Forums >General Running>Last warm up race before full, do I have it in me?
I did my last warm up race before my next full marathon. I ran a 1:48 hour half marathon. Do you think I have it in me to do a 4:00 hour marathon, or even a sub-4:00 hour marathon. The marathon is in 2 weeks, taper starts now.
Jodi
PR:
Half: 1:48 (March 3rd, 2013)
Full: 4:05:40 (March 17th, 2013)
2013/2014 Goals:
Sub-4:00 hour Marathon
Sub- 125 poundsSub- 1:45 hour half.
Plug in your time in any race calculator and it'll give you an equivalent time for the marathon. the calculator assumes you've done the proper training for the marathon, though.
Feeling the growl again
A calculator yields about 3:48 for the marathon. If the HM was run without a taper, you could expect to run faster than the equivalent marathon. However, if you are not running the volume to support converting on the equivalent marathon or don't have enough experience with the marathon this may not be the case.
Without more info and a public log, 3:48 could be within reach or wildly optimistic. Four hours would seem reasonable, but again one needs more than a race time to really give a good opinion.
"If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does. There's your pep talk for today. Go Run." -- Slo_Hand
I am spaniel - Crusher of Treadmills
I don't keep a log on here. I did not run the half with a full taper (only about 3 days), earlier this week I did a 20 miler. On average I have been running between 45-55 mpw. Average paces are: long runs: 9:45 min/mile; medium runs: 8:45-9:00 min/mile; and pacing intervals around 8:00-8:30 min/mile, with one run I ran 3X 1 mile repeats at 7:30. Marathon is on March 17th.
So you did do a short taper but you have also been running pretty decent volume. Is this your first marathon? I would think if you want to do sub-4 then you SHOULD be able to go out and do sub-4. If you were running even more volume or you had several marathons under your belt I would say go for closer to what the calculator predicts....but I think that would be aggressive.
----Your statistics sound pretty close to mine. You mentioned running 45 to 55 miles a week (same here), and a 1:48 half (my best was a 1:51, but recent results indicate I am at about a 1:48).... I think a sub-4 Marathon is absolutely in reach for you. It depends on how much your pace tends to fade towards the end. That is what I personally have a problem with.
----Each person approaches this differently, but considering it takes a 9:10 average pace in the Marathon to come in at the 4 hour mark, my personal plan is to start out the first 10 miles or so at about an 8:40 pace, then the next 8 at a 9:00 pace, then the final 8 at a 9:20 pace or better. That allows a little bit of decrease in speed in the later miles, but still a finish in under 3:59:59 :-) That is just one idea, some folks will say to pace it diffferently and it will be up to you to decide what you think will work best for you.
The Plan '15 → /// "Run Hard, Live Easy." ∞
You are planning to positive split a marathon? The reason people usually slow down at the end is because they went out too fast; slowing down at the finish is not inevitable. Going out faster than you want to average on purpose is unlikely to help you at the end. Going out 30sec/mile faster than you want to average is a seriously fast start.
30sec/mile X 10 miles = 5min banked
10sec/mile X 8 miles = 1:20 banked for 6:20 total
10sec/mile over X 8 miles = 1:20 over, or ~3:55 finish time
Even if you wanted to start a little quick, 8:40 for 10 miles is really digging yourself a hole if 4:00 is near the top of your capabilities.
I would think so, as long as you pace well, so the hills late in the race do not give you a problem. My 3:47 marathon PR I ran only a 1:50 half 4 weeks before (on pretty dead legs). 1:48 should give you a great shot at getting in under 4, even with the tough course. I'm not crazy about crazy about KLD's pacing strategy, running 30 sec faster than planned average pace for 1st 10 miles seems like not the best plan to me, but that's just my opinion.
PRs: 5K: 21:25, 10K: 44:05, HM: 1:38:23* (downhill), M: 3:32:09
Spaniel, this is marathon number 9...
I'll probably do a positive split. My plan is 9:00 min miles. I am disappointed about the pacing teams.
Do not do this ^^^^^^^^
Starting out fast and 'banking time' gaurantees you will slow down at the end.... and often you will slow down a lot more than you planned. This what usually happens when runners talk about 'blowing up' at the end of the marathon. They just start too fast. KLD hasn't learned this yet, but he will. The hard way.
be curious; not judgmental
Spaniel, this is marathon number 9... I'll probably do a positive split. My plan is 9:00 min miles. I am disappointed about the pacing teams.
