12345

Races vs. Time Trials (Read 1211 times)


HobbyJogger & HobbyRacer

    57+65+70+75=4:27.

     

    Never mind the rest of the thread -- these splits are fabulous.

    It's a 5k. It hurt like hell...then I tried to pick it up. The end.


    Needs more cowbell!

      Never mind the rest of the thread -- these splits are fabulous.

       

      I feel sorta queasy thinking about doing ONE lap at that average speed.  Sheesh.

      I shoot pretty things! ~

      '14 Goals:

      • 6 duathlons (1 Olympic distance)

      • 130#s (and stay there, gotdammit!)


      HobbyJogger & HobbyRacer

        That's ok - there aren't too many of us that can run consistent 57sec quarters for a mile.

        It's a 5k. It hurt like hell...then I tried to pick it up. The end.

          Yep. I was all jacked up. It was at University of Wisconsin's indoor track, pretty new technology in those days, green rubberized something. Was going to kill it. Just me and the guy with the watch.

           

          Blew through the first quarter in close to a PR -- for a quarter.

           

          I never did get that 4:15. My best wound up as 4:22.8.

           

          I'm thinking 200m splits since this was an indoor track...

           

          27-30-32-33-34-36-40-35

           

          When you went out in 27, did your friend say anything?

           

          Did that 57 include the extra 9 meters for the mile? Or were you just running 1600m? (Or was it a 220y track and are these 440y splits?)

           

          Did you know that the 2:02 you split for the first 800m is the equivalent of a 4:30 mile? Plus, you did it very unevenly, so I'd say that it is already close to a 4:25 effort by itself... given that, the way you held on is nothing short of miraculous.

           

          So many questions...

           

          4:22.8 is a good time.

            How many of you do time trials in place of races from time to time?  And what I mean by a time trial is an all out race, but it's only you. I'm asking because I don't race that much, but occasionally to see where I'm at I'll run a time trial. This almost always leaves me dissapointed because I don't do as well compared to races.  

             

            I'm currently training for a half in April and I ran a 10k just now and I ended up running it at the same pace as a 6 mile tempo run I did a few weeks ago. During the tempo run, I felt strong and controlled, and today I felt awful and was exerting too much effort for the pace I was going. This leaves me upset and rethinking my pacing strategy for the half.  Do others have the same experience? Maybe I just had an especially off day today, or I'm not acclimated to the weather (70).

            You should never EVER race your workout.  In that respect, if you're doing "all-out" time trial, that itself is a failure.  Your goal in training is to get you ready to "RACE WELL", at least that's my objective, and not to do your very best in the workout.  Nobody gives you, unless you had a bet or if you've been nice to your wife and she may give you a pat on a back, a medal or plaque for doing a very fast time trial all by yourself.  Save it for the real race.  Any time trial or tempo run that you do in training should be in good control and should be done without kicking it in at the end.  One of the biggest mistakes people make is to sprint at the end of "workout" to meet the pre-determined (or wishful) target time for that workout.  It would be SOOOOOO much better to just run through and, if the time wasn't as good as you'd hoped, evaluate and alternate your plan, if necessary, so you'll still come right on the RACE DAY.


            Interval Junkie --Nobby

              You should never EVER race your workout.  In that respect, if you're doing "all-out" time trial, that itself is a failure. 

               

              Of course, Nobby is right if official times are the only thing you value -- or if you have chances to actually win something.  However, if races are basically just formal ways to figure out how fast you can go, then I don't really see a problem with a one-man race.  Of course, you should keep in mind that all the risks of racing are present in your time-trial (injury, etc).  

               

              Every once in a while I do a 1-mile time-trial to gauge how fast I am compared to my HS PR over 20 years ago.  I have no intention of running a 1-mile race in adulthood.  But it's the only time I remember from my youth that I was really proud of (4:48).  I'm at 5:50 right now -- though I too think I would run faster in a real race.

               

              Besides, time-trials are cheaper than races these days.

