|
Apr 2024
6:19pm, 24 Apr 2024
7,122 posts
|
Little Miss Happy
I don't see it as a badge of honour larkim, just horses for courses - and I have had/do have a lot of gastric issues.
|
|
Apr 2024
6:22pm, 24 Apr 2024
44,051 posts
|
SPR
Lets replace fuelling with supershoes in that statement 😉
It's not a badge of honour for me, it's just faff and I just want to run with no distractions. Even drinking is faff. Did that early in my HM in October and quickly thought better of it for the rest of the race. It was a cool day though. In a 10,000m on a super hot day a few years ago, I did try to drink early but was better pouring over myself and then in the second half it was preferable to dig in with no distractions.
Obviously a longer distance and slower pace could make a difference though.
|
|
Apr 2024
6:31pm, 24 Apr 2024
80 posts
|
crash
I’m another one who hates fuelling on the run. My last 3 or so marathons I just had 2 or maybe 3 of the lucozade bottles on the London Marathon course (been that long not sure if it still is lucozade!). It’s more the trouble of carrying stuff that annoys me and distracts me from my running form. For me, the right combination of fat burning for energy and glycogen stored in the muscles should get through a marathon without any detrimental performance issues. That doesn’t sell gels though and it’s hard enough for people to make a living from running as it is (except for Nike etc…) Very much agree with the horses for courses as well, we are all different and what works for some of us doesn’t work for others.
|
|
Apr 2024
7:25pm, 24 Apr 2024
23,905 posts
|
larkim
LMH, sorry that wasn't aimed at you; you've tried and tested what works for you with results to back it up.
But there are some who seem to view use of fuel in a race as some sort of philosophical debate. If the science says fuelling is the correct answer in most cases, then not trying it because the runner "wants" to run without fuel seems a little disingenuous.
And yes, spr, I am sort of aware of the same with super shoes, though I would say that my position on that is different as I'm looking at it from a perspective of comparability between the 2017 "me" and the 2024 "me", and controlling for that super shoes benefit is important in that context. If I started racing now I would absolutely buy into the shoes.
|
|
Apr 2024
7:40pm, 24 Apr 2024
240 posts
|
Charlesvdw
It has been scientifically proven that pre-race carb loading and in-race fueling are beneficial for performance.
Having said that, the winner of the men's race (I forgot if it was London or Boston) barely fueled, if at all.
|
|
Apr 2024
7:49pm, 24 Apr 2024
44,054 posts
|
SPR
I don't think a 'can I do this in the way I would prefer' position is disingenuous (how can it be?). Why can't someone try without fuel if they want to? If they find it doesn't work for them, then they have decisions to make.
|
|
Apr 2024
6:19am, 25 Apr 2024
7,123 posts
|
Little Miss Happy
No super shoes here either. 
I think it's very much trial and error. I know for a fact that having a gel on the start line and then every thirty minutes would just make me sick. I also know that I'm an effective fat burner (not that I have much) but I think that's partly training low and partly psychological. It's a shame there's no research into how many runner's race's have been ruined by trying to take in as much fuel as recommended by a one size fits all manufacturers guideline versus being under fuelled.
|
|
Apr 2024
8:42am, 25 Apr 2024
23,912 posts
|
larkim
Obviously each to their own, but I just don't think you can look to step up to running a marathon and say "I have two goals for this - to achieve xxx time and to not fuel during the event" when the science is 100% clear on the benefits of in-race fuelling with carbs.
Absolutely I can see "I intend to experiment with what fuels me best to get to the time I want to achieve, and I want to try zero in-race fuelling as one of those scenarios", but that's different from expressing a preference before starting about fuelling (IMHO). Broadly if you want to do well at a marathon you need to establish your boundaries in terms of time commitment, but then be prepared to do whatever it takes in the event itself, surely?
Maybe I'm biased because I'm lucky that my "best guess" strategy works (or at least, doesn't fail). And I'm also a bit narrow minded as I don't think I'd ever start a marathon without expecting to fuel mid-race, so perhaps that can get thrown back at me. But it feels like the science is so clear on this that it feels like there is nothing to lose by using gels or other fuel sources mid race.
|
|
Apr 2024
8:59am, 25 Apr 2024
44,057 posts
|
SPR
I had runs on Friday and Saturday that felt much different to how I normally feel to start I believe because I drank tea with honey shortly before the run.
I was thinking of doing 10 on the Friday and then 13 on Saturday but felt weird on the Friday run so just did 4.6. It's only when I had a similar feeling on the Saturday run to start that I made the connection*. I ran through it on Saturday (16 miles) and the feeling disappeared but it also seemed to be a run that took more out of me in terms of recovery after than others I've done (Saturday long runs are normally done fasted as they are done after waking up). I also generally don't have anything other than water in the 90 mins before running for standard runs.
*My connection of course could be wrong as I'm not clear how it would cause a difference but presumed it changed my body's fuel preference at the start of the run?
|
|
Apr 2024
9:25am, 25 Apr 2024
23,915 posts
|
larkim
That feels like such a small dose of sugars that it wouldn't make a noticeable difference, but human bodies are weird and wonderful things so I wouldn't discount it as being a factor. And, despite what I wrote earlier, the brain is also a confounding factor; the ability of it to influence the physical body is also pretty amazing, so there is always the possibility that the way you think about fuel influences the way it feels in your body.
|
