|
Oct 2020
6:27pm, 9 Oct 2020
17,844 posts
|
Bazoaxe
nooooo, Gus......you have me thinking about it.
|
|
Oct 2020
7:19pm, 9 Oct 2020
4,060 posts
|
K5 Gus
|
|
Oct 2020
10:55pm, 9 Oct 2020
46 posts
|
riggys99
Sounds like a plan Baz
I was thinking about Nottingham half in December but given the current infection rates can’t see it happening
Will probably start following a the science of running book marathon schedule (sort of anyway) with a fallback plan of running the 33 and a bit miles of the cuckoo way from the river Trent back home along the chesterfield canal if the marathon gets cancelled. In a fit of optimism I have entered the ballot for London and put my lottery numbers on 😁
|
|
Oct 2020
11:53pm, 9 Oct 2020
4 posts
|
cheekorobbins
Thanks jda, I am indeed pursuing sub 3 for London next year, same boat as everyone else though, currently nosing about for events to stay inspired with the training in the meantime.
I’m down in Cornwall so plenty of trails, the Indian Queens half is early December so we’ll see if that goes ahead.
Not sure what training plan to follow, I’ve done Lydiard, Hanson’s, Pfitzinger and a Ben Parkes one. Pfitz was great for so many reasons but something about the longer runs just wasn’t happening for me and I fear my schedule would stay the same.
|
|
Oct 2020
10:53am, 10 Oct 2020
16,673 posts
|
Chrisull
Oh another Cornish runner! I'm considering Indian Queens, I'd do it, but I'm 90% it will get cancelled.
|
|
Oct 2020
12:24pm, 10 Oct 2020
5 posts
|
cheekorobbins
Yeah, there’s definitely enough space to have people setting off in waves but the way things are headed there might not be a choice.
Legs are feeling good again, considering heading back out for a chilled run tomorrow. Contemplating going for a PR attempt soon but having the classic internal debate of the easier 5k, middling 10k vs the half, which is where I need to do the most work but is of course the biggest effort. My 1:29 was three days after a 30k @ 5:00 per km so wasn’t fresh(yes, I was panicking at the end of my training schedule two weeks out from race day :D )
|
|
Oct 2020
11:48am, 16 Oct 2020
12,324 posts
|
larkim
Am I right in reacting to this on the RW site with a bit of annoyance?
"A 3:15 hour marathon is 7:26 per mile. However, on the day, you're likely to have to run close to 7:20 per mile, once you factor in the inevitable dodging and weaving that comes with any big marathon. For this reason, marathon pace in this schedule will mean 7:20 per mile. To break 3:15, you should eventually be capable of a sub-1:30 half-marathon (6:52 per mile) and sub-40:00 10K (6:30 per mile)."
Firstly you don't need to run at 3:12 pace to run a 3:15 marathon. And secondly sub 40 10k is definitely not 6:30 per mile! Who do they pay to write this nonsense.
Had one night of mojo last night. Will it last?
|
|
Oct 2020
12:12pm, 16 Oct 2020
987 posts
|
SKR
"However, on the day, you're likely to have to run close to 7:20 per mile"
technically I agree with this. my faster marathons each started with a relatively slower first 10k and the rest run at "faster than target pace" for the time i was planning to run.
I've never quite managed to run an evenly paced race (never quite managed a perfect negative split either) but holding back at the start and working up way up to the faster paces seems to work for me
|
|
Oct 2020
12:13pm, 16 Oct 2020
36,134 posts
|
HappyG(rrr)
However, I agree with the sentiment if not the reasoning larks!
I targeted 7:20 when doing 3:15 because a. you'd be annoyed if you went for 7:26 and averaged 7:27 and just missed it b. beause of GPS inaccuracy (tho PTB's method fixes that - but how can RW know about PTB's patented method?!) and c. because round numbers are easier (which is sort of related to 1 above) - so in training, sub 3:15 MP to me was 7:2x = 7:20 cos I'm always on the cautious side! :- G
|
|
Oct 2020
12:16pm, 16 Oct 2020
12,325 posts
|
larkim
Yep, it was more that it was linked with "dodging and weaving". I'd quite happily recommend someone who was looking to bag 3:15 to train as if MP was 7:20, and then on the day just run betwene 7:20 and 7:25, but not for the reasons of dodging and weaving.
The writers will be the same people that claim that because their GPS measured 26.6 miles that they really ran 26.6 miles because they didn't run on the racing line all the time.
Though mis-measurement by GPS is a good reason to not cut the pace per mile too fine too.
|
