. Then they line up for the next one.

Any runner unable to complete a loop in an hour is eliminated. When only one runner is able to start a loop, they get to run the last loop solo and are declared the winner. Every one else did not finish.

I imagined the first few laps might be easy. Most runners can readily complete the 4.167 miles in 40–50 minutes. Pacing is key. As in any endurance race, starting out too fast burns up resources quickly making the latter miles tenuous.

The 4.167 mile loop distance is chosen so that 24 such loops — one day’s worth — equals 100 miles. In 2012, the winner of Big Dog, Joe Fejes, took the title after 28 loops (116.7 miles). Last year, Harvey Lewis won with a record of 108 loops (450 miles).

Let that sink in. Harvey Lewis ran for four and a half days with only a few minutes of rest every hour. That’s astoundingly insane.

My goal was much more modest. I just wanted to see if I could do 12 loops in the Backyard Ultra format. That works out to 50 miles. To date the longest I have run is a marathon (26.2 miles) although I have done two of them on consecutive days in different cities (Chicago and Boston in 2021.) Nothing in my running past suggests that at 63 years old I am capable of running 50 miles in 12 hours.

I have learned some things in these past few years of running under the influence of Parkinson’s disease. As to limits: Past experience is not a good indicator of them.

True, the odds were against me. But I had made a plan and told the world about it*. There was no room for debate. I wanted to give it a shot. One doesn’t beat Parkinson’s without a solid measure of audacity.

Besides, it would undoubtedly be a valuable learning experience. There may even be some joy along the way.

I set up my garage as the rest stop between loops. A table was loaded with food and other consumables. I had a cooler packed with ice for keeping drinks and some watermelon slices cold. On another table several changes of running kit and shoes were assembled.

A few years back, we built a gym in the garage and outfitted it with a heat pump to allow heating and cooling. The gym would be my cooling station for when the temperature ramped up in the afternoon.

I sketched out my plan on the white board in the gym. I would need to consume 500 calories of carbs each hour. Electrolyte replenishment would vary depending on the outdoor temperature and the severity of leg cramps. Most likely 500–800 mg of Na would be needed every hour.

I expected the ultra to cause more gastrointestinal distress than a marathon. Hence, I assembled a variety of foods hoping that one or more of them would do the trick if my gut became balky. Besides the watermelon, I had Tailwind Endurance Formula, Untapped Maple Syrup gels, potato chips, baked potatoes, and home-baked cookies. For sodium replenishment, I brought in SaltStick electrolyte tablets, a container of table salt, the Tailwind, and Zym tablets.

I expected friends to join me for some of the loops. Chairs were set out for them. There was plenty of food and drink for any supporters who came by.

My wife, Lynn, had planned a weekend getaway with her two sisters. She was reluctant to leave me on my own knowing that my stubborness could get me into trouble. I think she worried that my Type 2 Fun adventure might slip into that Type 3 life-threatening kind.

I reassured her that I would be fine. The folks joining me could be trusted to keep me safe.

Most Backyard Ultras have somewhat challenging, scenic courses. I routed mine through Schmitz Park that featured dirt trails, a stream crossing, and 220 feet of elevation gain. Schmitz exits onto surface streets at about the 1.5 mile mark. Another 110 feet of elevation gain takes the runner to 2.0 miles then the route goes flat for a bit before heading back downhill to my garage.

Two weeks earlier, during my 4x4x48 challenge, a sciatica flare-up made running awkward and painful. In the interim it had responded well to physical therapy and I downgraded it to a niggle, a mere annoyance.

I started my Garmin and the first loop at 8 am. The temperature was a reasonable 62 degrees. I finished it in a bit over 43 minutes, ate and hydrated to plan then knocked off the second loop in 45 minutes. Erika joined me for the third loop which we finished in 46 minutes. I aimed to average 11 minutes per mile and we were on target.

It was heating up though. Seeing this, Erika pointed out that I might want to flatten out the loop. The hill might be too much.

“No shame in that,” she said, referring to adopting the lesser challenge. I was beginning to agree.

Erika had to leave but vowed to return later in the day. On the fourth loop— solo at 11 am and 67 degrees — I started to wilt but still completed it in 46 minutes.

