Race Report: Rocky Raccoon 100-Miler

[crossposted at brbrunning.com]

As some of you know, I ran 100 miles this weekend.  Here’s the race report.  Also, I know it’s not related to game theory at all.

The race I ran was Rocky Raccoon, a five-lap race in Huntsville, Texas. You can see the results here. I finished in 24:58:28.  Only 43% of the 415 runners finished. (Does anyone have updated stats on this?)

Lap 1: It was a dark and stormy night …

About an hour before the race started, Dad and I were sitting in the rental car.  Rain was coming down in sheets. Per the normal clichés about storms, lightening zig-zagged through the sky and thunder echoed through the forest.  We don’t get storms like this in Northern California, and I hadn’t prepared for it.

I hacked some holes into a black plastic trash bag, and used duct tape to get the extra plastic away from my legs.  In my mind, the end result looked like a superhero combination of a Catwoman costume and a steampunk bustle. In reality, it probably looked like a house getting tented for termites.

The race started at 6am. Much of the first lap was in the dark.  It took less than a mile for me to trip over a tree root, a hazard the course is notorious for.  I was already bleeding, and we hadn’t even been running for ten minutes. Somehow, this early wipe-out didn’t dampen my spirits any more than the storm did.

Every two or three miles featured an enormous, impossible-to-avoid mud puddle. I was regularly up to my ankles in mud and water. My shoes were at least damp, if not drenched, for the entire race. This would prove to cause problems later.

I don’t remember much of the first lap. There was so much running left to do, and I didn’t want to think too much about what was to come.  I do remember, around mile 8, having a bit of a panic attack.  I still had 92 miles to run.  92 miles seems a lot longer than 100 miles.

Lap 2: The Man with the Sea Dragon Compression Socks

Every so often, in a race, runners will fall into step and pace off of each other. The two runners acknowledge each other and run in silent camaraderie. No words required.

For lap 2, and some of lap 3, I found such companionship with a man whose name I still don’t know. All I know about him was that he had running spandex and compression socks that looked like sea dragon scales, so that’s how I mentally referred to him.

Somewhere during lap 2, I also met a man named Bruce. He was wearing a blue shirt with cat paw-prints on it, so, being a cat person, I had to ask about it. I learned that Bruce was from Toronto, and told him I’d be visiting in July for World Futures 2012. Bruce had heard of WFS; he’s a CIO for a large school district near Toronto with 7k faculty and 54k students, so he’d been thinking about attending.

Best part: Bruce is in the middle of deploying Google Apps for Edu for his school district. [For those who don't know, Google Apps is the part of Google I work for].  Bruce and I talked about everything from Gmail to Chromebooks to centrally-managed Android tablets. I’m somewhat embarrassed to say I drilled him for about an hour on his opinions on our products.  He seemed happy to oblige my curiosity.

Lap 3: Lothlorien in Light and Shadow

About midway through this lap, I saw the sun for the first and last time during the race. It was a wan orb, low on the horizon, mostly obscured by emaciated tree trunks. Spindly shadows reached across the dirt path.

Seeing the sun made me unreasonably happy.

Around mile 52, I realized that it was going to get dark before I got to the turnaround and could pick up a headlamp.  I ran the last 8 miles of this lap very quickly to avoid getting caught in the dark.

Lap 4: Trust

This was the lap I had been looking forward to for the last 60 miles. My thought had been that if I could just get to this lap, I’d make it the rest of the way.  This is the lap when my pacer, Georgia, joined me.

The first two-thirds of this lap were great.  It was fantastic to have someone to talk to, and Georgia was an excellent pacer. Real friendship is carrying extra caffeine Gus and a jacket for your runner.

One of the fun parts of this lap was being able to share my newly-acquired, yet very intimate, knowledge of the course. Having been around the course three times times already, I could tell her where all the turnoffs were, where the tricky roots were, and the easiest way around mud puddles.  The aid stations were at 3.1 miles, 6.2 miles, 12.2 miles, and 15.6 miles. The hardest bit was the loop between 6.2 and 12.2, because that’s a full six miles without aid.  The far timing mat was a little less than 10 miles into the loop.

