Forums >Racing>2011 Goal of Sub-3:00 Marathon
I was really suprised when I started getting pelted as I was not expecting.
Not sure why you were surprised because I seem to recall this happening to you before. You ran east or something and were surprised when the clouds overtook you and the hail began. Seems like it was this summer.
2-4 minutes difference is fair for faster runners....if you pace it perfectly. The problem is getting it just right on that day. Having run both courses multiple times, if you have a bad spot at Chicago and work through it you can do it with virtually no impact on your time. At Boston, if you hit a bad spot and it happens on one of the more challenging sections of the course, or before Newton in general, it will eat you and spit you out. Most people will not approach what they could do in Chicago at Boston. While Boston has the potential to be nearly as fast it is just hard to execute. Chicago gives you way more leeway. This does not stop me from preferring Boston.
2-4 minutes difference is fair for faster runners....if you pace it perfectly. The problem is getting it just right on that day. Having run both courses multiple times, if you have a bad spot at Chicago and work through it you can do it with virtually no impact on your time. At Boston, if you hit a bad spot and it happens on one of the more challenging sections of the course, or before Newton in general, it will eat you and spit you out.
Most people will not approach what they could do in Chicago at Boston. While Boston has the potential to be nearly as fast it is just hard to execute. Chicago gives you way more leeway. This does not stop me from preferring Boston.
I'm fascinated by this... I've run Boston 6 times, but never Chicago. It just never seems to work out in the fall. My PR is at Boston. I think I know how to pace it very well. And it is a substantial net downhill. Some would say the varying terrain also aids by working different muscle groups.
Paced perfectly, is Chicago really faster at all? I am thinking sub-3 at Boston 2011, and if that works, *possibly* 2:55 at Chicago. I had been assuming I'd get a bit of a benefit from the course, but... I can't forget how much I like the Boston course.
Give me perfect weather over a perfect course any day.
Chicago has come up short in that department lately
I'm fascinated by this... I've run Boston 6 times, but never Chicago. It just never seems to work out in the fall. My PR is at Boston. I think I know how to pace it very well. And it is a substantial net downhill. Some would say the varying terrain also aids by working different muscle groups. Paced perfectly, is Chicago really faster at all? I am thinking sub-3 at Boston 2011, and if that works, *possibly* 2:55 at Chicago. I had been assuming I'd get a bit of a benefit from the course, but... I can't forget how much I like the Boston course.
Long dead ... But my stench lingers !
Give me perfect weather over a perfect course any day. Chicago has come up short in that department lately
So has Boston (though 2009 and 2010 were good). Doesn't Boston Marathon weather tend to be more variable than Chicago Marathon weather?
Thanks for the added motivation. I like it when people say I can't do something. I'm hoping I can group you with Thunder. You will be the Thunder/Spaniel of 2011!
Not sure where I said anything about you not being able to do it. In fact, I said I hope 100% achieve it, and my 50% guess is actually quite optimistic, given that last year it was 36%. And I have zero clue what the Thunder/Spaniel reference is. Guess ya lost me a little there.
Are we there yet?
Definitely. And I also think that running a sub 3 hour marathon is much more difficult than most people think. Running one at Boston... even much more so.
I think Boston can be fast and so this statement I see as a misjudgement.. I'm not trying to say its easy but it ain't Everest
Never said Boston can't be fast. Simply saying that for someone trying to crack 3 hours, it is a more difficult course to make it happen. If Boston is run well, it can be as fast as any. BUT, if you make a couple mistakes or don't respect it enough, it will eat you up quickly. As stated above, you can "get away with" a few of these on a flat or "easier" course.
Boston suits some people but for the huge majority of folks it is 2-4 minutes slower than Chicago or other fast courses like Baystate.
Runners run
Feeling the growl again
I like Boston too but it is slower than Chicago. The benefit of net downhill is overblown, especially on courses where there is substantial downhill early in the race (beating quads up) and hills in the last 10K. Some people can run Boston well. I have done well both times I went there, that is why I am betting what may be my last shot at a fast marathon on Boston (and I can no longer train hard in the heat of summer so Chicago is out by default). However for most the combination of likely going out fast, quads beat up from early downhills, and ill-timed hills late in the race leads to it being slower.
