Erika,

  I'm not sure if this post will be general enough to generate discussion

.

A couple of days ago, in the daily I suggested to EGH that she run Boston even if she is walking.  You challenged my suggestion.  (No worries,  it's cool.  I'm just exploring where the differences are.)

I am sure none of us would disagree if running the race were to caused permanent damage. don't do it!

unfortunately,  you usually don't find out until long after the fact. 

You were there hen I ran my 12th marathon in 12 months.  IT was a bad one for me,  I didn't run again for a year.  still it gave me certain bragging rights.  it was a major set back, but it was nothing permanent.  probably stupid that I ran that race, but no regrets.  My point is I think the same about Boston. 

hind site is 20-20.   if any race causes a permanent set back.  it was really stupid that you did it.   wish we could know in advance.

RE: Boston,  I guess my point was that it is a REALLY special race.  and you don't have to be a 3:30 marathoner to run it, (just to qualify for it)  so,  If you can walk it in, in 6 hours (without permanent injuries) DO IT!!!

Dive.. I certainly should not comment.. but.  Remember I had those two marathons scheduled in November 2 weeks apart and I came up with a knee injury... sore, swollen knee (turns out it was missing cartilage behind the patella and on the femur.. bone on bone contacts + loose pieces getting jammed up).  I got the knee drained 2 weeks before the first marathon and just adjusted pace slower (finished 4:12).  Then it swelled up again and the Drs would not drain it a second time but it was runnable at the slower pace so I ran Richmond (quite hilly) and finished (4:12) got my Maniac status (for real) and I'm really proud of that.  After knee arthroscopy, in January, to clean the junk out, I'm running again and it's getting better every day. I'm still planning to run Boston even if slower than desired.

Last year I could not run Boston because an adductor injury just plain hurt too much to run. Simply not possible (even hurt to walk)

The year before, 2008, I ran my first Boston and was in great shape and enjoyed the whole experience which was the best experience ever!!  Had I been injured it would not have had the same wonderful feeling.  Something would be missing.

I qualified for Boston in 2007 and got a plantar faciitis injury so could not run it.  It was a tough decision to bale on my first Boston (and I would have had a "Blue Bib" too).  I am so glad I waited to run my first Boston healthy. (my '07 BQ was good for '07 and '08)

If you are injured, you can get a medical deferral and guaranteed entry for next year's Boston.  That's what I'd do.

This year IS my medical deferral from '09 so hopefully I'll run it ok.

ETA:

Dive.. EGH3 is a guy (George). He is running for a charity, not becasue of  qualifying. He deserves to be there because he is giving alot back to the community. But, my comment on medical defferal is probably invalid for charity runners.

Bottom line... if this is the one and only chance and you can get to the start, I'd somehow make it to the finish before the cut off.  My bet is he'll make it!

Ask for a deferment and run it next year.  I ran Boston in '06 when a hamstring injury was not fully healed and gimped it in in 4:17 or something like that.  Never again.

Much has to do with your point of view about marathons I think. I remember when i was young I used to think of the marathon as some destination, or achievement.  Today, I see that anyone can run a marathon, unless they are morbidly obese, or have some constitutional defect which does not allow them to run.

I am planning to run a marathon on March 28th in Oklahoma, so I wanted to run a 21-miler on Saturday.  My plan was to do it at Cowtown in Ft. Worth.  Because of a mixup about where my car would be, the Saint was unable to pick me up at 21, so I ran to 22.5, and had a fabulous training run.  Strangely, some of my friends who knew I had planned to do this just for training, acted surprised that I didn't just run it all the way in, since I was feeling okay.  I just can't imagine this kind of thinking, just as they apparently can't understand mine.

I see the marathon as a race distance, not an event to plug on through, no matter the conditioning, and the number of marathons someone has run in a year or in a lifetime is of no interest to me.  I respect that others see it differently.

But returning to the Boston issue, if I were that runner, I would never run there injured.  Go when you can do the race justice.  Spareribs

Dive, I'm with you......

..........................................................I think it's a very personal decision.  Aside from the hot hot Boston in '04, I've always run Boston in the 3:30-3:35 range.  Last year, I was not 100%  and considered not running. 

At the time, a friend was going through a real crisis.  I was dealing with some personal issues that were not nearly so large, but my head certainly wasn't on as straight as it should have been.

I thought it was a good time to "run" the race and use it to do some reflection on my own shortcomings while meditating and praying for my friend. 

Given that it was going to be a lot of time, I figured if I donned my Red Sox gear, I'd get the attention of and have sufficient time to fit in some kibbutzing with my fellow RS Nation fans.  (not to mention the game was on the radio, so I broke a rule and brought along headphones and was able to discuss the game with the fans along the route as well as fellow runners.)

So it was a 5 hour marathon for me.   I made sure I went slowly enough and walked a lot so as not to injure or aggravate anything. 

 I enjoyed it and I'd certainly do it again.   And once I convinced my friend he could not give me back the medal, he told me it was the perfect gift. 

Boston is a celebration--of running, but also of the city and sports.  Of all the places I've lived, the longest period by far was in Massachusetts.  For me, going back is about much more than the running.

sincerely,

A

As one who seems lately to run between injuries, this is an interesting topic.  To me, the decision depends on a number of factors; degree of injury, extent of extra damage caused by finishing, and your goals.  Marathon experience,  how easily you qualify and your history with Boston plays a role, and it is a personal decision..

I have a long history with Boston, have run it many times and a few times pretty well. At this point in my life, an April marathon is very hard to prepare for even when healthy because of my children's ski race schedule. Hard to get the long runs in when you are always on a ski hill, plus by April I am tired. 

Like Erika, I qualfiy relatively easily and have a tough time keeping a good training schedule.

As a result, I now tend to run Boston more for fun and to have a  good experience  than with a set time goal. That said, I doubt I would be willing to start  the race if I knew  I would be walking vast sections of it because of injury. We all kid ourselves at times on these things, but if I knew i could not finish, I would not start. I tend to agree with Ribs that the marathon is a race distance, and I started at this business  long before the marathon became popular and long before  most folks  ran 5 or 6 hour marathons on purpose.  I respect Aamos' 2009 run and am a little jealous of how much fun she had, but I am just not wired that way.

In 2004 I started Boston when I should not have; arthritis issues were flaring up and training had been poor. the heat put the final nail in the coffin. I walked vast sections of the race,   could not figure out how to drop out and eventually finished in 4:50-something. I did not like doing it that way. The only positive is that i must have walked pretty fast.  To this day it is a race I do not like to discuss.

Last  year, fighting back injury issues, I did only two long runs, one about 16 miles and the other the Eastern States 20 miler.  Running generally had been sporadic, but I had done a lot of time on the elliptical.

The Eastern states race was the test; had I not been able to finish that in a respectable fashion, I would not have started Boston.    To me, the risk of additionall injury plus the unpleasantness of a death march would not be worth it.  Being able to run regularly is more important to me now than any race, even Boston.

There is usually another year, or for that matter, another race.