There’s one stretch of the course – less than a 10th of a mile – that’s right along the lake. It’s the only part of the course with an unobstructed view of the sky. On lap four, we had front-row seats to the stars.

That short stretch is also difficult, because just a few hundred yards away, across the lake, is the finish line.  You can hear the shouts and cheers of spectators urging their runners across the timing mat. It throws into sharp relief the fact that you’re just about halfway through the lap.

If I learned anything this time around it’s that, in long distance races, mood swings happen unpredictably and with no discernible cause. Miles 72 to 78 were very tough, and I’m not sure why. I had to sit down for a minute on a mound of dirt, where I spent two minutes contemplating the meaning of life with Georgia before finishing the lap.

At the impromptu rest point, I was about three-quarters done with the race. Sounds impressive, but not when that means I still had another full marathon until the finish.

Lap 5: Silence

Georgia and I finished lap 4 around midnight. I had been running for about 18 hours at that point. A sub-24 hour finish was still possible, but I knew in my heart it wasn’t very likely. I haven’t done a lot of research into this, but my intuition tells me that negative splits don’t often happen on 100-mile races.

After inhaling a chocolate donut and my first-ever mocha [which was delicious - thanks Dad!], I grabbed my iPod and took off for the last lap.

It was dark. Profoundly dark. And very, very quiet.

At this point, runners were either by themselves or running with a pacer. Everyone was spread out along the course.  Runners were exhausted, focused, and not interested in talking to othe rpeople.

All I could think about was the next step I was about to take.

When I talk about running, I often get asked about my music. Usually, I don’t listen to music. It’s distracting. When you’re this tired, any additional outside inputs or stimuli – even music – seem complicated, confusing, and overwhelming.

On this lap, I think I listened to about 45 minutes of music before I had to turn off the iPod.

The most frustrating part of this lap was that my muscles and joints felt fine, but I was unable to run. The constantly wet shoes finally taken their toll. Mud puddles had nurtured blisters on every single toe and the entire front pad of both of my feet. Each step was excruciating.

This lap reminded me of the Ave Maria sequence from Fantasia. Individual runners – little pools of light – painstakingly making a pilgrimage to the finish line. Not quickly, but inexorably, as if pulled by some external force.  And the sky is slowly turning grey.

The finish line.

There was no big celebration at the finish line. I walked across the timing pad, we took a picture, and that was that.

Epilogue: You Have My Sword, and my Bow, and My Axe

I finished the run in 24 hours and 58 minutes. I think that’s the longest I’ve been awake. I consumed more caffeine during that period than in the previous six months combined. There were highs, lows, and a lot of learning.

The hardest part of this race was not the roots, although that’s what the course is known for.  The hardest part was running in the dark. One of the reasons I like running is that it provides the opportunity to be fully immersed in nature. No technology, no distractions.  In the darkness, all you get is a tiny pool of light: just enough to see the path in front of you. There’s an entire forest, and all you get to see is some dirt and roots.  And a few headlamps twinkling in the distance. It’s hard to describe how frantic I felt at times, not being able to see anything around me.  Physically, 100 miles didn’t feel substantially different than 50. Mentally, the challenge was the darkness.

When I crewed for Mike at Badwater, he mentioned that picking a good crew is one of the most important components of a successful race. I didn’t think about it much at the time, and I didn’t understand why that would be the case until the end of the 4th lap of this race.  Going into the 5th lap, I felt like I was suffering from information overload, even though the number of ideas I had to hold in my head was very small. Case in point: I had to choose which jacket to wear on the final lap. Despite being a binary decision, this seemed like an insurmountable task, so I deferred to Georgia to help me decide. Decisions like that, so late in the race, can make or break a finish.

