19 replies to this topic

[tjg]

I posted a question a while ago asking for advice about what pace i should be running in my first marathon. thanks to all those who gave advice,  and thought I should share my experience.

Firstly, I finished in 3.47.45. I knew I could run faster than 4.00, I didnt know how fast I should go out, risk going too hard, blowing up and doing less than 4.00!

first lesson, in hindsight I dont know why I worried. the time, barring uncontrolled issues of the day, and there were none of them, was a direct product of the training I did. if you read this post http://www.coolrunni...showtopic=34596 you would have read about MARCO the marathon calculator http://feelrace.com/...mbPt1Gj&th=HOME . you input your pre-race times and it spits out its prediction. Marco predicted 3.48.46,  1 minute and 1 second slower than I ran. thats impressive. there was also discussion about the 14-14-14 strategy. Marco lists a similar strategy which I followed.  it worked to perfection apart from one important thing.

it seems to me that you only run as fast as you think you can run and how you are feeling at the time. i know that sounds so obvious but it means that from time to time i felt like crap. even before 10ks, running conservatively as per the strategy, i thought there was something seriously wrong and was thinking there was no way i was going to finish or even run 21.2ks! soon that feeling went away. then i felt great and i could speed up. that theme went the whole race - feel good, run faster, struggle and slow down - get yout stuff together and wait it out

the best advice i can give after my first marathon is - just do one - set your time and THEN worry about how you are going to beat it (or not) . i spent way too much time analysing it.

also to get your running rate per km right, get your maths right - dividing number of minutes by the distance is wrong (that gives you the decimalisation of a minute not the number of seconds). best to use a pace calculator - the cool runners example is here http://www.coolrunni.../4/4_1/96.shtml

lastly, the pacers in the race today. guys you are the best. i dont own a race watch so the best i could do was rely on my own watch (hour, minute and second hand and all!) and these guys.   as long as i kept Hamburgular (the pace setter for 3.45 the guy with the red baloons) in my sights (i ranged from 100m behind to 1km). thanks very much.

[Jimmy4990]

tjg, GREAT news. You must be feeling on top of the world. Congratulations on a great run. Your marco calculation & race strategy has done you well, you have done very well to be able to follow your plan on raceday. Congrats again:)

[feelRace]

Hi tjg,

I saw your post on my MARCO calculator. Thanks a lot for the good words.

I created the MARCO strategy just shortly after my first marathon in 2002 in Munich, Germany. During the weeks prior to the race I was also wondering how I should pace my race. I really had no clue on how this should work. So I read a book published by RUNNER's World (in German) about strategy, pacing, targets for marathon races. In order to prepare myself for the upcoming marathon in 2002, I created a timetable in Excel for all 42 km and followed that timetable precisely in the race. As with your first marathon, the strategy worked out so well that I decided to transfer these Excel calculations into a Web-based application which I named MARCO = MARathon COntrolled.

Over the years 10's of thousands of people are using MARCO.

Are you planning further runs?

All the best from Germany,
Peter

[tjg]

feelRace, on 16 April 2012 - 07:11 AM, said:

Hi tjg,

I saw your post on my MARCO calculator. Thanks a lot for the good words.

I created the MARCO strategy just shortly after my first marathon in 2002 in Munich, Germany. During the weeks prior to the race I was also wondering how I should pace my race. I really had no clue on how this should work. So I read a book published by RUNNER's World (in German) about strategy, pacing, targets for marathon races. In order to prepare myself for the upcoming marathon in 2002, I created a timetable in Excel for all 42 km and followed that timetable precisely in the race. As with your first marathon, the strategy worked out so well that I decided to transfer these Excel calculations into a Web-based application which I named MARCO = MARathon COntrolled.

Over the years 10's of thousands of people are using MARCO.

Are you planning further runs?

