Forums >Racing>Anyone ignore splits during races?
Will Run for Donuts!
Does anyone race without checking your splits or time during a race? I'm talking about completely ignoring your watch and just basing your pace on feel alone. I've run races based on feel before, but those have generally been events which I was doing more for training, and I didn't really have a time goal. And I've mostly positive split in those, because I'm not a great pacer and I'm terrible about knowing my pace just based on feel. When I'm actually racing for time, I check my watch pretty regularly, to make sure I'm holding pace but not overcooking it either. I can't imagine actually trying to race a half or full just based on feel alone. Does anyone do this regularly? Any advantages to this approach?
RIP Milkman
I check my splits for the reasons you alluded to: only to slow myself down. I find it's hard sometimes to run by feel for the first mile because you're so amped up and your legs may be fresher than usual. Otherwise, I don't use my watch to speed myself up.
5K: 16:37 (11/20) | 10K: 34:49 (10/19) | HM: 1:14:57 (5/22) | FM: 2:36:31 (12/19)
Are we there, yet?
I check splits for reference only. They don't affect my pace or effort. At most they give me an indication of whether it's going to be a good race or not.
2024 Races:
03/09 - Livingston Oval Ultra 6-Hour, 22.88 miles
05/11 - D3 50K 05/25 - What the Duck 12-Hour
06/17 - 6 Days in the Dome 12-Hour.
It's Tuesday every day
Hello - during non-marathon races, I ignore splits. (I do hear the watch beep every time I hit a mile, but I don't look at it, and in fact, I try not to hear splits anybody's calling out. I focus on doing what I'd planned to do in the race.)
During marathons (I've only run one with a pace group), I always put a set of "Do *NOT* go out faster than this" mile splits on one arm and check against that the first few miles to be sure I'm not going faster than that. Sometimes I'll have a second set of splits on the other arm because I really want to exceed some minimum goal, but I tend to not end up checking that much after the beginning.
So, yeah... a race-split-ignorer.
Track workouts, though: totally different scenario.
--Christine
Last race with a watch was oct 2012. The advantages of this depend entirely on the goblins in your skull. Mine don’t like to know. When a race has split clocks I just assume they’re wrong. I also like the surprise at the end when you see the finish clock. Sometimes it’s wrong too and you get another surprise when you check the results. At this point though, I pretty much know how fast I am or am not. The thing I like best about races though is racing, and the post race cool down with buddies reliving the race.
Come all you no-hopers, you jokers and roguesWe're on the road to nowhere, let's find out where it goes
Mmmm Bop
I had no choice when my Garmin died a couple of miles into a marathon a few years ago. I did surprisingly ok considering it was a small race and ran most of it solo! (finished in 3rd place)
5k - 17:53 (4/19) 10k - 37:53 (11/18) Half - 1:23:18 (4/19) Full - 2:50:43 (4/19)
Mother of Cats
Does anyone race without checking your splits or time during a race? I'm talking about completely ignoring your watch and just basing your pace on feel alone.
Yes - I'm a firm believer in this. I have not raced off of splits since 2011. All 7 of my marathons have been paced off of feel, including my marathon PR this weekend (split 92/90). At the risk of bragging, people often comment on how well I pace races - I do it all off of feel, and would not do it as well if I was relying on my watch.
Racing off of feel means that you don't get screwed if the mile markers are off, or an individual mile is uphill or windy, or tall buildings interfere with your GPS. And you don't waste mental energy stressing about splits.
It also means that you run to the absolute best of your ability that day. We all know that as runners we have good days and bad days - running off of feel means that you don't falsely limit yourself if you have a good day; and that you don't aggressively bury yourself if you have a bad day.
I ran major PRs at the 10 mile and half-marathon distances last year - each PR was at least a minute faster than I thought I was capable of. Had I been checking splits during either race, I would have panicked and backed off, since the splits would have been so much faster than what I was expecting.
The big trick to running off of effort is learning what feels right. As opposed to chasing what you think you "should" be doing.
If you try to run a 10K thinking "I should be going out at 6:30 pace and I'm trying to guess what 6:30 pace feels like" then you will just be tensing up and worrying and doing it wrong.
If, on the other hand, you try to run a 10K just running "what feels right" then you'll pull it off.
Everyone's gotta running blog; I'm the only one with a POOL-RUNNING blog.
And...if you want a running Instagram where all the pictures are of cats, I've got you covered.
