Pages: 1 |
| St. George or Chicago, Which Should I Do? (Read 368 times) |
|
posted: 5/14/2008 at 11:52 AM |
Okay, I continue my quest to BQ. I was fit enough and fast enough to BQ last year in Chicago, but alas it was 90 degrees and I finished in 3:30:23, ten minutes slower than what I needed. I have run Chicago each of the last three years improving my time each time. It is flat, fast and well supported, plus it is an easy roll out of bed from the hotel I stay in there.
BUT, I also just found out that I got into the St. George Marathon in Utah. It has a 2600 foot net elevation drop, with what looks like some rolling hills thrown in about 7 miles into the race. I live on the coast, where the biggest hill I run is probably 20 feet high, so I am uncertain as to how the starting elevation of 5,000 feet would affect me, and then of course how well I can handle the hills of St. George. St. George is also remote, which means probably taking a bus to the starting line, somewhere around 4:30 in the morning, and because it is a smaller marathon, I don't know much about how good the support is.
Can anybody here give me any advice or even firsthand experience regarding St. George? Which race would be better for a BQ? |
|
|
| view log Blaine Moore |
posted: 5/14/2008 at 2:05 PM |
If all you care about is the BQ, I'd stick with what you know and run Chicago.
If you want a good chance at a BQ but rate a new experience as more important, then run in St. George. |
Run to Win
I just started using Twitter - anybody else on there? http://twitter.com/BlaineMoore
I am now officially an older guy. Don't believe me? Ask Teresa's DS15. |
|
|
| view log Mr. Pervy McPervyPants |
posted: 5/14/2008 at 2:10 PM |
What's the date on St. George? How far apart are they?
If it's 3 weeks or more, I'd just do both, if I were you.
I don't know what the elevation would do to you at St. George's, or whether the downhills would counter any negative effects, or whether your quads might be ganked so badly on those downhills that you'd actually run slower. I know its a fast marathon ... but if you don't train in a lot of hills, it might not be. And I agree with Blaine: knowing a course well sure helps.
Then again, St. George sure looks like fun ...
I checked. They're only 8 days apart this year. Hell, I'd still register for both. You'll probably BQ at St. George and can make Chicago your victory lap. |
E-mail: JakeKnight2002@aol.com
---------------------------------------
Maniac # 965
"Don't give the prick the satisfaction ..."
~ Gunnery Sergeant Thomas Highway
[Space for Rent - but we don't rent to Scout7's 'round here in these parts] |
|
|
| view log |
posted: 5/14/2008 at 3:13 PM |
If you ran 3:30 at Chicago last year, then I'm absolutely certain you can BQ there this year if weather is normal. In fact, you can probably BQ on any normal course if you are in same shape as you were then. Most people I know of were 20-40 minutes slower than normal at Chicago last year.
If the only way you had a chance to BQ was to run an aided course like St. George, then I'd say go ahead, but if you do it at Chicago you wil have done it on a "record eligible" course rather than an aided one. Go for Chicago. |
Masters PR's:
40's - 5k 16:39; 10k 33:48, HM 1:15:27, Marathon 2:43:12
50's - couch potato
60's - 5k 19:02, 10k 38:35, HM 1:26:33, 30k 2:06:26 |
|
|
|
posted: 5/14/2008 at 3:28 PM |
| Isn't Chicago registration closed already anyway? |
"On most days, run easy. On some days, run hard. But not too hard." |
|
|
|
posted: 5/14/2008 at 4:06 PM |
| Quote from milesoftrials on 5/14/2008 at 3:28 PM: Isn't Chicago registration closed already anyway?
I am already registered for both races. Now I have to make a choice. I can defer my St. George registration until next year without going through the lottery if I do it soon enough. |
|
|
| view log |
posted: 5/14/2008 at 5:38 PM
modified: 5/14/2008 at 5:43 PM |
I faced your same choice, and I'm going with St. George this year. I'm tired of rolling the dice on Chicago's weather (2006: 30 degrees, 2007: 90 degrees). If I'm going to commit a half of a year to going after my first BQ time, I'm going to do my damnest to let my training -- not the weather -- be the deciding factor in whether I meet that goal. St. George's has historically consistent favorable weather conditions, low humidity and little wind.