All the best from Germany,
Peter

Peter, welcome to Cool Runner! thanks for all your work on Marco as well! to be honest I cant wait to do my next race which is HM in Sydney on May 20. Ill be interested to see what Marco makes of that! you will notice my input TARGET on the Marco website was in fact 3.45 though that was a tough ask as it was faster than any of my training runs, though without hills. So I just missed that target but now know I can do a 3.45 next time.
so, what tiem do i put in to calculate my next Half marathon pace - the full marathon time or my fastest half marathon split?

thanks again

tim

[tjg]

Jimmy4990, on 16 April 2012 - 04:18 AM, said:

tjg, GREAT news. You must be feeling on top of the world. Congratulations on a great run. Your marco calculation & race strategy has done you well, you have done very well to be able to follow your plan on raceday. Congrats again:)

Jimmy, mate how about your time! you smashed, well done you too but yes I was very happy especially given all the bloody demons in my head beforehand. ive now struck a time and can use that as my base - not hot air!  and marco? yes I love it when a plan comes off! cheers

feelRace, on 16 April 2012 - 07:11 AM, said:

Hi tjg,

I saw your post on my MARCO calculator. Thanks a lot for the good words.

I created the MARCO strategy just shortly after my first marathon in 2002 in Munich, Germany. During the weeks prior to the race I was also wondering how I should pace my race. I really had no clue on how this should work. So I read a book published by RUNNER's World (in German) about strategy, pacing, targets for marathon races. In order to prepare myself for the upcoming marathon in 2002, I created a timetable in Excel for all 42 km and followed that timetable precisely in the race. As with your first marathon, the strategy worked out so well that I decided to transfer these Excel calculations into a Web-based application which I named MARCO = MARathon COntrolled.

Over the years 10's of thousands of people are using MARCO.

Are you planning further runs?

All the best from Germany,
Peter

Also Peter, what are the stats about Marco's accuracy from peoples real race times? also, how many people put a goal time that is different to marco?

[Perseus]

Congrats tjg.

Peter Riegel was first to play with pace calculators for swimming. His 1981 version is probably the most accurate (and simple) of all calcs. Examples here. I think you'll find even splits are the most efficient pacing strategy for a flat course. This has been proved both on paper and also in racing. A negative split (second half faster) may mean you ran too easy. There's also an element of self-fulfilling prophesy with all calcs.

Without doubt the best way to perfect pacing is to race often at varying distances.

[feelRace]

Hi tjg,

I found your race entry at feelRace (Canberra marathon). Perhaps you want to enter your upcoming HM in Sydney on May 20 as well. For that HM race, I recommend that you input your recent marathon time and then downsize it to the HM distance. Downsizing is always more precise than upsizing.

Regarding your question: We cannot perform such stats as we do not trace people's race times associated with what they have calculated via MARCO. But we do receive MUCH positive feedback regarding the precision.

-Peter

[runhard]

Just saw MARCO then. Great work Peter. I love these Calculators and this looks pretty good as well. Almost spot on for me. There are a lot of variables but gives people an idea of what to pace.

Well doneTJG as well Great run in Canberra.

RH

[Supersam1979]

Perhaps this Marco system works, but I have my personal doubts about anything that asks about your heart rates as a factor of 220 minus age. I should be maxing out at 188, but (admittedly I never pay much attention to heart rates in training) have never gotten that high even during an extremely intensive interval session.

My personal view is that Daniels is the best predictor when one is properly trained and I also like the way it gives me the exact pacing to train at and to move up incrementally as I get fitter and also the 400 and 800m tests that he offers at different points in the season.

These things are never infallible though and I suppose that a calculator (like a watch) can plant that seed in the head that one won't go quicker and hence you will either go that time or slower. I still have some PBs when I did not even bother wearing a watch in the race and just ran hard from the gut.

Another example of this is a young lady I know who had all the potential to run under 40 in the 10KM, but everytime she had her watch or Garmin, she would go around 41mins or slower as she simply believed that was all she was capable of. A group of us kidnapped her watch prior to a race and when she had calmed down at the start, we got her positioned between three of us and told her to just run hard and not worry about time. End result for her 39.40 and she had the monkey off her back.

Edited by Supersam1979, 20 April 2012 - 09:14 AM.

[Uncle Dave]

Cool link Perseus.

Concur with the even-splits approach too.

Look at how many guys have run 2:04s now. Not one of them has run a 60 minute first half and allowed for a 4 minute fade in the second.

The MARCO calculator is obviously a vastly different approach, and probably good for those who are either attempting their first mara with just a finish in mind, or have perhaps had a few blow-ups and need a stronger finish to boost confidence. It's calculations are probably a bit on the conservative side for those really trying to run to their true potential though.