Erica (note the different spelling) was waiting for me at the garage at the end of the fourth loop. The next one was scheduled to start at noon and the temperature had risen to 69. It would reach the mid-seventies soon. That spelled trouble. I never do well in that kind of heat and my body had already started to fade. Something had to change.

That’s when I decided that the Backyard Ultra adventure had run its course. Four loops was it. I pivoted to a more flexible strategy with the goal of getting to 50 miles by whatever means my body allowed.

I discussed the new strategy with Erica and she needed no convincing. She had already noted that my movements were unsure and wobbly.

We chose a flat out and back but otherwise full distance for the next loop, which started on time at noon. As expected, the heat got to me and I had to walk some of it. I needed to cool down.

Erica and I at the start of the fifth loop (photo by J. Drake)

Earlier I had tried to get the AC working in the gym but I was unable to connect to it with my phone app. A storm the night before had taken out the garage wi fi. Erica saved the day. She ignored my fumbling and reached for the system’s local remote mounted on the wall. Doh! She had it cooled down within minutes. I finally had a legitimate cool-down room.

Despite the route flattening, this loop drained me. Leg cramps came on strong and I downed six Zym tablets (~1800 mg of Na!) dissolved in a liter of cold water.

Erica stayed with me for the next three legs. They no longer resembled the prescribed Backyard Ultra loops. Distances were shortened, start times were pushed out, and intermittent walking was necessary.

Erica was terrific company. We talked of running strategies, injuries, a horrific incident when a car hit her while she was running 10 years ago, and her son’s recently discovered aptitude for race walking — the most disrespected of Olympic sports.

At one point, we came upon a lady who sang out in a sweet British accent, “I love your pink socks!” I smiled and thanked her as we ran by.

I told Erica that this sentiment was common. “Usually,” I said, “I get it from women. Sometimes from men though.”

As if on cue, the next person we passed was a muscular, shirtless guy who yelled out, “Oh, I love those socks. I really appreciate them!”

When we got back to the garage at the end of Erica’s shift, Erika and Larry were waiting for us. Larry had joked by text earlier that he’d definitely be joining me knowing that there would be cookies available.

We bid farewell to Erica and the three of us took off for the next segment. The 3 pm scheduled start time slid to 3:30, the route was shortened to a flat 3.2 miles, and we walked all of it.

Erika is an accomplished, fast runner and she has been helping me out ever since we met three years ago. She continues to evolve her approach to running and I was surprised to learn that she has been seeing the same physical therapist for twenty years.

“Oh”, I said, “you mean since high school?”

She laughed. “No, but since my twenties.”

She recently bought a book entitled “Advanced Marathoning” with the intent of revising her training strategy.

When her husband saw the title he said, “Advanced? What have you been doing up till now?”

We returned to the garage just as a gust of wind stirred up an otherwise calm afternoon. As we waited it out, Andrew came along and Erika had to leave to meet her family coming in to SeaTac airport.

Erika, Andrew, and Larry in the garage rest stop (photo by J. Drake)

I learned that Larry was a Miniature Schnauzer devotee just like Lynn and I. We bonded over our respective dog photos while I waited for my leg cramps to dissipate.

During the next segment (scheduled for a 4 pm start but delayed to 5:00), I suggested to Larry and Andrew that, since we were walking, we take it a bit farther all the way to Lincoln Park, a round trip of 7.5 miles. They were game and reminded me that they were there for support and I was to call the shots.

I felt remiss for walking so much when this was meant as a running adventure. But every now and then my legs would seize up in cramps to remind me that my options were limited.

We chatted about running, injuries, physical therapy, etc. Like myself, Andrew often fundraises for Team Fox of the Michael J. Fox Foundation. He has done the Dopey Challenge with Team Fox in Disney World wherein runners run the 5K, 10K, half marathon, and full marathon on four consecutive days. Sounds fun.

This loop took more than two hours to complete. Andrew and Larry had other responsibilities for the evening. I let them know how grateful I was for their support as they headed home.

Larry’s parting words to me were, “Make good choices.”

It was at 7:30 pm. By my original schedule, I should have been nearly done. Yet, I had covered only 37 miles. Lynn checked in by text to see how it was going. I told her I thought I needed another three hours.

“Oh dear,” she wrote. “Your last video was heartbreaking. You look very sick to tell you the truth.” I had been sending her periodic video updates of my status.

