Forums >Running 101>What do you feel after a long run @ MP?
Re Garmin reading long, yes, you can't just assume your Garmin will read 26.2. You can wind up very disappointed that way.
I prefer to turn off autolap for races, try to keep "current lap pace" a little faster than my goal for this mile, and manually hit the lap button. If the mile markers are inaccurate, it may be better to just leave it on autolap and pace slightly ahead the whole way, but then you're just guessing at how long the course will measure in the end.
I never sweat this discrepancy in training. So what if I did my MP runs at 6:50 by Garmin and I have to keep it at more like 6:47 on race day -- race day is just different all around. For training, the Gamin is my ground truth, unless it's gone totally wacko (does happen).
Hey, great job with the TT. I'm too weak to do those now, so I substitute with tempo runs when I can't find a race. I did 41:59 and 42:14 10k TT in 2009 on my way to 3:08 marathon, so you're not too far off from your goal once you get in some consistent training. There's nothing wrong with going ahead with the full since you still have time to get in some training, but did you consider switching to the half (if that's even possible) in order to get in a strong race?
Good luck!
That is nice information for me. I am not thinking to switch to the half at the moment. What would be different to race this full and do another one in the future instead of a half and then a full? The only reason I can guess is that you may concern my base may not strong enough to execute the plan.
5k - 20:56 (09/12), 7k - 28:40 (11/12), 10k trial - 43:08 (03/13), 42:05 (05/13), FM - 3:09:28 (05/13), HM - 1:28:20 (05/14), Failed 10K trial - 6:10/mi for 4mi (08/14), FM - 3:03 (09/14)
There is definitely nothing wrong with racing this full and it can be good to gain the experience. You already recognize that you're not ready to BQ, so you don't have to worry so much of a complete blow up. It can be good to do the full just to get the experience of racing a full, learning how to fuel during the race, and experiencing the last miles of the race. FWIW, I raced my first full on about 35 mpw base with similar PRs to yours and finished in 3:18. I feel like you are in a similar situation I was when I ran my first marathon, so I thought I would share.
I think the 10K time is a good benchmark, but like any other benchmark for the marathon distance, it assumes a certain aerobic fitness level. I used to run 43 minute 10K's on just running around the neighborhood, no training plan, 25 mile weeks. If i had tried to run a marathon at that time though Iwould have crashed and burned around mile 12 at an 8 minute pace. With an easy day the day before, i have always found the MP LR to be fairly easy, even with as many as 13 miles at MP. If you struggle with it in training, it can mean you need to reconsider things. Everyone is different, with differing abilities at certain distances, so my experiencemay not be analogous to yours. Maybe you are naturally more aerobically fit, but slower at shorter distances, but maybe not. With your recent break in training, be honest with yourself about your aerobic endurance or you will pay the price on race day.
Thank you for the sharing. I certainly concern if my base is strong enough to run at 7:40. At the moment I think I am comfortable with 7:50 as my MP. Here is the stats of today's long run. My breathing was good all the way except some hills. I didn't feel it hard but at the end of the run my legs were rather tired.
Slow-smooth-fast
Your anticipated time is what I got in my first marathon, I did I it In 3:23. My longs runs of between 16 and 22 miles where between 8 and 8:30 pace. Probably closer to 9 at the beginning of my 14 week plan. I recall a tough 18 miler done in 8:20 pace, 2 weeks later I did a 22 and averaged 7:52 so that was a confidence booster. A good workout I liked was 3x3 mile or 2 x4 mile at 30 seconds quicker than marathon pace.
I do find anything faster than easy pace (anything that makes me work) is tough but I can really up the ante in a race.
take for example my last half. My longest tempo was 7 and I avg 7:25 pace which felt ok but not the easiest. I then went to run the half at 6:55 pace with the last 2 miles in 6:40 and 6:12 - so I may have had more?
"I've been following Eddy's improvement over the last two years on this site, and it's been pretty dang solid. Sure the weekly mileage has been up and down, but over the long haul he's getting out the door and has turned himself into quite a runner. He's only now just figuring out his potential. Consistency in running is measured in years, not weeks. And over the last couple of years, Eddy's made great strides" Jeff 14 Jan 2009
Eddy, Thank you for sharing your experience. you are probably the kind of race person who can get energized by the race atmosphere. I am not sure if I am. I don't know if the race will help me. Plus, the marathon I am running is rather small. There will probably be about 300 people. So I might just run by myself most of the time.
Yesterday I run at my tempo pace (6:51) that was faster than my 10K trial pace (6:56) 2 weeks ago. It was a much flatter route though. My breathing was much more comfortable than the trial race. I think I could probably go another one or two miles on that pace. Was that just a good day or my two-week workout has helped?
Also I am wondering how many seconds difference between the tempo pace and the MP? McMillan calculator gives about 40 - 60 seconds difference.
If you can do a 6-7 mile tempo at 6:51, 3:20 may be conservative.
40-60 seconds sounds way too big to me; I'd think 25-35 seconds. So your MP may be faster than you are thinking.
Unless you're only running about 45 miles a week. Then it may be aggressive.
Runners run
Well there is that.
Yesterday I run at my tempo pace (6:51) that was faster than my 10K trial pace (6:56) 2 weeks ago. It was a much flatter route though. My breathing was much more comfortable than the trial race. I think I could probably go another one or two miles on that pace. Was that just a good day or my two-week workout has helped? Also I am wondering how many seconds difference between the tempo pace and the MP? McMillan calculator gives about 40 - 60 seconds difference.
McMillan calculator is not a calculator,but rather a forecaster. A forecast by definition is not accurate. The tool works very well for my 5k to half. My marathon is always way slower. You will need several years to figure out your adjustment with it. I would suggest you race a short distance, then add some buffer on McMillian forecasted marathon time. Over time, you will do a little better.
Using training to estimate is more personal. Too many factors, mileage, and recovery ability etc. "High" mileage runners train at fatigue state. A slow recover runner can't train too fast, but it doesn't mean he/she will race slower, because of taper.
The most important thing is not to over agonize, none of us can get it right every time. I would say we get it wrong most of the time.
I understand we have to talk about it.
,
The tool works very well for my 5k to half. My marathon is always way slower. You will need several years to figure out your adjustment with it
Ha. I just checked your PRs... our marathon PRs are within 3 seconds. But your half PR is 5 minutes faster than mine. Yeah, I have to adjust McMillan's times down slightly for marathon, instead of up.
45 mpw is not enough base to support then. I have a 20 mile run coming this Sunday. It is my first 20 miles. Can I use that to gauge my base? I was planning to run at 8:30. If I run at 8:00, would that give any indication? Also, it is first time I am going to try some energy gel.