Ah, it did not occur to me that you were there today, too.
This is the link to unofficial results
http://mcm.xacte.com/index.html
Were you running with someone else's bib? You're not turning up in the results --- nor is Allison (though I do see Caitlyn).
Options,Account, Forums
Josh ran 2:59. Their splits are together thru the half, then she drops off.
I found Caitlyn - 3:43 - indeed, I netnipped her. I don't know how to find Allison, as I don't know what bib she had.
We also haven't entered Saturday's race results either.
It's a 5k. It hurt like hell...then I tried to pick it up. The end.
Jeff's MCM race report:
MTA:
Now I see that my running neighbors were both there --- and she was a lot faster than he.
Three 3:58s sounds like mental torture. Poor guy.
Allison's MCM splits:
Curious that mile 18.6 to mile 21.75 was by far her fastest stretch of the race. That's when most people start struggling.
My personal experience is that around the 20 mile mark most people think they're going to get through it pretty well. They've come that far, are 75% of the way through, only have a 10k left to do, and will be done within the hour. Smooth sailing. Some people even speed up as a consequence.
And then your body implodes and you have to slog through the hardest 4 miles of your life.
Are we talking about Allison or Alison?
Allison P.
Ok, All = Palmer, Al = Parris (it seems to me like their names should be either Allison Pallmer and Alison Paris or Alison Palmer and Allison Parris, but that's not the case). Those were the MCM splits of Palmer.
It seems that me, Perry, and Crystal were all subject to similar patterns of slowing (me the most severely, Crystal the least severely). Here are each of our 3 miles splits (ignoring the "final bits", the recorded distances of which varied among us).
DR's splits:
The damage: mile 2 was 26 seconds slower than mile 1; mile 3 was 11 seconds slower than mile 2; and mile 3 was 37 seconds slower than mile 1.
Perry's splits:
The damage: mile 2 was 13 seconds slower than mile 1; mile 3 was 12 seconds slower than mile 2; and mile 3 was 25 seconds slower than mile 1.
Crystal's splits:
The damage: mile 2 was 10 seconds slower than mile 1; mile 3 was 9 seconds slower than mile 2; and mile 3 was 19 seconds slower than mile 1.
This is quite overdue, I know, and I'm afraid it will be less a race report than a race ... apology! Bulleted for succinctness.
Why I expected to be significantly faster this year than last year at the CAASA Step By Step 5k (which was perhaps my most disappointing race of 2011, as I thought I'd be far more powerful following my sub-60:00 10-mile breakthrough):
Excuses for why I actually ended up slower this year than last year at the CAASA Step By Step 5k (and more significantly than the race results would indicate, as I had a shorter Forerunner measurement this year):
I found myself in something of a daze immediately after the race. Beforehand I might’ve considered only taking 10 seconds off my 2011 time to be a potential worst case scenario --- but to actually add 5 seconds (I stopped my watch at 17:41, but then the results mercifully improved me to 17:38, just 2 seconds slower than last year) when my Forerunner reading came out to 3.10 miles rather than 3.14? It was all a bit too much to comprehend at first. It barely occurred to me that I’d handily won the race and successfully defended my 1OA title. After much reflection, however, it dawned on me that I’d essentially just relived the Leapin’ Lizards 5k experience (my time at mile 3 was 17:07 at both races … so the fact that my LL finish time was 18:17 should indicate just how significantly the total distance of a Liza-certified 5k can vary). Albeit a distinctly cooler version of the event (low 40s vs. low 90s!). Again I'd found myself basking in the confident glow of having recently achieved great success at a major goal race (Crofton Kiwanis just a couple weeks before Lizard and the LPR10 20 days before CAASA) --- and again I found my confidence crushed upon fumbling a 5k follow up. Twice now has my intended victory lap been reduced to a walk of shame, and twice has that disgrace been abetted solely by a hollow sense of overall victory (I somewhat narrowly held off Joe and Perry to win LL, just as I rather marginally kept Perry and Tom at bay to slay the CAASA 5k). Yet a peak race performance (a la Kiwanis and LPR10) wouldn’t really be a peak race performance if one didn’t subsequently fall from that glorious height of running prowess and, starting anew from down in the murky trough, have to resolutely begin ascending the next, even higher peak of potential.
Did you do any strides the week of the race? Due to the storm it looks like you really didn't do enough running that week and your hardest run was 2 days before the race, so probably Saturday was the day you were most physically fatigued the entire week, too.
The hurricane thoroughly threw off my customary race week plan. For years now, it's been take off Sunday; easy mileage on Monday; a brief, sprinty workout on Tuesday (with actual speed work amounting to no more than 1.5 miles); usually off Wednesday; Breezily Brisk on Thursday; and then a short, light run followed by strides on Friday. But because of Sandy, I had to get in a run on Sunday, missed Monday, translated my Tuesday workout to the elliptical (it was still quite cold and damp out, and avoiding coming down with a cold was a high priority for me), and then did a light run Wednesday before going Breezily Brisk Thursday and taking Friday completely off. So my routine was indeed way out of whack. I am beginning to think, though, that a Thursday BB is not such a wise tactic after all --- unless the race is going to be on Sunday, in which case I would take Friday off and then do the light run on Saturday (which is exactly what I did for the last two LPR10s). Next week I might endeavor to do a minor Fartlek Friction on Monday and then a BB on Wednesday.
I find with delayed onset muscle soreness that two days after the exercise is when I'm at my weakest. My nerves can still do pretty well the next day, but the second day my body goes into full recovery mode. So I always prefer to do something like:
-Normal run
-Day off
-Easy run
-Race
So I agree with your LPR10 preparation as an ideal way to end the week.
DR its pointless to compare your Forerunner distances between this year and last year. Quite simply your previous Forerunner read everything longer than Perry, Crystal, Joe, and I. Your new Forerunner reads similar to one of the Rapps Forerunner, Joe, and my Forerunner, though Perry and Crystal do have one Forerunner (I think it maybe the 405, but I could be confusing it with another one of their watches, I think they have three) that reads shorter than everybody else (for example if we get 3.10 they will get 3.07) on that one. I think Crystal was using that one in the spring and summer as she went from having shortly longer distances than me on group runs to shorter runs all of a sudden.
My thought is the higher the mileage you are running and the shorter the race you are running the more you benefit from tapering. Its like for longer races, even when you have not tapered great, if you have a ton of mileage, your legs might not feel springy, but they are not really dying on you as they can go at a fairly fast clip for a good while. However, whenever you have to run at a speed your legs seldom train at (5K or shorter), your legs are going to tire really quickly and start to feel like lead because you are activating fast twitch muscle that was not activated on tempos and what not, so you need to be fresh.