I considered how best to finish the last 13 miles. If walking was to predominate then rest stops made no sense. I no longer had to worry about maintaining my carb intake. Walking primarily burns fat and I was carrying plenty of that around my waist. For hydration, I could choose a route that featured water fountains.

It was getting dark. I decided that I would go out and not come back home until the 50 miles were done.

It had cooled off though and I was feeling better. I ran for two miles but knee pain forced me to walk the next one. I was hoping to keep up this alternating run/walk the rest of the way but the pain in my knee and, now, in my hip, made running untenable.

I thought that odd. “Running” at that point was about as fast as walking — ~17–18 minutes per mile — yet was much more painful. Something must be very off in my form if I can walk pain-free at the same pace as I ran with severe pain.

By mile 44, walking stopped being pain-free. Just about every step released a burst of f-bombs. The last half mile was a slow, excruciating wobble until, with great joy, I stepped into my yard and stopped my Garmin.

Just after midnight, I messaged Lynn and others to let them know I was done. What I had originally planned to do in 12 hours took all of 16 to complete.

The following day was as one would expect. Walking (shuffling, really, to be generous) was awkward and slow. That pain in my left knee had increased and the joint buckled when I put weight on it. My left hip bitched at me with each step.

Erika texted to ask how I was doing (damn, I have the greatest friends). I briefed her on how the adventure ended and assured her that I was spending my recovery day eating and napping.

It is now two days afterwards and I’m walking almost normally with only minor discomfort. Seems a rather quick recovery. I can’t explain that but I am not complaining. It gives me hope that I will fully heal in time for my last challenge of the summer coming up in two weeks — a ~50 mile run around Lake Washington.

*The Backyard Ultra is the second of three self-inflicted endurance events dubbed “Running 4 Type 2 Fun” that I am undertaking as part of the Michael J. Fox Foundation Summer Challenge Fundraiser. If you would like more information and/or instructions on how to make a donation, make a comment to that effect on this page and I will provide.

[image error]

Included with permission from Mark Remy (dumbrunner.com).

With only four miles to go my body wanted to give up. Miles 43 and 44, out of a planned 48, were a struggle. And those were downhill miles. They should have been easy. I stopped and doubled over to catch my breath. My house was just a few hundred yards away — best not to collapse on the concrete in full view of neighbors — get home first and crash in discrete comfort.

I felt spent and wretched. How was I to finish this?

I had a little more than three hours to figure it out.

David Goggins (the “Can’t Hurt Me” guy) conceived the 4x4x48 challenge during the pandemic when nearly all traditional endurance events were canceled. It is a test of physical and mental toughness that anyone can tailor to their particular situation.

The idea is to run 4 miles every 4 hours over 48 hours for a total of 48 miles. Most runners can readily complete a 4 mile run in under an hour thus leaving more than 3 hours of recovery time before the next 4 mile leg. That part doesn’t sound so bad. It gets nasty though during the nighttime legs when the body expects sleep. And the cumulative toll of run, wait, run, wait, run, etc. over the course of two days is significant.

I decided that it shouldn’t be that hard, really. After all, in 2021, I ran the Boston Marathon the day after running the Chicago Marathon. That worked out to be 56.4 miles in 34 hours, which included a flight from Chicago to Boston. With no logistical issues and anchored by the comfort of my home in Seattle, this 4x4x48 thing should be a relative walk in the park.

And it just might have been if not for the painful sciatica flare-up two weeks prior that put the kibosh on my training.

The signature feature of Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a deficit of the neurotransmitter dopamine, which is critical for a person’s motor functions. Typical symptoms are uncontrollable tremors in the arms and legs, slow movement, balance issues, stumbling, and falling.

PD is progressive. As time goes on, symptoms worsen. Medication helps by replacing the lost dopamine thus reinvigorating some motor functions but it does not affect the progression. To compensate, a Parkinson’s patient typically must increase their dosage of medication over time to manage the symptoms.

In the worst cases, the disease progresses beyond the point that medication has any positive effect. The latter decades for a person living with PD can be excruciating for them and for their caregivers.

Despite much research on the disease, there is no cure. Vigorous exercise, however, to the tune of at least 150 minutes per week, can slow its progression. Yet, there is no limit. The more exercise, the slower the progression.

That is why I run as much as I do. It is also why I test the limits of what my body can endure.

Indeed, how much exercise is needed in order to reverse Parkinson’s? That is a data point worth exploring.