Does the starting elevation worry me? A little, but Daniels classifies that as only moderate altitude which should not have significant adverse physiological effects. Also remember that you're only going to be at 5000+ feet elevation for a short time. The city itself is under 3000 feet elevation, and the average elevation for the course is closer to 4000 feet.
Do the downhills worry me? A little, but I just know I'm going to have to do some training for them. Since I live in Chicago, that's probably going to mean running up and down parking garage ramps. Not fun, but I'll do it. Also, I know that if I train for them, the downhills are going to mean a fast course. At St. George, that could mean a 4-6 minute pickup if I'm sufficiently acclimated to the downhill running.
Finally, I have no worries about the logistics or course support for St. George. The reviews from past runners are universally outstanding. Plus, it'll undoubtedly be a unique experience and scenic delight (at least for the miles when I'm capable of appreciating such things  ).
But, I'll be the first to admit its a close call. Both are fast, favorable courses under the right circumstances. The decision was even harder for me because I live in Chicago, so the logistics would be even easier (and cheaper) to run my hometown race. I not only know the Chicago Marathon course, but I run on portions of the course everyday. Blaine is correct in noting that kind of familiarity is helpful. I'm sure I'll have plenty of second-guessing about my decision.
But all factors considered, for me personally, I think St. George is my better shot at a BQ ... and I think I'll really enjoy the race either way. |
| How To Run a Marathon: Step 1 - start running. There is no Step 2. |
|
|
| view log |
posted: 5/17/2008 at 9:34 PM |
| Quote from Jim24315 on 5/14/2008 at 3:13 PM: If you ran 3:30 at Chicago last year, then I'm absolutely certain you can BQ there this year if weather is normal. In fact, you can probably BQ on any normal course if you are in same shape as you were then. Most people I know of were 20-40 minutes slower than normal at Chicago last year.
If the only way you had a chance to BQ was to run an aided course like St. George, then I'd say go ahead, but if you do it at Chicago you wil have done it on a "record eligible" course rather than an aided one. Go for Chicago.
Jim, what do you mean by a "record eligible" course? |
|
|
| view log |
posted: 5/17/2008 at 10:30 PM
modified: 5/17/2008 at 10:54 PM |
| Quote from runnin-at-sixty on 5/17/2008 at 9:34 PM: what do you mean by a "record eligible" course?
A record eligible course is a course that satisfies the requirements of USATF Rule 185.5. The two requirements are as follows:
(a) The course must not have a net decrease in elevation from start to finish exceeding one part per thousand (i.e., one meter per kilometer.)
(b) The start and finish of the race must lie no more than 30% of the race distance apart as measured along the straight line between them, except when it can be shown that the average component of the wind direction at the head of the race (the lead runner) did not constitute a significant tail wind. Note: a tailwind shall be deemed to be significant if it prevails consistently throughout more than 50% of the course during the race.
A course that meets these requirements is called an "unaided course" and a course that does not meet both of these requirements is called an "aided course." Only times run on unaided courses are eligible for USATF records, such as world records, American records, etc. Some well-known aided marathons included Boston, New York, Steamtown, Grandmas, California Int'l, and St. George.