To sum up: I had a great crew. Dad and Georgia were incredibly supportive, upbeat, and helped me make good decisions.  Thanks so much, you guys. I could not have done it without you.

After finishing, I promptly pronounced I would never run another 100-mile race again.  Just over 24 hours later, I’m taking less of a hard line towards that assertion. While I have no immediate plans to run another 100, I could see doing it again, sometime in the distant future. Just to see how it compares to this one.

Separating Facebook users: 4.74 Degrees

Remember my less-than-epic, although very entertaining, quest to confirm or deny the famous Six Degrees of Separation experiment, originally conducted by Stanley Milgrim?  My goal was to send out letters, as in the original experiment, and have those recipients do their best to get those letters to a named someone in Boston.  Each link in the chain would write down their name on the letter, and, by the end, we’d have a list of how many people the letter went through to get to that final person.

You might remember that not one letter made it to my contact in Boston.

Many other groups have turned to Facebook to answer the question. Several failed, fake, or ineffective “Six Degrees” Facebook groups have popped up.

However, just a few months ago, the University of Milan partnered with Facebook to report that the average number of acquaintances separating any two people in the world was not six, but 4.74.

The new research used data from 721 million Facebook users, more than one-tenth of the world’s population. Facebook posted the results on their data facebook page.

From the New York Times article:

The experiment took one month. The researchers used a set of algorithms developed at the University of Milan to calculate the average distance between any two people by computing a vast number of sample paths among Facebook users. They found that the average number of links from one arbitrarily selected person to another was 4.74. In the United States, where more than half of people over 13 are on Facebook, it was just 4.37.

That being said, Facebook users are probably a self-selected bunch.  In this case, the people who use Facebook are those who have online access and choose to use Facebook.  They might be better connected individuals than those who do not use Facebook.

Importantly, this study raises questions about definitions like “friend,” “acquaintance,” or “guy you met one time on the bus.”  Which of those actually counts as a connection?

Either way, it’s pretty exciting to know that we’re only a few introductions away from people like Hugh Laurie and David Cameron.*

*If anyone here is Facebook friends with them, let me know.

Game Theory of Black Friday

If you’re reading this real-time, you’re probably not out shopping.

Black Friday, the day after Thanksgiving, is a day of shopping madness, and is sometimes considered the beginning of the Christmas shopping season. Most major retailers open extremely early andd offer promotional sales to kick off the shopping season.

A few days ago on NYT, Robert H. Frank described Black Friday as a retail race to the bottom in terms of a zero-sum or negative-sum game:

In recent years, large retail chains have been competing to be the first to open their doors on Black Friday. The race is driven by the theory that stores with the earliest start time capture the most buyers and make the most sales. For many years, stores opened at a reasonable hour. Then, some started opening at 5 a.m., prompting complaints from employees about having to go to sleep early on Thanksgiving and miss out on time with their families. But retailers ignored those complaints, because their earlier start time proved so successful in luring customers away from rival outlets.

Tyler Cowen, of MarginalRevolution, has a different opinion.  Based on the fact that early December has in general the cheapest prices of the year, not Black Friday, he says:

Dare I suggest that some people like waiting in those lines with their thermos cups and stale bagels.  You could try to argue they are “forced to do so,” to get the bargains, but in a reasonably competitive world  each outlet will (roughly) try to maximize the consumer surplus from visiting the store, including the experience of waiting in line.

All I know is that a few of my colleagues were more excited to go home for Black Friday than for Thanksgiving on Thursday.

Wondering why Rebecca Black’s face is the photo for this post?  Check out the commercial below.  Read about it here.

Economics of this Halloween party

On Saturday, I’ll be attending the Ghost Ship Halloween party, mainly because several of my good friends are going.  I was wrangled into the party a few weeks ago when one of them sent out an email directing us to the ticketing website.

This post is about the cleverness of the Ghost Ship’s ticketing strategy.