Something I've used for every mara pb I've set is just a simple excel-based spreadsheet (attached) which punches out even-split k's. Laminate it and wear on your wrist. Very much relies on accurate km markers out on course though.

Cheers,
Dave

[Colin]

Damn, I nod off and someone has re-invented the bloody wheel yet again. But I just checked and it is still round , so all good.

Yes , Perseus I bought my first RW probably in '77 or '78 and recall the pace calculators and used it..it worked.

Then in 1985 when I organised the SA Marathon Champs (as road running convenor)  I put a table of distances anf times and little article in the  brochure [from a huge amount of local and international data from WR's to guys in my group, given to a guy in IT at work and  getting a 'huge' 4th degree equation ---big equation must be right]. Still have the article somewhere.
I thought everybody else had nodded off too, but the wheel was still round. Damn, if only FB existed I would have had ten thousand 'likes'.

However, these days the best calculator around is the Neujahrs one, using a combination of distances, giving you stability factors (do you have enough endurance or speed) and also elevation (ascent/descent). I recommend that particular wheel, kind of 'all terrain'.

Uncle Dave, on 20 April 2012 - 09:26 AM, said:

Look at how many guys have run 2:04s now. Not one of them has run a 60 minute first half and allowed for a 4 minute fade in the second.

Something I've used for every mara pb I've set is just a simple excel-based spreadsheet (attached) which punches out even-split k's.

True Dave, but very, very few weekend warriors that are aiming for a marginally achievable time (the best attainable from other performances) are able to run a marathon without fading.
Your marathons however, are like clockwork

[Perseus]

I think Neujahrs and Riegel are one and the same, t=ax^b

$b = (log($time2 / $time1)) / (log ($distance2 / $distance1));
$a = $time1 / pow($distance1, $b );

10/10 for simplicity. The 'stability factor' b is calculated from personal performances. This will always trump McMillan, Daniels that are based on constants.

[Peterhorse]

Colin, on 20 April 2012 - 10:12 AM, said:

Damn, I nod off and someone has re-invented the bloody wheel yet again. But I just checked and it is still round , so all good.

Yes , Perseus I bought my first RW probably in '77 or '78 and recall the pace calculators and used it..it worked.

Then in 1985 when I organised the SA Marathon Champs (as road running convenor)  I put a table of distances anf times and little article in the  brochure [from a huge amount of local and international data from WR's to guys in my group, given to a guy in IT at work and  getting a 'huge' 4th degree equation ---big equation must be right]. Still have the article somewhere.
I thought everybody else had nodded off too, but the wheel was still round. Damn, if only FB existed I would have had ten thousand 'likes'.

However, these days the best calculator around is the Neujahrs one, using a combination of distances, giving you stability factors (do you have enough endurance or speed) and also elevation (ascent/descent). I recommend that particular wheel, kind of 'all terrain'.

Uncle Dave, on 20 April 2012 - 09:26 AM, said:

Look at how many guys have run 2:04s now. Not one of them has run a 60 minute first half and allowed for a 4 minute fade in the second.

Something I've used for every mara pb I've set is just a simple excel-based spreadsheet (attached) which punches out even-split k's.

True Dave, but very, very few weekend warriors that are aiming for a marginally achievable time (the best attainable from other performances) are able to run a marathon without fading.
Your marathons however, are like clockwork

Is that because Dave's pacing is spot on for his 'best attainable from other performances'? or simply his training structure ensures he holds pace in the last 10k?

In other words, should the weekend warriors (i.e. me :-)) try to address the fade by even pacing or more specific training for that back end of the marathon?  

FWIW, my fastest marathon 3:34 (of the 5 i was trying for PBs, excludes 2 others which were particiaption only) had the slowest time at halfway (1:46), but most even split (~2mins).  Also, I negative split the last one i did 3:58 (2:00 flat at half way) and it was quite comfortable for the last 10k (relatively speaking).

[Colin]

Peterhorse, on 20 April 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:

Is that because Dave's pacing is spot on for his 'best attainable from other performances'? or simply his training structure ensures he holds pace in the last 10k?

In other words, should the weekend warriors (i.e. me :-)) try to address the fade by even pacing or more specific training for that back end of the marathon?  

FWIW, my fastest marathon 3:34 (of the 5 i was trying for PBs, excludes 2 others which were particiaption only) had the slowest time at halfway (1:46), but most even split (~2mins).  Also, I negative split the last one i did 3:58 (2:00 flat at half way) and it was quite comfortable for the last 10k (relatively speaking).