I've heard the theory of working different muscle groups, but if you are strong enough to run a marathon well this is a moot point. Your energy reserves will govern your speed and not your muscles getting weak.
I really hate Chicago. It is over-large, crowded and dirty. Yet if time is all I care about, that is where I go. It is phenomenally fast. It changes direction enough and goes through enough buildings to shelter you from any wind, and with an early AM start it is MORE likely to give you good weather than Boston. At the pace I used to run when I was running both of those races for time, I had more people to run with at Chicago than Boston. The crowd is better at Boston but does not make up for people to draft on.
"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've done Boston, Chicago, Houston, New York and Wineglass.
Out of those 5, nothing is as hard as New York. That's in a difficulty level by itself out of those 5.
Then I would say Chicago is the fastest of the remaining 4, but has a dubious trend with being way too hot. Houston is slightly slower than Chicago. Not much. There is one biggish hill on that course, but its half the size of any hill in Boston. I think you have a better chance of good weather in Houston. But the competition is not as good at the faster paces.
Then there's Boston/Wineglass. I actually think Boston is faster than Wineglass. If you know how to run the downhills thats a positive and there are actually people to run with at the sub-3 pace. While Wineglass is also slightly downhill. I hated running on roads with cars. Intermittent water stops. Just something about the course didn't feel fast...
Maybe its just because my PR is @ Boston.
Chicago could be considered faster because if you blow up in Chicago you don't have the Newton hills from16-21 and the downhill from 21 in...
Good Bad & The Monkey
nothing is as hard as New York. That's in a difficulty level by itself out of those 5.
On what basis?
I'm running somewhere tomorrow. It's going to be beautiful. I can't wait.
Poor baby
Run like a kid again!
Nah this is the same run but it feels like it just happened in the last month. Maybe it was two months ago. I am too lazy to go back and look it up.
Your point was that most of the people in this group will fail to accomplish this. Since I am in that group and you did not say that I would be one to accomplish this feat, I am assuming that you are saying that I will fail. Thanks for the motivation. I actually believe it will happen at Indy next year and not at Boston. Not because Boston is harder but because I think it is easier to get lots of miles in during the summer when the kids are off of school and the weather is warmer.
That, my friend, is a stretch. But you're welcome.
One interesting thing would be to know what kind of percentage improvement on PRs this goal represents for people. I guess some people are going to being wildly, even unrealistically, optimistic in setting goals - others will be pretty conservative. An interesting goal would be: improve marathon PR by, say, 5%; which might be a realistic goal for most, but for the really fast people gets hard. Improvements also get trickier for older runners too, maybe an age graded percentage improvement instead...
One interesting thing would be to know what kind of percentage improvement on PRs this goal represents for people. I guess some people are going to being wildly, even unrealistically, optimistic in setting goals - others will be pretty conservative.
An interesting goal would be: improve marathon PR by, say, 5%; which might be a realistic goal for most, but for the really fast people gets hard.
Improvements also get trickier for older runners too, maybe an age graded percentage improvement instead...
I'll be aiming for an 18min improvement - 10%. I expect most people will say thats silly. Thats ok - in fact I'd probably agree with them. So maybe it will happen in 2011, maybe not. It wont stop me trying.
In my most recent marathon (October) I improved by 28mins - just over 14%. The one before that I improved by 48mins - just over 21%
I'll be aiming for an 18min improvement - 10%. I expect most people will say thats silly. Thats ok - in fact I'd probably agree with them. So maybe it will happen in 2011, maybe not. It wont stop me trying. In my most recent marathon (October) I improved by 28mins - just over 14%. The one before that I improved by 48mins - just over 21%
The thing about the marathon is that you can be trained for it but so many things can go wrong on that day that mess you up. Running a marathon at a certain pace that really pushes you is very hard to accomplish. It is not like a 5K goal where you can just keep trying it every 2 weeks. A marathon you get two or three real chances to race it a year. This is just one goal you don't have total control over because of things like the weather. Running a certain number of days straight or getting a certain amount of miles in I think you can control a lot more but marathon racing is a whole different story.. Good luck to Mandy. I'm going to have to log stalk you now to keep an eye on how your doing. Best of luck in your training.