On my post about marathon elevation profiles, I got this anonymous comment:
"You're foolish to blow off Boston like you did, which is why it turns "tough" course runners into mints meat EVERY year-don't be fooled by it's profle! Even Ryan Hall who ran it in practice, trained for it after, still said aftward, "It's much harder a course than I thought." It's harder on your legs to run down hill than up, especially at the marathon distance."
First of all, my dissing Boston was somewhat of a joke, because I haven't even qualified for it let alone run it. However, I am irritated by people who regard Boston with such reverence, and I'm delighted that I have pissed one of them off. "Oh! It's so hard! It's downhill!"
I would really love to bash these Boston weenies even more, but I feel that I am not qualified to do that until I have run Boston myself. So Mr. Anonymous Boston weenie, I tell you what I am going to do.
This year I will run a marathon to qualify for Boston. Then next year, I will pay for a flight and hotel, and run the Boston marathon. Having never done a race like Pikes Peek I would not call myself a "tough course" runner, but it will be interesting to see if Boston turns me into "mints meat" as you suggest (not sure what that is. A minty fresh steak?)
Instead, I predict that I will run a PR in Boston. Afterwards, because my legs will feel so good, I will go back to the hotel and run up and down 12 flights of stairs screaming "Ryan Hall is a weenie!".
All that just to prove some anonymous commenter wrong. Am I overacting?
(Nah. I was going to run Boston with my sister Monique anyway)