I've run 2 half marathons so far, and the first time I ran the entire thing with a smile on my face while beating my goal time.  The second time I ran the second half faster than the first and thought I really left it all out there, but probably could have run it faster if I had started at the proper pace rather than trying to make up time later.

I've been going over my notes from past training cycles, and I'm finding that I tend to hit a point in training where my paces pick up significantly.  Last time I used Daniels Plan A for my half, but I didn't do the entire 24 weeks.  I did 16, and the paces picked up after 3 weeks of phase 3.  Well, I'm starting week 4 of phase 3, and while my legs are tired at times my paces are picking up pretty significantly at all levels of effort.

I have a tune up race scheduled at the end of the month.  It's 6 weeks out from my first full marathon.  It's a half marathon, and I know I'm not that experienced, but I'm toying with the idea of running it by effort.  I don't know.  Maybe I'll start out with a specific pace and just adjust earlier.

Does anybody have any advice here?

The trouble with running by effort is that I am pretty sure that most new marathoners report feeling like they're going out WAY too slowly at the beginning of the race, even if they end up with a major positive split when all is said and done.  So what "feels right" in the first half may actually be faster than you need to be running, you know?

But that's just my "never run a marathon" experience, so take that for what it's worth.

I'm gonna follow the "measure twice cut once" mantra.  Some here will tout that running by effort/feel is a good running tactic and for them it might be.  I just think it's easier to measure when you can.  At least for me.

Before I ever had a garmin, I used to use the timer on a heart rate monitor watch so that I could simply check elapsed time.  Since then I use my garmin most of the time and even WITH the dang thing I still almost always go out too fast.  But it definitely helps keep me from blowing up which can kill a race before it gets started.

'By effort' is always a good goal, but, for longer races (HM+) I think you do need quite a bit of racing experience for it to become the best strategy.  You need to have run an HM pretty close to your top effort over the distance so that you know what that effort feels like at mile 1, at mile 5, at mile 10.

If you're doing a Daniels plan you're doing a ton of 'quality' work-- what does that work indicate?  Many find that a tempo effort a bit before an HM can act as something of a race predictor.  If you can manage a longer tempo (8 miles continuous, or some like 2x4 miles with a short rest), that can be a good indicator of HM pace.

Maybe I'll start out with a specific pace and just adjust earlier.

I think this is a good plan.  Start off at your best estimate at what your pace should be, and be willing to constantly adjust.  I am always asking myself "is this pace sustainable?  Can I work any harder?"  (After 10 miles, the answer is usually , 'no, but I'm not going to give up on it yet!')

 

I completely disagree with that.  My marathon pace is nearly a minute faster than my easy pace.  That's not jogging and I never feel like I'm just out for a run.  In a half marathon, I'm focused and pushing from the start.  In any race, I start to feel the first twinges of discomfort right around the halfway point.

I would agree with this for more experienced marathoners but not for first time marathoners that are unsure as to their pace.  Awood has improved a lot in the last few months but he really does not

know what he is capable of; however, I don't think he should use effort for the race.

Awood, I would choose a pace and stick with it for thefirst half and adjust accordigly.  Or race that HM and see how well you do.

I think that what I'm gathering from the responses is this:

A) I can use my recent tempo paces to get a handle on a pace for my HM, and don't necessarily need a hard race or time trial.

B) Use that pace to start my half marathon, but don't feel like I'm tied to it.  In the past I've waited until after the first 7 miles to adjust, but maybe I can start making small adjustments a bit earlier now if it feels as easy or easier than my first two HM's.  That way I'm not trying to erase minutes from that last 10K.

C) Lock down a marathon pace after the HM, and stick to it.  Probably better to run a respectable time and have a good experience in my first marathon, than be on pace for a faster time and blow up with 10K left.  I'm not going to qualify for Boston this year.  So, leaving an extra 5 or even 10 minutes on the course when I don't have an established PR probably won't change anyone's perception of the accomplishment anyway.  I just have to beat Oprah, and Paul Ryan.

When I'm not actually running, but sitting and thinking about running I think I can complicate things.  The people here always have a way of putting it into perspective.  You all rock.

 

C) Lock down a marathon pace after the HM, and stick to it.  Probably better to run a respectable time and have a good experience in my first marathon, than be on pace for a faster time and blow up with 10K left. 

I agree with this, speaking from my own limited experience.  That said, with your HM six weeks before your FM, you'll still have a little room to improve.  I think it's best to go out conservatively and check your pace with your watch.  Like Zelanie said, it's hard for a noob (myself included) to really know what easy effort is in the early stages of a marathon.  Running 20 seconds under pace might feel easy early on, but it's still wearing you down and tiring your body.  That'll come back around in the latter parts of the race.  Believe me, 10K might be a short run now, but it'll feel painfully long if you're struggling late in your marathon.  I didn't get that right until my third marathon.

Don't worry about leaving 5 or 10 minutes on the course.  You won't.