Many of my running adventures are best classified as “Type 2 Fun”. Unlike Type 1 fun — which is, simply, fun — Type 2 is only fun after it’s over. Type 2 activities are not enjoyable at the time but stir feelings of pride and accomplishment upon completion.

That positivity is critical for maintaining the proper mindset for living with Parkinson’s. I get that positivity by taking on nutty running challenges.

Besides the lost dopamine, there is evidence that Parkinson’s disrupts the workings of the autonomic nervous system (ANS) via damage to a part of the brain called the hypothalamus.

There is a vast array of non-motor symptoms that a Parkinson’s patient may experience. Constipation. Excessive sweating. Muscle cramps. Sleep disorders. The list seems endless. All due to a defective ANS.

Pain is also managed by the ANS. In an act of self-preservation, the brain triggers a painful sensation when it is necessary to prevent the body from harming itself.

My interpretation: The damaged ANS in a person with Parkinson’s can create a heightened pain response even in situations when the concern is not warranted.

For example, in response to the signals from my pinched sciatic nerve, my brain has decided to make my right butt cheek hurt and the pain radiates down to my ankle. That’s sciatica and the pinching is probably being done by my piriformis muscle. It’s often known as piriformis syndrome.

I know that sciatica is not a “real” disorder. Although there is pain, it is not like that of a torn tendon or broken bone. Continuing to exercise in disregard of the pain, assuming that I can endure it, won’t destroy tissue as would a stress fracture or muscle sprain.

Performing stretching exercises designed to open up the channels where the sciatic nerve traverses — thus preventing the pinch — is a potential therapy for sciatica. My runner friend, Dudley, suggested this via some online videos after we compared notes on our sore butts. When I performed the routines that Dudley sent me, the pain, although still present, diminished greatly. Ibuprofen helps a bit, too.

Thus one part of my plan for dealing with the sciatica pain was to just live with it. In addition, I’ve noticed that running up hills doesn’t bother me as much as on the flats. Possibly that is due to an imbalance between my stronger quads and my weaker gluteal (butt) muscles (i.e. quads dominate on the hills.) Gotta fix that imbalance eventually.

I decided to make the first part of my 4 mile loop uphill (~400 feet) to give my butt a chance to ease into it. That had the added psychological advantage of knowing that once I got to 2 miles in to a loop it was all downhill from there.

Another questionable choice I made was to begin the first of the twelve 4 mile legs at midnight Saturday morning. That way, the entire effort did not stretch into a third calendar day.

With 4 hours between legs, there was no time pressure for each running segment. I started each leg off tentatively, attempting to ease into the pain and to overcome the awkward gait that sciatica was causing.

I never sleep all that well. That’s typical of Parkies. I rise frequently through the night to pee and often I experience a few hours of insomnia. However, I am a champion napper, and I regularly take an hour long mid-day siesta. This skill worked well for me. Between segments, I found it relatively easy to get one to two hours of deep sleep and usually woke up before my alarm went off.

So as not to disturb my wife, Lynn, I set up camp in one of our guest rooms. I settled into a regular sequence. Run, cool off, hydrate, eat, change clothes, sleep, rise, pee, repeat.

As one might expect, hydration and fueling were critical variables. Temperatures were high throughout and I know from experience that this is my kryptonite. I sweat a lot and I have a high concentration of sodium in my sweat. Without appropriate replenishment, I get horrific leg cramps. It is another one of those Parkie things — the ANS does a poor job of core temperature regulation. Sweating is excessive and that deprives the body of sodium needed for proper muscle contractions.

After each leg, I drank at least two liters of water and consumed roughly 2000 mg of sodium through a combination of Tailwind Endurance Formula, Zym tablets, and SaltStick electrolyte capsules. With this protocol, leg cramps were minor.

To most runners, that amount of sodium replenishment would seem excessive. I would agree except that I recently bought a hydration meter to wear while running and I have data to support my strategy. Since acting in accordance with the data, I haven’t had serious cramping issues. I do often have nausea after a hard run on a hot day but the nausea subsides with adequate sodium intake after the workout.

I chose to avoid any conventional meals for fear that the digestive burden would bring on nausea. Rather, I stuck with snacks of Tailwind, Untapped Maple Syrup gels, cookies, lemonade, potato chips, and Ritz crackers for my caloric needs. Carbs all the way.