Good argument.My belief is that the closer you get to all out best eg WR or for that matter Dave knocking constantly on a 2:20 limit, then your halves will equal out. Most WW's have plenty of untapped potential left and usually go faster rather than 'further'. If it were possible (imo) that you could run numerous iterations of a marathon eg every week and keep improving then you will mathematically approach the limit by reducing the positive split to an infinitesimal amount i.e. you approach it from the positive rather than negative.

It will be a combination of " I do have that potential (from first HM) but need to do more training to hold pace" and/or "If I go out slightly slower my second half will be close to 1st HM"

[Peterhorse]

Yep, the great intrigue of this distance which makes it so much fun and so much of a challenge for elites and WWs alike .... I like this approach Colin talks about - to apply that to myself as an example - after say, an honest 1:38 half mamr 4-5 weeks out from race day, I should be able to do a sub 3:30.  So to try and get that balancing act right, the go might be to aim for 1:43-1:44 for the first half (not 1:41 like in 2006 and finish with 3:38!!:-)).  Even if I blew out doing the 1:43-1:44, the approach would be to keep chipping away with the correct training to get the second half fade under under 3mins and presto, goal achieved ;-) i.e. rather than keep backing off the first half pace.

Having said that, for right or wrong for first timers, I'd recommend dividing the pace plan into 3 sections lately, namely - 0-10k (settle), 10-32k (build), 32-42.2k (hang tough) but that's more to deal with resisting teh urge to go too fast early and also all abut the mental aspect.

Cheers

PH

[Mick]

Do other people find they just "get into a rhythm" ?

At Canberra I had no garmin, no pacing band, ran a lot on my own, and just used a simple stop watch. I think I looked at 4km, whatever the marker was at Parliament house, saw my 10km split, again at 15km only so I could tell the female I was running with how far she was behind first female in the half and honestly I think the next time I looked was 37km. I did then look at every 1km to see how I was tracking for a finish time.

I now find it bizare that for over 20km I did not look or even think about my pace.

The splits have me running 3:48, 3:45, and 3:50 pace.

If the 21km was accurate I ran about 79:50 / 80:40 splits.

[iangallagher16]

thats effin awsome mick!! great result and well deserved. i hope i can pull off something similar at GC

[Peterhorse]

Mick, on 20 April 2012 - 03:16 PM, said:

Do other people find they just "get into a rhythm" ?

At Canberra I had no garmin, no pacing band, ran a lot on my own, and just used a simple stop watch. I think I looked at 4km, whatever the marker was at Parliament house, saw my 10km split, again at 15km only so I could tell the female I was running with how far she was behind first female in the half and honestly I think the next time I looked was 37km. I did then look at every 1km to see how I was tracking for a finish time.

I now find it bizare that for over 20km I did not look or even think about my pace.

The splits have me running 3:48, 3:45, and 3:50 pace.

If the 21km was accurate I ran about 79:50 / 80:40 splits.

Yeah well interesting point there... the 3:34 with even splits i mentioned above was in New York marathon and my watch was stolen the night before, so went without one. there were time clocks on the course at key milestones though... but when we donwloaded the race info later from timing chip, the variance between each mile was 5, maybe 10seconds at most, except for mile 23 (the whole mile is uphill on 5th avenue!!). something to be said for running on feel.

At your faster pace though, i'm not sure if it's the same or not, but i'm guessing we all have a 'natural rhythm' at our ideal pace.

[Jimmy4990]

Ran the 1st k in Canberra by feel. Felt like 4:30. Was 3:46. Lucky I had a watch or my race would have been toast by about km 8.

[sfGnome]

I think the trick to a 'no-watch' marathon is that you have to be experienced enough to know just how easy you have to take it at the start of a marathon. If you can manage that, then it'll work well. If not, much pain will ensue, as Jimmy suggested.

I'm luck enough to be pretty metronomic when it comes to pace, but last year when I was intending to run a fairly cruisy pace (backing up from 6ft), I ran my 3rd km a full minute faster than intended, and neither I nor the very experienced runner I was with had noticed. If you're up for the experiment then give it a shot, but maybe not on a major goal race or when you're still feeling your way into endurance running.