The pricing structure looked something like this*:

  • Super Early-bird Presale: $25
  • Early-bird Presale: $30
  • Regular Presale: $35
  • Presale: $40
  • Last Chance Presale: $45

*I couldn’t remember what the names of each tier were, so I made them up. You get the idea.

These weren’t actually time-sensitive tickets; sales for each tier all ended a few days before the party. At the time the tickets were posted, you could purchase any one of these options.  I could theoretically purchase the Super Early-bird Presale or the Last Chance Presale.  Obviously, given the option, I’d prefer to purchase the less expensive ticket.

So, why wouldn’t everyone purchase the Super Early-bird Presale tickets?  Well, there were only a limited number of tickets at each pricing tier.  And those coming to the website closer do the date of the party would see which tiers sold out.  So, when I got to the website, the pricing structure looked more like this:

  • Super Early-bird Presale: $25 Sold Out
  • Early-bird Presale: $30 Sold Out
  • Regular Presale: $35 Sold Out
  • Presale: $40 Sold Out
  • Last Chance Presale: $45

I quickly purchased a ticket because, well, look at the ticket sales – a lot of people were apparently going to this party.

What’s going on here?  Ghost Ship was doing something pretty clever – they were using the ticket sales to publicly indicate how many people were purchasing tickets to the party.  The ticket sales were an indicator of the party’s popularity.

Not only that, but they were playing off of a phenomenon we discussed last week: Loss Aversion.  Tickets for Ghost Ship were selling out quickly, and I didn’t want to lose the opportunity to purchase one and attend the party … so I bought one.

There’s more to this story about ticket sales, such as the black market for tickets on Craigslist that erupted shortly after the final tier sold out, or the limited number of more expensive tickets available at the door (encouraging people to show up early), or the awesome costumes we made.  But this post is long enough as it is.

Happy Halloween!

Edit: This post got written up on the WePay blog!  Check it out here.

Closing the Deal

Caveat:  This post is about sales.  I don’t usually like reading blogs about sales, but, while my job isn’t directly in the realm of sales, I interact with a lot of sales people on a daily basis.  I like tying game theory in with my job, and this seemed like the perfect opportunity.

At one point or another, all sales reps have faced this problem: a potential customer goes “Radio Silent.”  This is what happens when, after a sales rep has several engaging conversations with a prospect, the prospect disappears.  They don’t pick up their phone and they don’t answer emails.  Often, this is intentional and a signal that the prospect is no longer interested.  Sometimes it just means they’re busy.  Either way, the sales rep usually wants to know what’s happening on the other end.

A few sales reps I know will send out an email like this:

I will make this quick, as I haven’t heard from you lately regarding your interest in [product].
If I can ask a favor: could you please let me know if our services are no longer of interest to [company]??  Should I close out this discussion?

Potential customers respond almost immediately.

Why does this work?  Potential customers feel like they’re going to lose something – a connection with your company, the opportunity to purchase a product, or something less well defined.

This is a phenomenon called Loss Aversion.

Loss aversion refers to people’s tendency to strongly prefer avoiding losses to acquiring gains. Some studies suggest that losses are twice as powerful, psychologically, as gains.

What does that mean?  If you have an apple, and someone takes it away, you feel less happy.  Someone has to give you two apples in order for your happiness level to be equal to what it was before the first apple got taken away.

Want to get more complex?

Loss aversion was first proposed as an explanation for the endowment effect—the fact that people place a higher value on a good that they own than on an identical good that they do not own … Loss aversion and the endowment effect lead to a violation of the Coase theorem—that “the allocation of resources will be independent of the assignment of property rights when costless trades are possible”

[The endowment effect: If you have an apple, and Joe has an apple that is identical in every way, you still might not want to trade with him, because you value your apple more highly.]

Anyway, back to the topic at hand: For people to negotiate on a daily basis, taking advantage of loss aversion can be an easy way to move the conversation forward.  That being said, tread softly; you probably don’t want to come off as impatient or short tempered.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 408 other followers