Many runners with PD modify their medication schedule to take best advantage of their effects. Some experience “OFF” time when the meds wear off and dangerous symptoms emerge (read: stumbles and face plants). It can be tricky to get the timing right because “ON” duration can decrease during exercise — i.e. the well dries up faster while running.

For whatever reason, that doesn’t happen with me. Some of my bonks during a race or long runs may be due to inadequate meds. It’s hard to say. But I’ve never experienced a performance boost by taking a pill mid-race earlier than usual. Therefore, I decided to stick to my normal med cycle of Sinemet every four hours (6 am, 10 am, 2 pm, and 6 pm) and Selegiline at 6 am and noon.

I chose segment start times of midnight, 4 am, 8 am, noon, 4 pm and 8 pm. That made the 4 am segment the least medicated of them all and I was curious how that might work. Interestingly, during the 4 am leg on Saturday my running was stiffer and more sluggish that usual but these feelings did not return on Sunday at 4 am. Hence, I have no data to suggest a better optimization of my med cycle.

I should note that the 4x4x48 was the first of three running challenges I set for myself this summer as a fundraiser for Team Fox of the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research. If I survive them, I will report on the other two in future posts to this blog.

A month or so earlier, I told Lori, one of the owners of my favorite running store, West Seattle Runner (WSR), of my plans and she spread the word to the local running community. Lori thought that some runners would want to run some of the legs with me. Hence, I chose my 4 mile loop to pass by the store a little beyond the half way mark.

As I approached WSR on my third (8 am Saturday) leg, a group of runners were waiting for me. Though Lori said this was likely, I didn’t expect it but was very happy to have them join me for the rest of the leg. I nearly always run alone but having company for this challenge was an enormous emotional lift.

Among them were Sarang, Shawna, Luis, and Brian. Brian and I are in the same age group and compete in local races. He always beats me. I met Sarang earlier this year and we both ran the Tokyo Marathon in March. This was my first time meeting Shawna and Luis. We cruised downhill and chatted about upcoming races and Sarang’s newborn daughter, snapped some selfies, and then parted ways at the Puget Sound shoreline near my house. As I headed home, the rest of them ran off to complete their planned 11 mile workout.

My segments at 4 and 8 am were the most tolerable with the temperature at about 60 degrees both days. By noon, the mercury reached the 70’s. Difficult but not too bad. But the 4 pm legs were in the 80’s and those were dangerous. I wore my hydration meter on the Saturday 4 pm and it reported over 3600 mg of sodium loss or about 900 mg/mile, which was a record for me.

Each run segment left me a bit wasted but I soon found that I regained my senses within 20 minutes or so by dousing with cold water, hydrating, and downing some carbs. To keep the pain level tolerable, I did the prescribed sciatic nerve stretches after each segment. I also needed about 20 minutes of just puttering around after the nap in order to get back into running mode.

The 8th leg was at 4 am Sunday. I was happy to complete that one because that meant that the nighttime ordeals were over and I no longer needed to wear a headlamp while running. Sidewalk trip hazards on the route were prolific. Falling at night was a real concern of mine and might have ruined everything.

At 7:30 Sunday morning, my friend Andrew (also a Team Fox member) texted me to ask if I wanted company on the next (9th) leg. Of course, I was delighted to have him along. He’s a good story teller; chatting with him allowed the time to fly by.

Andrew was the first companion runner to experience the steep hills of the first two miles and suggested that maybe I didn’t really need to be so hard on myself. By then I had already come to doubting that strategy but figured I was locked in. Besides, after that leg I only had three more to go. What could go wrong now?

Afterwards, Andrew took off to finish the rest of his 9 mile run. At the beginning of the Sunday noon segment I saw Ty, another local running friend, passing by my house very quickly. He, too, offered to join me. He had tracked my progress on Strava and was sprinting down my street because he thought that I had already left for the next loop but slowed down when he saw me.

Ty is very fast. We both ran the Boston Marathon this year and he finished more than an hour ahead of me. Boston was hot this year, about the same temperature as this 10th leg, 73 degrees. Ty apparently does not have as much difficulty with heat as I do. I warned him that I would be very slow but he brushed that off saying that he was good with whatever pace I set.