Yes - I'm a firm believer in this. I have not raced off of splits since 2011. All 7 of my marathons have been paced off of feel, including my marathon PR this weekend (split 92/90). At the risk of bragging, people often comment on how well I pace races - I do it all off of feel, and would not do it as well if I was relying on my watch. Racing off of feel means that you don't get screwed if the mile markers are off, or an individual mile is uphill or windy, or tall buildings interfere with your GPS. And you don't waste mental energy stressing about splits. It also means that you run to the absolute best of your ability that day. We all know that as runners we have good days and bad days - running off of feel means that you don't falsely limit yourself if you have a good day; and that you don't aggressively bury yourself if you have a bad day. I ran major PRs at the 10 mile and half-marathon distances last year - each PR was at least a minute faster than I thought I was capable of. Had I been checking splits during either race, I would have panicked and backed off, since the splits would have been so much faster than what I was expecting. The big trick to running off of effort is learning what feels right. As opposed to chasing what you think you "should" be doing. If you try to run a 10K thinking "I should be going out at 6:30 pace and I'm trying to guess what 6:30 pace feels like" then you will just be tensing up and worrying and doing it wrong. If, on the other hand, you try to run a 10K just running "what feels right" then you'll pull it off.
Congratulations on your PR! That's flying, and a negative split too! Well done!
I've actually raced the half distance and shorter based mostly on feel, and it's served me well, but invariably I've blown up in the full when I've tried it. I've felt too good at the start and overcooked the first half, which has come back to haunt me in the second. Other times, I've felt awful at the start but forced myself to get at or near goal pace, and once the race-day jitters have gone away, I've been fine. For me, "feel" isn't always an accurate gauge of what I'm physically capable of running on race day, and during an event as long as the marathon, my sense of "effort" can vary wildly as the race progresses. I think I'm best served running with my watch to help me get a handle on how the race is playing out.
My question is based on a friend who's running a target marathon in the fall, and intends to run it without looking at his watch. I question whether he's got the experience level to pull that off (plus he's done it in the past and missed his goal) but I respect the fact he should be the one deciding how to run his race. I just was curious about effort-based racing and wanted to get the perspective of some other runners.
At one time that was the only way to race. Unless you had an uncanny knack for hitting a specific pace you raced by feel or according to the competition, because very few races marked mile splits and digital watches, much less GPS based watches, weren't yet available. The only races where you got splits were on the track and even then only if someone with a stopwatch was calling out times as you finished each lap.
Of course. The advantage is that if you master running by effort you can come closer to your true potential--i.e a true max effort--on the day than if you can by reacting to splits.
Runners run
I think that really depends on the runner, and maybe the circumstances. Imagine you're leading a major marathon and you have no idea of your splits or where the rest of the field is. You're close to or at what feels like a true max effort. At Mile 25 the following thing happen:
A. A race official tells you 2nd place is :05 back.
B. A race official tells you 2nd place is 3:00 back.
C. A race official tells you nothing.
I'll admit, in Situation B, unless I'm close to a PR, I'd definitely back off a little if I had a 3:00 cushion and only 1.2 miles to go. If I'm at or close to max effort at that point, I'm going to be in a world of pain, and I'll happily endure a little less pain and still preserve the win. If C is the case, I'll probably just try to hold pace, and if A occurs, I'm competitive enough to try to accelerate as much as I can in that final stretch. At least to me, the pursuit of true max effort is as much a mental pursuit as it is a physical one. Absent the proper incentives (like a PR, a placing, or a BQ, etc.), I'm not going to subject myself to any more pain than necessary.
not bad for mile 25
I was never able to master running by sundial.
I think that really depends on the runner, and maybe the circumstances. Imagine you're leading a major marathon and you have no idea of your splits or where the rest of the field is. You're close to or at what feels like a true max effort. At Mile 25 the following thing happen: A. A race official tells you 2nd place is :05 back. B. A race official tells you 2nd place is 3:00 back. C. A race official tells you nothing. I'll admit, in Situation B, unless I'm close to a PR, I'd definitely back off a little if I had a 3:00 cushion and only 1.2 miles to go. If I'm at or close to max effort at that point, I'm going to be in a world of pain, and I'll happily endure a little less pain and still preserve the win. If C is the case, I'll probably just try to hold pace, and if A occurs, I'm competitive enough to try to accelerate as much as I can in that final stretch. At least to me, the pursuit of true max effort is as much a mental pursuit as it is a physical one. Absent the proper incentives (like a PR, a placing, or a BQ, etc.), I'm not going to subject myself to any more pain than necessary.
I'm not sure I understand your point or what this imaginary anecdote has to do with looking at your splits or not.
Options,Account, Forums
You were lucky to have sundials.
If we wanted to know what time it was, we had to run around Stonehenge to find out what day of the month it was.
It's a 5k. It hurt like hell...then I tried to pick it up. The end.
You were lucky to have sundials. If we wanted to know what time it was, we had to run around Stonehenge to find out what day of the month it was.
Psh, when I was young, we had to run barefoot. In the snow. Uphill. Both ways!