The Boston Athletic Association (BAA) does not distinguish between aided and unaided courses in determining qualification for the Boston Marathon. The BAA requires that the qualifying course be certified, meaning that it meets or exceeds USATF requirements for determining the length of the course (or the equivalent standard for international courses). The BAA lists the most common qualifying marathons on its website. As it relates to this thread, both Chicago and St. George are certified, qualifying marathons. |
| How To Run a Marathon: Step 1 - start running. There is no Step 2. |
|
|
| view log |
posted: 5/17/2008 at 10:52 PM
modified: 5/17/2008 at 11:00 PM |
You can punch in any state on this USATF link to get a list of most certified courses. The heading of 4th column to the right is "Record Eligible". Next to each course under that column is a "yes", "no", or "wind-dependent".
http://www.usatf.org/events/courses/search/
Surprisingly I didn't find St. George on the list after searching "UT". I'm pretty sure that it is certified, but not record eligible. Being eligilbe for "Boston Qualfiying" and some other qualifiers does not mean that it is record eligible, btw. The Chicago Marathon is record eligible, Boston is not. |
Masters PR's:
40's - 5k 16:39; 10k 33:48, HM 1:15:27, Marathon 2:43:12
50's - couch potato
60's - 5k 19:02, 10k 38:35, HM 1:26:33, 30k 2:06:26 |
|
|
| view log |
posted: 5/20/2008 at 5:32 PM
modified: 5/20/2008 at 5:34 PM |
I did StG last year and BQ'ed. Couple of tips:
1) Don't worry about the altitude. It really wont affect you, except on Veyo Hill, which is a small uphill rise at about mile 7 or so. When you run downhill, you simply don't need as much oxygen. You just need your leg turnover to be fast.
2) Learn how to run downhill properly, through practice. There are sections in the 2nd half of the race that are very steep downhill grades, 8-10%. If you are pounding your heels and putting on the brakes on these types of grades, you will do very poorly at StG. If you run downhills properly, you actually DONT beat up your quads! Your feet actually hurt more than anything, as your toes get crushed up into the front of your shoes. I think 90-95% of runners don't know how to run downhill. Stay light on your feet, dont hit your heels, and whip your legs behind you like Roadrunner. Don't be afraid of going fast. And relax!
3) Almost everyone who is properly trained for StG runs a negative split at StG. I ran 1:37 first half, 1:33 2nd half. |
|
|
|
posted: 5/21/2008 at 9:13 PM |
I've done both and I loved St G. It's a beautiful course and the weather is probably a lot more predictable (cold at the start, warming throughout the day but overall pretty good). The course is FAST but you will be sore...the first few miles are gently rolling, Veyo Hill is the only climb of any significance and you can negative split that course very easy. The last 5-6 miles are very gently downhill so if you still have your legs under you, you can really roll into town. The severe downhills are around 14 if memory serves. I paced 3:10 there a few years back and went through the half very easy at 1:35:45, expecting to make up those 45 seconds between 13 and 20. It turned out with no additional effort we made up that 45 seconds in about 2 miles, and I had the brakes on to avoid going too fast as my whole group ran up the road away from me! Show some patience on that course and you'll run very fast. And be prepared for sore quads for a few days afterwards!
Chicago is also fast, but too flat for my taste - it's monotonously flat. Add in the massive crowds and the dicey weather and you COULD run fast but it's not necessarily as easy as some might think.
As far as record eligible - if the BAA accepts it, that's all you need unless you're looking for a world record or Olympic Trials qualifier! |
|
|
| view log |
posted: 5/21/2008 at 11:14 PM
modified: 5/21/2008 at 11:14 PM |
| Quote from PacerChris on 5/21/2008 at 9:13 PM: I had the brakes on to avoid going too fast as my whole group ran up the road away from me! Show some patience on that course and you'll run very fast. And be prepared for sore quads for a few days afterwards!
Just so everyone is clear:
Downhill <> Sore Quads.
Downhill + Brakes = Sore Quads. 
That said, you will be more sore overall after St George than if you did Chicago. Every joint in your body seems to ache. |
|
|
|
posted: 5/21/2008 at 11:20 PM |
| Good point - but as the 3:10/7:15 per mile pacer, I couldn't rightly bomb down the hill at 6:05 pace! Next time you're engaging the services of a pacer, give them a little love... |
|
|
| view log |
posted: 5/21/2008 at 11:54 PM |
Chris- Good work holding back at the toll of your own body to run an even pace.  |
|
|
Pages: 1 |
|