Running with someone significantly faster can be off-putting. They look as if they could comfortably walk at that slower pace. I got that impression with Ty. My leg was an 11 min/mile detour of his otherwise sub-8 minute paced long run. But Ty is polite. He maintained a “running” posture while I trudged alongside him on that opening uphill. Ty works at Boeing. We had a lot to talk about given the very public struggles of that once venerable company.

After some more selfies, Ty ran off and I headed home with only two more segments to go. I was feeling pretty good having had wonderful company on both of the two previous legs and I already had heard from two other friends, Erica and Erika, that they would run with me on the final leg at 8 pm. 40 miles down and a lovely end to this ordeal was in sight.

The temperature rose to 85 degrees by 4 pm for the start of the penultimate leg. At the top of the hill that joyful feeling of “It’s all downhill from here” I had grown accustomed to was absent. I have run in extreme heat before so I knew the feeling: utter depletion and with every step a struggle. I knew that I could just walk it in if necessary but I refused. This was a running challenge, damn it.

At the 4 mile mark, I was light-headed and weak. Walking to my house I was unable to keep to a straight line. It occurred to me that this was potentially serious. Heat stroke was a possibility.

Fortunately, prior experience and research prepared me for this scenario. In fact, I have written about it on this blog.

I was at an early stage of “heat exhaustion”, which features dizziness, nausea, fatigue, weakness, irritability, muscle cramps, and unsteady gait. It is not as bad as heat stroke but is a step along the way. Treatment must be rapid and decisive. As I entered my house, I chirped a cheerful “Hi Lynn!” to my wife and headed straight to the bathroom for a cold shower.

My first priority was to bring my core body temperature down, which was probably dangerously high, at least 100 degrees. But I didn’t want to shock my system with very cold water. I got in with the water lukewarm and gradually dialed down the temperature. After about 10 or 15 minutes the fog lifted and I knew I was in the clear.

Still a bit weak I started in on hydration. For the first time in the challenge I felt some muscle cramps but eventually they dissipated as I executed my hydration plan.

The body amazes me with its adaptability. We are all capable of so much more than we might think. After a 75 minute power nap I felt strong enough to go for it. And the outside temperature had cooled off some too. Good thing. I did not want to disappoint Erica and Erika.

The ladies showed up just before 8 pm and Lynn took some photos of us. Both of them are faster than me even on my best days. I warned them not to expect too much. Like everyone else, they dismissed my objections and let me set the pace, which was becoming comically slow on the initial uphill. They also suggested I needn’t have selected such a hilly route. Erika wondered why I didn’t pick a flat out and back.

“I could have,” I quipped, “if I wanted to do this the easy way.”

The leg went by happily and without incident. We talked about upcoming races and injuries. I told Erica, who is Dudley’s wife, how his suggestions helped me to tame my sciatica somewhat thus allowing me to follow through on the challenge. She chuckled a bit when I referred to Dudley as the “Sciatica Whisperer”.

Erica reported that she recently came down with frozen shoulder — a baffling and painful ailment that can come on after age 40 and is most common in women. The two of them discussed the condition although I didn’t have too much to add other than the fact that Lynn has had it and it takes a godawful long time for it to heal.

Once again, having company made the leg fly by and the lower temperature meant that I did not suffer much. Though the challenge was intended as Type 2 fun, the thrill of having friends join me brought it delightfully close to Type 1 fun.

The next challenge is coming up soon, August 18. For that one the format is modeled after a Backyard Ultra wherein each leg of 4.17 miles must be completed in an hour at which time the next one starts. I am attempting 12 such loops for a total of 50 miles in 12 hours. I’ve never run that distance in a single day.

Erica, Erika, Andrew, and others have committed to joining me on that one too. They expect to take turns accompanying me on the loops and so I am anticipating a lot of Type 1 fun.

Pacing will be key as will be managing the heat. I intend to run at a 11–12 minute per mile pace, which would allow 10 or so minutes of recovery prior to the subsequent leg. Although the route I am considering is different than the one I used for the 4x4x48, it is still front-loaded with a steep climb.

It threatens to be more difficult than the 4x4x48 and I have my reservations. But I will give it a go. The current forecast calls for cooler temperatures than what I just worked through. And perhaps my sciatica will heal some before then. And maybe I go with a less strenuous route.

The worst that can happen is that I fail. I can live with that. I don’t think that I would be happy with not trying.

[image error]