Monday, April 15, 2013

Boston, Massachusetts: April 15, 2013


Eight and a half years ago, I started telling my wife Colleen and very close friends that I was going to run a marathon. No one laughed at me, but more than a few people looked at me like I was making a joke. In the fall of 2004, I wasn’t running at all. I wasn’t even walking, with the exception of  few walks around my neighborhood. I was smoking cigarettes. I wasn’t a heavy smoker, but 10-15 cigarettes a day doesn’t do you any favors if you want to go for a 2-3 mile run, let alone run a marathon.

Four months later, I had quit smoking easily enough but was having trouble with my long runs. The program I was doing had me go from a 10-mile run to a 12-mile run to a 14-mile run. The 14-mile run was grueling. During the last mile or two, my legs were jelly and I felt like I was going to fall over. When I got home, I crawled up the stairs of our second floor apartment, stumbled over to the coach, and almost started crying. I don’t show a lot of emotion in general, so Colleen was a little freaked out. “What’s wrong?” she asked, sounding upset.

“I don’t think I can do it .” I told her. “If I feel like that after 14 miles, how am I going to run almost twice as many?”

Two months later, I finished my first marathon.

When the subject of running a marathon comes up, the first question people always ask is “was it hard?” My answer is always the same. “The training is hard. Compared to that, the marathon is easy.”

Training runs were solitary affairs. For the long, weekend run, I’d get up at 5:30 or six in the morning so I could spend some time with Colleen after I got back. For two or three hours, I was by myself. Some runs were better than others, but I can remember the bad ones better than the good ones. One of my favorite memories is running 14 miles for a different marathon in a constant mist on a raw, cool fall day. Besides me, the only people outside were taking their dogs out to go to the bathroom, and they all gave me the same look that said, “I have to be out here. What the hell are you doing out here?”

Race day was different. There’s a lot of anxiety, but the atmosphere at the starting line and throughout is that of a big party. I ran one marathon in Cincinnati and another one in Philadelphia. Both races had throngs of people on the sidelines, cheering you on, telling all of the runners that we were doing a great job, or were looking great, or some other kind of encouragement.

Another popular question that comes up is “what does it feel like to cross the finish line?” This is harder to put into words than whether or not running a marathon is “easy”, but besides watching the birth of my children, it’s the greatest feeling I’ve ever had my life.

As I said above, I didn’t exactly face naysayers, but I did get a lot of reactions that had an underlying “really?” As in, “really, you think you’re going to be able to run 26.2 miles?” Or, “really, you think you’re not going to give up eight weeks into your training?” Or, “really, it’s noble that you want to do this, but you’re going to be really sad and disappointed when you give up…because you eventually will.”

Training for a marathon is a transition from “no I can’t” to “yes I can” and finally to “damn right, I did it!” Once you’re out there running the race, any doubts that you have or that may have been planted by others fall on deaf ears. It’s you out there, and every stride is a triumph before you even cross the finish line. Getting to the starting line is a victory in and of itself.

Except you’re not alone. So many people out there share your story. Their reasons might be somewhat or completely different, but all of the other first timers started out in the same place: deciding to run a marathon but not knowing what the outcome of the decision would be until months of training and preparation.

All of these memories came flooding back today after the I first saw the news about the explosions in Boston.

The Boston Marathon is a different race than the two marathons I ran. Cincinnati (The Flying Pig) and the Philadelphia Marathons are open marathons. Anyone can register and give it a shot. Boston is a qualifying marathon. In order to get in, you have to have finished another marathon under a certain amount of time (there are different time requirements for different age brackets). There aren’t any first-time runners in Boston (theoretically; some people run the race even though they’re not registered).

When you’re running a marathon, around the twentieth or twenty-first mile, the idea of the finish line becomes Valhalla. You start picturing what you’re going to see when you cross, the large crowd, and the festive atmosphere that’s going to be waiting for you there.