Just stay close to 9s and you'll have a great shot at hitting the goal.
Training for my first marathon (3:59:55), I ran closer to 11 minutes per mile on average with much less volume. If you are doing that volume @ 9:45/mi. (even if only for long runs), I would think sub 4 is definitely in the cards.
I would even suggest that you might be able to pick it up at the end. However, I WOULD NOT suggest trying to bank time. Seconds fast at the beginning will make you minutes slow at the end.
Not knowing anything about the course profile for your race, I would suggest getting out a bit BEHIND pace for the first five miles. Then, lock in on your pace through 20 miles. At that point, see what you have left in the tank. If you are feeling good, you can pick up some time and it is very fun to be strong at the end!!!
And you can quote me as saying I was mis-quoted. Groucho Marx
Rob
Right on Hereford...
It depends on how much your pace tends to fade towards the end. That is what I personally have a problem with. ----Each person approaches this differently, but considering it takes a 9:10 average pace in the Marathon to come in at the 4 hour mark, my personal plan is to start out the first 10 miles or so at about an 8:40 pace, then the next 8 at a 9:00 pace, then the final 8 at a 9:20 pace or better. That allows a little bit of decrease in speed in the later miles, but still a finish in under 3:59:59 :-)
It depends on how much your pace tends to fade towards the end. That is what I personally have a problem with.
----Each person approaches this differently, but considering it takes a 9:10 average pace in the Marathon to come in at the 4 hour mark, my personal plan is to start out the first 10 miles or so at about an 8:40 pace, then the next 8 at a 9:00 pace, then the final 8 at a 9:20 pace or better. That allows a little bit of decrease in speed in the later miles, but still a finish in under 3:59:59 :-)
Sorry, but I think that's a horrible idea.
I've only run 5 marathons. Three were negative splits or even splits, one was a 2-minute positive split, and one was a 13-minute positive split. I can tell you that the one with the big positive split was by far my most painful, worst marathon experience ever.
Most people, myself included, run a positive split accidentally. They plan to run even splits, but either overestimate their fitness, or call an audible on game day and run faster than goal pace because they think they are feeling great...at the beginning. Either way, they start too fast, fade, and end up doing some version of the death march to the finish line. That certainly describes my worst marathon (Boston, 2010).
Looking at race results and splits from a lot of marathons, I think it's fair to say that the majority of marathoners run this way -- significant positive splits accompanied by significant pain and suffering. And, almost none of these people are doing it intentionally.
So, when you say you're going to run a 6-minute positive split on purpose, which to me already sounds like a pretty painful experience, I think the odds are that your actual execution would be much worse. If most people shooting for 4 hours try to run 9:09 and end up running 8:40 in the first few miles by accident, what happens when they try to start at 8:40 pace? Think 30 or 40 minute positive split instead of the intended 6 minutes. How awful would that feel? And how much slower would they be overall?
When you get the pacing right in a marathon (and I would say I've done it only twice), it's not only a much more enjoyable experience, but it's much faster. Houston 2012 was my PR, and I had about a 1-minute negative split. Not only did I feel better during the race, but my recovery in the days and weeks afterward was amazingly easy and quick.
So, for your fastest and most enjoyable marathon, set a realistic goal and aim for even splits. Easier said than done, of course...
KLD hasn't learned this yet, but he will. The hard way.
Oh, I think he has. Or should have, I meant to say.
Log stalking...
KLD's MCM 2012
1st half: 2:05:40 (9:36 pace)
2nd half: 2:43:14 (12:28 pace)
Oh, I think he has. Or should have, I meant to say. Log stalking... KLD's MCM 2012 1st half: 2:05:40 (9:36 pace) 2nd half: 2:43:14 (12:28 pace)
Yeah, the real absurdity is this: Assuming a runner has a fitness level that will support a 3:59:59 marathon (9:09 pace), 8:40 pace would be right around that runners half-marathon pace... so, no, don't run the first 10 miles at your half-marathon pace! I can promise that will end badly... lol...