              2014 Goals:  sub-3 Marathon 

              Current Status 06/19: Pelvic stress-fracture = 6-weeks of no running.

                Of course, Nobby is right if official times are the only thing you value -- or if you have chances to actually win something.  However, if races are basically just formal ways to figure out how fast you can go, then I don't really see a problem with a one-man race.  Of course, you should keep in mind that all the risks of racing are present in your time-trial (injury, etc).  

                 

                Every once in a while I do a 1-mile time-trial to gauge how fast I am compared to my HS PR over 20 years ago.  I have no intention of running a 1-mile race in adulthood.  But it's the only time I remember from my youth that I was really proud of (4:48).  I'm at 5:50 right now -- though I too think I would run faster in a real race.

                 

                Besides, time-trials are cheaper than races these days.

                 

                That's exactly how I feel, but I understand the problem with it. All of the injury risk with no reward or really any chance to run to your full potential so in a way, what's the point? I think as I gain experience and have a better sense of my fitness based on tempo runs, I won't feel the need to do time trials to see where I'm at.

                2014 Goal: Run faster than 3:37:07 in the NYC Marathon


                HobbyJogger & HobbyRacer

                  Well, really, what exactly is the dividing line between an "official race" and a "time trial" ?

                   

                  Whether you advertise? Whether you advertise publically? Whether you charge admission? Whether you post the results later on to a bulletin board or a web site?

                  It's a 5k. It hurt like hell...then I tried to pick it up. The end.


                  Interval Junkie --Nobby

                    That's exactly how I feel, but I understand the problem with it. All of the injury risk with no reward or really any chance to run to your full potential so in a way, what's the point? I think as I gain experience and have a better sense of my fitness based on tempo runs, I won't feel the need to do time trials to see where I'm at.

                     

                    I think if you're doing a 5k Time-Trial to see how fast your next week's 5k race is going to be, then Nobby is right: you're doing it wrong.  If your 5k Time-trial is to find out how fast you are because there is no 5k in your near future, then go for it.

                    2014 Goals:  sub-3 Marathon 

                    Current Status 06/19: Pelvic stress-fracture = 6-weeks of no running.

                      Well, really, what exactly is the dividing line between an "official race" and a "time trial" ?

                       

                      Whether you advertise? Whether you advertise publically? Whether you charge admission? Whether you post the results later on to a bulletin board or a web site?

                       

                      Whether there are other people.

                      Runners run.

                        You mentioned having run 37 miles over the weekend and training for an ultra before the time trial.

                        For a race you would taper- obviously the results will be different, and the time you ran is not indicative of your race pace.

                         

                        So if your purpose in running the trial was to determine your race goal you did not go about it the right way.

                        PBs since age 60:  5k- 24:36, 10k - 47:17. Half Marathon- 1:42:41.

                                                            10 miles (unofficial) 1:16:44.

                         

                          Of course, Nobby is right if official times are the only thing you value -- or if you have chances to actually win something.  However, if races are basically just formal ways to figure out how fast you can go, then I don't really see a problem with a one-man race.  Of course, you should keep in mind that all the risks of racing are present in your time-trial (injury, etc).  

                           

                          Every once in a while I do a 1-mile time-trial to gauge how fast I am compared to my HS PR over 20 years ago.  I have no intention of running a 1-mile race in adulthood.  But it's the only time I remember from my youth that I was really proud of (4:48).  I'm at 5:50 right now -- though I too think I would run faster in a real race.

                           

                          Besides, time-trials are cheaper than races these days.

                          I don't think people who try to get their "real" time in races are the ones who "have chances to actually win something".  I'd say majority of people want to get PR in the official setting; otherwise, there's no reason to call that PR.  It's almost like (sorry, ladies) masterbating looking at pictures in Playboy and telling people you had slept with 100 girls (sorry, I've been watching "When I Met Your Mother" too much lately...).  It's like finding a cure for cancer and nobody knows about.  