On the day I ran the Philadelphia Marathon, Colleen, my then 23-month old daughter Lucy, and our friends Jenn and Jim were waiting for me about half a mile from the finish line. The Philadelphia race goes down this long stretch of a road named Kelly Drive that is bereft of crowds for a good three miles and makes the last few miles difficult. About a mile before the finish line, a few fraternity and sorority houses known as Boathouse Row are where the crowds form. The longer it takes you to finish, the larger those crowds are. I’m far from an elite athlete, so by the time I got there, it was almost impossible to pass through the throng. I didn’t know if Colleen or Lucy were there. I told myself it wouldn’t be the end of the world if I didn’t see them, but when I heard Colleen shout out “Mike!” I instantly knew I had been fooling myself. I saw Colleen’s beautiful face and my little daughter all bundled up in her arms and knew that seeing them made this even more special, and it made the last mile a joy instead of a chore.

I can’t stop thinking about the families that were out there today waiting for their loved ones to cross the finish line. The loving wife or husband who knew that the countless hours of training would impact their weekends for months and not only didn’t complain about it but was supportive and gave everything he or she could and dug deep in his or her own way. The sons and daughters who maybe didn’t completely understand until the moment during the race that Mom or Dad ran past them with a look on his face that they had never seen on Mom or Dad’s face before. The parents who always offered support for their children who weren’t going to miss it when their kids crossed the finish line.

But the other thing I’m left with from today is the countless acts of kindness from so many of the people involved with the race or in the community. The runners who finished the race running to the hospital to give blood. The local entrepreneurs who offered a place to sit, free food for those who couldn’t afford it, and anything else they could do to help. Residents offering strangers with no place to stay a bed or a couch to sleep on. I’m surprised but not surprised, amazed but taking it in stride. Twenty-six-point-two miles builds a community in a short four and a half hour span, an environment that says we’re all in this together whether you’re running the race or just standing there cheering the runners on. Those that have been part of this temporary community of 26.2 at one time or another were less surprised by the random acts of kindness. A marathon is already a miniature miracle: an extraordinary achievement undertaken and frequently achieved by “ordinary” people. The kindness I saw today in Boston I saw in Cincinnati and Philadelphia on smaller, lesser scales but was no less important to those competing. There is nothing like a marathon to remind us that we are all in this together and that – for a short time at least – we can lift each other to heights we never imagined possible.

Thursday, March 14, 2013


It was just before dawn one beautiful morning
In Hundred Acre Wood
It was peaceful, quiet and calm
And nothing could go wrong
Or at least so it would seem
But there was a loud sound
And it shook all the ground
And the animals all slowly woke
It made all the earth shake
Like a major earthquake
Or hellfire coming from the skies
Winnie's honey pots broke
Eeyore's ears competely fell off
And Rabbit was completely crushed by a tree.
Owl's home was destroyed
The Heffalump was annoyed
And Piglet was turned into ham stew
And my eyes still grow damp to remember
Christopher Robin tried
To save all his stuffed friends 
It was dark all around, dead animals on the ground
When the Tiggers broke free
And no one survived
From A.A. Milne's greatest works. There were all left behind
Most of them dead, the rest of them dying
And that's how that fucking Tigger
Took Winnie the Pooh from me.

Friday, November 9, 2012

Nate Silver and 538


Before I go any further, let's get one thing out of the way. Nate Silver is a genius. He is skilled not only in manipulating data but also in providing explanations for how he manipulated data. Silver gets plenty of credit for the first thing and way too little credit for the second thing.

My little niche in the world has been carved writing about fantasy baseball and applying math to player valuation. By trade, I've spent the last few years of my career applying math and statistics to health care analytics. Using statistics properly is difficult enough. Using statistics well and explaining to someone how you got there is climbing Mount Everest. Silver's 538 blog not only climbs that mountain, it reaches the summit.

The knee-jerk reaction to Tuesday’s election results was to praise Silver as the Dean Emeritus of the Electoral College. Some were amazed that Silver nailed 49 out of 49 states, and will probably get Florida right as well.

While there's no doubt that Silver did a terrific job, the surprised reaction of the masses came because of some last second projections from some far less analytical sources. Conor Friedersdorf of The Atlantic has a good piece on this phenomenon. To some on the right it was difficult to believe that Barack Obama could possibly clear 250 electoral votes, let alone win an election. In reality, the opposite was the case. All along, Mitt Romney had a difficult path to the Presidency where the electoral votes were concerned.

To be fair, there were voices on the right that either thought Obama was the favorite or that Romney was only a slight favorite who didn't have a realistic path to 300 electoral votes. Ted Frank at Point of Law posted a very well thought out and rational piece a week before the election explaining his issues with Silver's methodology. While I don't agree with many of Frank's conclusions, unlike a lot of those on the right Frank offered a thoughtful rationale that went beyond "well it can't possibly be correct that Obama is winning by that much."

The right also seemed to get stuck on the idea that because Silver’s model gave Obama a 91% chance of winning that Obama was going to win in a landslide. But this wasn't what Silver was saying at all. Rather, his system was estimating the probability of an Obama victory at 91%. That nine percent chance for Mitt Romney wasn't trivial. To use an apt analogy that Bret Sayre of Fake Teams provided on Twitter, a home team in baseball with a one-run lead, a runner on third base, and two outs in the top of the ninth has an 87% chance of winning. The game is close, but the odds of the road team winning are poor.

The most significant problem with the right's analysis is that on a basic level using state polling data works. Nate Silver isn't the only analyst that uses state polling data to try and predict the outcome of elections. Election Projection and Electoral Vote both rely heavily on state projections. Unlike Silver, they don't shake and bake with the numbers. Both sites aggregate state polls going back about a week. Both sites predicted an Obama victory, 303-235. The only state both sites got wrong was Florida, which Silver (probably) got right.

As a fun exercise, I went back even further than Election Projection and Electoral Vote and calculated a leader based on a month's worth of polls, using only one poll (the most recent one) per polling firm. This methodology is generally considered a poor one because older polls are generally considered "stale" and don't take into account recent events that could tip the scales in one direction or the other. How does this "neutral" model do compared to Silver's more rigorous model?

Nate Silver's 538 model versus "neutral" state poll model
State
Raw Polling
Average
Silver/538
Actual
California
Obama +14
Obama +17.4
Obama +20.5
Colorado
Obama +1.1
Obama +2.5
Obama +4.7
Connecticut
Obama +12.7
Obama +14.1
Obama +17.8
Florida
Romney +1.3
Obama 0
Obama +0.6
Iowa
Obama +2
Obama +3.2
Obama +5.6
Massachusetts
Obama +19.7
Obama +19.1
Obama +22.8
Michigan
Obama +3.6
Obama +7.1
Obama +8.5
Minnesota
Obama +5.7
Obama +8.6
Obama +6.4
Missouri
Romney +10.8
Romney +8.1
Romney +9.6
Nevada
Obama +2.6
Obama +4.5
Obama +6.6
New Hampshire
Obama +1.8
Obama +3.5
Obama +5.8
North Carolina
Romney +2.7
Romney +1.7
Romney +2.2
Ohio
Obama +2.8
Obama +3.6
Obama +1.9
Pennsylvania
Obama +3.8
Obama +5.9
Obama +5.2
Virginia
Obama +0.2
Obama +2
Obama +3
Washington
Obama +13.6
Obama +13.6
Obama +13.3
Wisconsin
Obama +4.7
Obama +5.5
Obama +6.7
National
Obama +1.7
Obama +2.5
Obama +2.5

I included every state that had a minimum of five or more polls listed at Real Clear Politics in the 30 days leading up to the election.

While the right kept vaguely and not-so-vaguely accusing Silver of "cooking the books" in the days leading up to the election, Silver's model may not have been aggressive enough. In 11 of the 15 states where Silver had Obama winning, the actual margin was even higher than Silver predicted. The raw polling model was even more tepid on Obama than Silver's model, lagging behind him in 13 of 15 states.

Silver's model worked very well. But we shouldn't be too surprised. State polling-based models have worked very well in the last three election cycles. If you used raw polling averages in 2004 and 2008, you would have correctly predicted the winner in 49 out of 50 states both times, with only Indiana (2008) and Ohio (2004) being off the mark. If you used a shorter time frame in 2004 than 30 days, you would have predicted a George Bush victory; John Kerry was only ahead in one poll in the last few days leading up to that election.

The "surprise" of Silver doing so well with his model has more to do with a lack of belief in data than in anything that Silver is or isn't doing. While the right's apoplectic reaction has magnified this perception, Presidential election coverage in general has always tried to present the state of the race as something that is difficult to get a feel for and could go in any direction. While this is theoretically true, we now have three Presidential election cycles where state polling has offered us an excellent baseline to predict what will ultimately happen on Election Day.