                           

                          There's NO WAY you run faster or as fast in a solo-effort than/as the actual race with other runners.  To say you do, to me, actually means you either (1) suck at peaking or (2) you are in fact one of those people who race their training and never reach their true potential.  There are people who aways say "Oh, I just race through this one (race) so I didn't taper or get seriously ready for it..."  In most cases, it's either sour-grape or excuse.  Sure, sometimes people do use the actual races as a part of their training.  Then they wouldn't push it as much as they can.  But that's the whole point about "training"; they are using the "race" as "time trial" and they won't go "all-out".  If someone is running a time trial "all-out" and run a race "sub-par", that's defeating the purpose........as far as I'm concerned.  For some people, that's perfectly fine--to run a crapy race, knowing he/she ran minutes faster somewhere else without anybody knowing.  

                           

                          If someone is running "time trial" at regular interval just to see where they are at, that's probably a different story.  That, to me, is different from trying to see just how fast they can really go; that's just simply comparing where they are at each month or each week or whatever.  

                            I'm thinking 200m splits since this was an indoor track...

                             

                            27-30-32-33-34-36-40-35

                             

                            When you went out in 27, did your friend say anything?

                             

                            Did that 57 include the extra 9 meters for the mile? Or were you just running 1600m? (Or was it a 220y track and are these 440y splits?)

                             

                            Did you know that the 2:02 you split for the first 800m is the equivalent of a 4:30 mile? Plus, you did it very unevenly, so I'd say that it is already close to a 4:25 effort by itself... given that, the way you held on is nothing short of miraculous.

                             

                            So many questions...

                             

                            4:22.8 is a good time.

                             

                            1. It was a 220-yard track, the way they all were back then.

                             

                            2. Those 220 splits are probably accurate, although maybe too much credit for the 35 at the end.

                             

                            3. My friend said, "Uh-oh."

                             

                            4. Thanks. The 4:22.8 (on the same track, coincidentally) was pretty good, but I always felt I fell way short of potential because A) I started college by going from 40 miles a week in the summer to some crazy 100+ at 6-minute-and-under pace for much of it my first week of college, with nothing in between, and was perpetually hurt, and dare I say Nobby415, perpetually without a base until I eventually gave up and started running on my own (and being team manager for a while); B) I learned about drinking in college and became very good at it (with the help of a mostly newspaper career) until I quit in January 2010.

                             

                            I ran an even-split 3:11.5 3/4-mile as part of a workout a few weeks before the ill-fated time trial, which was the reason for the ill-fated time trial.

                             

                            My best mile effort ever was probably: 4:25.8 -- on a 12-laps-to-the-mile all-purpose concrete surface in a high school gym. City record at the time (I don't even know if they run meets on those things anymore).


                            HobbyJogger & HobbyRacer

                              AP:

                              Well, really, what exactly is the dividing line between an "official race" and a "time trial" ?

                               

                              Whether you advertise? Whether you advertise publically? Whether you charge admission? Whether you post the results later on to a bulletin board or a web site?

                               

                              Whether there are other people.

                               

                              That makes sense -- you're saying it is all about the competition. To this I can relate.

                               

                              Then getting a fast friend out to pace you for a time trial is enough to (conceptually) turn it into a race. Or getting a friend of about your speed out to actually race you is probably even better.

                               

                              And falling into the no-man's-land in a race, so you wind up with no competition at all, is enough to conceptually drop it back into a time trial.

                              It's a 5k. It hurt like hell...then I tried to pick it up. The end.

                                I think, to return to the question, that a time trial is a controlled effort done with a training purpose in mind. They are certainly mentioned a lot in the H.I.T. book.

                                 

                                A race, you go out against other people, factor it all in, see how you do in your age group and everybody else and go for it.

                                 

                                Sometimes, in the H.I.T. method and others, races can SERVE as time trials in that you train through them and they're part of your program.  The book says you have to be OK with "being last" under those circumstances, although that's an exaggeration and in fact, you might run well. But they only serve a purpose on the way to a bigger goal.

                                12345